Originally posted by Rocketman7
Fact A) The Royal Society, held a special exhibition, in 2005, at the British Museum, displaying footprints in lava discovered in central Mexico of modern man. And I quote...
Adds to the global archive of human prints.
The presence of ancient human and animal prints is a rare occurrence in nature, because it requires special conditions for their preservation. The Valsequillo Basin footprints add to this literature and reflect specific environmental conditions for their preservation within this area of Central Mexico.
(Quoted from their Mexican Footprints Exhibition webpage from the Research link on the main page.)
Fact B) From the prestigious journal Nature Dec 1 2005
Paul R. Renne,, Joshua M. Feinberg, Michael R. Waters, Joaquin Arroyo-Cabrales, Patricia Ochoa-Castillo, Mario Perez-Campa and Kim B. Knight
Here we show by 40Ar/39Ar dating and corroborating palaeomagnetic data that the basaltic tuff on which the purported footprints are found is 1.30plusminus0.03 million years old.
- Berkeley Geochronology Center, Berkeley, California 94709, USA
- Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
- Departments of Anthropology and Geography, and Center for the Study of the First Americans, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-4352, USA
- Laboratório de Arqueozoología, Subdirección de Laboratórios y Apoyo Académico, Instituto Nacionál de Antropología e Historia, CP 06060, México
- Subdirección de Arqueología, Museo Nacional de Antropología, Reforma y Gandhi s/n, CP 11560, México
- Proyecto Cuicuilco, Instituto Nacionál de Antropología e Historia, CP 06700, México
For those not familiar with the Royal Society, Charles Darwin was elected a member of the Royal Society on Jan. 4 1839
For those not familiar with Paul Renne his publication record would be too large to post. To say he is the leading expert on lava dating in the world would be an understatement. He is currently a professor at Berkely.
link to accreditation
And fact C) The lava was also examined as to whether or not it was sediment, or fresh when the footprints were placed in it, and it was determined that the grains were magnetically aligned, hence the prints were placed while the lava was fresh, at the time of the volcanic eruption. As stated also in the journal Nature.
Saying since they are 1.3 million years old they can't possibly be human footprints is not a valid scientific argument. See the quote above. Members of the Royal Society, home of Charles Darwin, through thorough scientific study, determined the prints were human, and should be preserved. If you want I can quote from a BBC science reporter who was taken there in person by a professor, and showed the prints, and he stated, clearly some of these are human footprints.
If you try to discount this evidence I am presenting by quoting articles from Evolution magazine, I will quote Bible passages as a reply. Otherwise you may do your best. Scientific approaches only please.
If you are unscientific in your arguments, with mere appeals to authority, I will quote Bible passages as a reply.
Look at it like a gong.
Evolution theory and the Out of Africa hypothesis have been disproved.
If you want my personal opinion, I think we are down to aliens did it....
Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by Rocketman7
thats cause faces have nothing to do with sexual selection. Sexual selection is influenced by behavior.. And attributes such as height, or width, or strength. A face has nothing to do with it.. Thus why majority of sex occurs at night in a dark room. If faces had anything to do with it.. We would look similar and have sex during day in the light face to face. We may have different looking faces, but its the behavior, and body language that is equal, for majority of humans..
Originally posted by AuranVector
S&F for being brave enough to bring up this topic. See "Forbidden Archeology" by Cremo and "Book of the Damned" by Fort. Humankind is far older than Establishment scientists will consider possible.
Yes, Homo sapiens sapiens is part starseed.
Originally posted by pierregustavetoutant
1 and done) The entire fossil record and all of genetic research.
Modern humans first arose about 200,000 years ago in Africa. When and how our lineage then dispersed has long proven controversial, but geneticists have suggested this exodus started between 40,000 and 70,000 years ago. The currently accepted theory is that the exodus from Africa traced Arabia's shores, rather than passing through its now-arid interior.
Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by mutatismutandis
All over the world we have discovered skeletons of our pre-modern human ancestors that are a couple of million years old and they were obviously within a continuously developing evolutionary state and somewhere along the way some of those ancient prehistoric people heard strange sounds,looked up and saw flying saucers descending from the sky and those alien beings became their gods who genetically manipulated them into the modern humans we are today and if there is a still missing link,it is an alien link...
edit on 4-3-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by pjslug
So you say the lava was fresh when the imprints were made. Are we to believe that someone went on a nice, summer stroll one day, through 570º-895º lava? If one were to accidentally step on a fresh lava field, I guarantee you that footprints would not be the only impressions found.
Thanks for playing!
edit on 3/4/2012 by pjslug because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by mutatismutandis
reply to post by blocula
I'm not arguing there isn't the possibility our evolution has been tampered with by outside influences, its certainly a possibility. But the OP was arguing that evolution was false all together, which the evidence presented did not show.
*added in hindsite: if it were true aliens altered dna, isn't that in its self a form of forced evolution? Evolution states the body changes due to outside influences...id say alien dna experiments would qualify as a pretty big outside influence, wouldn't you?...edit on 4-3-2012 by mutatismutandis because: (no reason given)
The part where the Royal Society, experts on evolution, the most ardent supporters in the past, of Darwinism, have stated that they studied fully, some human footprints in Mexico, are completely convinced they are human prints, the prints of modern man. Not homo erectus, or anything of that sort, but modern man.
Shall I make a quote for you from the website provided by the British Museum, one of the foremost experts in Paleontology in the world, if not _the most respected Museum of Paleontology in the world?
Since the most expert people in the world on the subject have determined that modern man was in Mexico 1.3 million years ago, walking with his dogs and cats and farm animals and a child, what they have shown quite clearly, is that evolution as described to date has no basis in fact.
Whereas, other animals look the same and in any numbers, would easily be confused.
Humans fleeing volcanoes have been known to step on lava and lift their toes as well, and put more pressure on the ball of their foot, and these prints which I am afraid I am unable to show you due to the conspiracy, do show signs of toe lifting.
But the lava need not be red hot in order for a print to be left. If you examine the experts wording, that being Renne et al, in the journal Nature...and I quote
"recently erupted ash."