reply to post by BeastMaster2012
400K year old German Spears...
They've found 400K year old 7 foot long spears in a German coal mine along with multifaceted tools....
Funny... It seems that every day something comes along and a discovery is made that blows the current darwinian theory out of the water, but instead
of acknowledging it and saying we better rethink it, they just continually adjust their predictions of what should be found and their theories to
match up with the evidence that was just five minutes ago, completely counter to their theories...
So 400K years ago people were living in Germany using relatively complex tools, and working in teams to bring down large game. Hmmm. previous
discoveries at 200K years ago were found in Norway and they were written off as neanderthal, now they've found evidence of human tool use at over
Could it be that there are problems with the dating perhaps?
One thing that people haven't taken into consideration is that if space is expanding, that time itself is speeding up.
How do we measure time? Through the rotation and revolution of our planet around the sun or at the most advanced, the vibration of atomic structure
and decay rate of unstable atoms. These aren't really measuring time though. These are measuring only what they are measuring. Time itself is woven
into the fabric of spacetime and because we are existing within it, it is difficult if not impossible to objectively measure it. We can iductively
reason however that since space/time may have been expanding since the beginning of space/time after the initial singularity, that time has been
speeding up, so as space/time stretches more and more, it takes less time for the earth to rotate, even though to us it appears to take the same
amount of time. Or does it.
I know that as we age, it appears that time moves faster and we have written that feeling off as just having lived longer, so relative to our lives it
is much shorter, but what if it is a real factor and time has been speeding up.
If you look at things like radioactive decay rates, etc... it would make sense. as space is more compressed, time would move slower.
There have been recordings of past humans to have lived MUCH longer. If time was moving slower, that would make sense. The earth would've moved
around the sun many more times in the equivalent period of time if time was moving slower.
Of course that means that eventually time will move so fast that nothing can survive in physical form.
It is best theorized that the universe is a sphere and eventually in an expanding universe, the material will curve back in on itself.
Is the universe going to not collapse, but all of the material eventually coallesce onto a singular point? return to the place of origin, or possibly
create a new place of singularity???
All interesting questions, unfortunately, we have no where near the amount of observed knowledge to even make an educated guess and it is all
conjecture. We know so little, and what so many think they know is constantly shown to be inaccurate.
Just remember this, the only historical scientific truth is that the current scientific paradigm is never currently accurate....
With that in mind, the more complex and substrated (built upon previous foundations) science becomes, the less likely we are to come to a greater
level of truth. This is due to levels of inaccuracy becoming greater as you build on levels of inaccuracy.
For example. If you postulate that 2.131433 plus 4.233233 equals 3.364566 instead of 3.364666 like it actually does, that's not a big mistake.
NOw if you state that 2.131433 plus 4.233233 is the formula that gives you the DNA structure of a amoeba and you state that it equals 3.64566.
Then you create a formula that allows an amoeba to transform into a sexually reproducing animal that is 3.64566 cubed + a different formula (1.77555 +
8.44545) and you say that this equals 10.212 instead of 10.221. now you end up with 48.453872218073496+10.212=58.665872218073496 instead of
Ok, so even that isn't that big a difference. Ok so let's now take that difference exponentially out 10 places. That's not a big stretch. Science
has gone much farther than that to get to it's modern conclusions.
you end up with what should be 486936780122120171.28414753622902
but because of those slight errors you end up with 482897903069010350.13815036554309
well you're now into the realm of being off by 4000 trillion in your calculations.
So instead of getting to humans through DNA manipulations, you've got a mutant frog with eighty eyes, forty three point two legs and no skin.....
actually, DNA manipulations is a poor choice of example, because we're nowhere near to having any idea how DNA becomes manipulated over time or the
limitations of DNA manipulation while still having a viable organism.
But the math illustration is EXACTLY what happens with science, that has been proven time and again inaccurate, when it is used to build a false
foundation and gets more complex over time....