It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

6,500 Year-Old 'Noah' Skeleton Found in Museum Closet

page: 1
33
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+14 more 
posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Greetings, ATS!

I have no idea if this is the correct forum for this thread. Apologizes if I've gotten it wrong.




Scientists at the Penn Museum (the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology) announced Tuesday they had found a 6,500-year-old skeleton in the museum basement.

The bones belonged to a once well-muscled, 5'9" man estimated to be at least 50 years old. His remains had been lying in a coffin-like box for 85 years with no identifying documents. Since he likely outlived a great flood that, millennia later would be a precursor to the Biblical story, some are referring to the skeleton as "Noah."


source article

I find information like this interesting. Not that they've named the skeleton Noah, as in the biblical figure, but that this individual lived so long ago and yet they can tell much about him. One of the reasons I enjoy reading archaeological information such as this is simple: I like to try and imagine the life of the individual or individuals found. It's a form of time travel, I suppose you could say.

Now, the other interesting aspect of where this man was found is that archaeologists have deemed it "likely" that the disaster flood were the "historic precursors of the biblical story written millennia later." Interesting, don't you think?



+31 more 
posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
My guess is the're calling him "Noah," because they have no-ah-dea who he is.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I love these kind of things


I like to try and imagine the life of the individual or individuals found. It's a form of time travel, I suppose you could say.


Right with you
S&F


CD



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

I see what you did there.


This is actually really interesting.

Will be even more interesting once they know more.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Skeletons from that period and location are rare due to the acidic soil and the depth you need to go to find them, a DNA analysis of that gentleman will be of great interest.


+5 more 
posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Goodness!
Does anyone else find it disturbing that they had him in a closet for 85 years, and just "found" him? Seriously, what is going on at our museums?

Otherwise very interesting story OP.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Goodness!
Does anyone else find it disturbing that they had him in a closet for 85 years, and just "found" him? Seriously, what is going on at our museums?

Otherwise very interesting story OP.

Bet tom cruise beats him

And beats him



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: smyleegrl

I'm sure 'Noah' was supposed to have lived until he was 900 odd years old so it can't be him in the closet.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: smyleegrl


just to be clear its not the skeleton of the biblical 'Noah"


As such, Penn researchers named the rediscovered skeleton "Noah." Though, since the skeleton is much older than the Bible, "Utnapishtim" would have been more appropriate. "He was named in the Gilgamesh epic as the man who survived the great flood," William Hafford, Ur Digitization Project Manager at Penn.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: LightningStrikesHere

No, I don't think the researchers named him "Noah" because they thought he was the exact person referred to in the Bible, but because the area of silt they found him in was the remnants of a major flood.

Still, clarification is always a welcome thing.

edit on 6-8-2014 by smyleegrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Goodness!
Does anyone else find it disturbing that they had him in a closet for 85 years, and just "found" him? Seriously, what is going on at our museums?

LOL

You dig when you can, as much as you can. You research later, when you can't dig.

Maybe the original finder died before he could finish or something.

Harte



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 10:29 PM
link   
First we find out that all this time someone knew where Jonah's tomb was (yes, the Jonah... supposedly), at least until IS/ISIS/ISIL recently blew it up. Now they find Noah's/Utnapishtim's skeleton in a closet!


Next week Neptune? Poseidon?



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: smyleegrl

Pretty messed up! They dig their asses off to find this poor
basturd. Roust him from his grave, send him far away from
his native land, to sit in a closet. Forgotten in some basement
in a world he never knew for eightyfive years. Only to have
some yahoos look him up and give him a label that, will only
get laughs, from the community authorized to speculate about
his remains. What did this guy do to deserve this?

No respect at all.


edit on Rpm80614v11201400000012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: smyleegrl
a reply to: LightningStrikesHere

No, I don't think the researchers named him "Noah" because they thought he was the exact person referred to in the Bible, but because the area of silt they found him in was the remnants of a major flood.

Still, clarification is always a welcome thing.



i guess your reading comprehension is a bit off today ...

i fully understand why they named him "Noah" i was making it clear , for people who might be unaware



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Goodness!
Does anyone else find it disturbing that they had him in a closet for 85 years, and just "found" him? Seriously, what is going on at our museums?

LOL

You dig when you can, as much as you can. You research later, when you can't dig.

Maybe the original finder died before he could finish or something.

Harte


Especially back then it was dig, dig, dig and hope to write the reports later, often times the main investigator died, lost interest, went soft in the head or lost funding and the reports were never written on the secondary finds of a dig.

It was during this time that Woolley found one of the most fabulous archaeological treasure so far found the Royal tombs of Ur so I can see why this poor fellow got neglected. He was however one of 1,800+ bodies found at that time.

Details of the tombs

Here is a link to ATS on the famous DEATH PIT of Ur

More stuff on the Royal Tombs

General info on Ur and the tombs
edit on 7/8/14 by Hanslune because: Added links



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: smyleegrl

No sooner does religion try to deal with homosexuals by trying to put them back in the closet, you have "Noah" coming out of the closet to change the game plan.

/end sarcasm


Interesting info.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
a reply to: smyleegrl


just to be clear its not the skeleton of the biblical 'Noah"



Spoken like someone who waded in after reading the title but none of the OP where smyleegrl pointed this out
out...

This is fascinating, I wonder what else they have hidden back there?



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
a reply to: smyleegrl


just to be clear its not the skeleton of the biblical 'Noah"



Spoken like someone who waded in after reading the title but none of the OP where smyleegrl pointed this out
out...

This is fascinating, I wonder what else they have hidden back there?


i was making a general statement... before people started to saying it was the real "Noah"



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune
Skeletons from that period and location are rare due to the acidic soil and the depth you need to go to find them, a DNA analysis of that gentleman will be of great interest.


funny how human skeletons that old are rare but hundreds of thousand year old dinosaurs with soft tissue seem almost common, sorta
interesting



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Hanslune
Skeletons from that period and location are rare due to the acidic soil and the depth you need to go to find them, a DNA analysis of that gentleman will be of great interest.


funny how human skeletons that old are rare but hundreds of thousand year old dinosaurs with soft tissue seem almost common, sorta
interesting


Rare for that specific place and time while 10 x millions of year old dinosaur bones are found fossilized in deposits over much of the earth.




top topics



 
33
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join