Noah

randyvs
reply to post by peter vlar

 

There are long periods of overlap

Been think'n about your post here Peter, off and for a good part of
the day. And wouldn't you admit that the evidence for this" overlapping"
as you call it, this intermingling, living side by side, is at least detrimental
to the theory of evolution ? Evolution is described by science to look
completely liniar. Yet there is solid proof that it isn't It just seems so
much to me that this debate only adds up to a difference of perspectives.

One excellent example is in the Levantine Valley where we have discovered sites where Anatomically modern humans lived side by side with Neanderthals and likely worked together.

More and more I'm starting to think that neanderthals were just pre duluvian
human beings. And that they were a better human being. Stronger and more
intelligent. And you know there is evidence for it.

I personally don't see how the vast amount of overlapping is a detriment. If current genetic data holds true, the likelihood of each of the more modern members of Homo(us, Neanderthal, Denisovan)all evolved independently from various populations of H. Erectus. If we take a look at the genetic diversity of SubSaharan Africans we can see that they are a more pure, for lack of more suitable adjective, version of anatomically modern humans who never intermingled with our other close relatives. As our ability to delve deeper into the human genome increases we will get a much better idea but from what we currently know all evidence points to either independently evolving from different geographically isolated bands of H. Erectus or as some of the new Georgian finds seem to indicate a separate as yet unknown admixture that is most likely going to turn up in Africa with a slightly lesser possibility of an Asian origin. I know it looks like a lot of what ifs and maybe's but there's no point in blowing smoke up your ... when asking a legitimate question and not mounting an attack.

From a religious POV I think we both know already I'm not going to go along with the Pre-Deluvian hypothesis for Neanderthal. However, from a geological perspective I can agree in that they were the kings of the Ice Age when a whole lot of water was locked into the ice caps and glaciers across the Northern Hemisphere and the end of the Ice Age and the beginning of rising sea levels does somewhat correspond to their demise as a separate sub species of Homo. You'll get no argument from me on their strength, its undisputable that they were far superior physically to AMH. A project I worked on once involved measuring attachment point scars for muscles and tendons on Neanderthal's and I can assure you, they were built like tanks. They were at least as smart as us and certainly had larger brains and had many of the hallmarks of what we would call civilization. They buried their dead with grave goods, took care of their sick and injured, practiced trepanation as well as other medical practices, used jewelry, built shelters and at least in some instances were friendly with us and we likely shared a bit of knowledge back and forth. An interesting side note is that at one of the Levantine sites the tool making skills of the Neaderthals who lived there was actually inferior to older European populations and improved after contact with AMH.

reply to post by peter vlar


Well handled and I was hoping you would mention the
larger brain size. Nice retort.

reply to post by randyvs


Utnapishtim-Noah 1 wonders is there a connection randyvs. If so what is taught shared entertained manifested in mass populace as truth?

Utnapishtim (or Utanapishtim) is a character in the epic of Gilgamesh who is tasked by Enki (Ea) to abandon his worldly possessions and create a giant ship to be called The Preserver of Life. He was also tasked with bringing his wife, family, and relatives along with the craftsmen of his village, baby animals and grains.[1] The oncoming flood would wipe out all animals and humans that were not on the ship, similar to that of the later Noah's Ark story. After twelve days on the water, Utanapishtim opened the hatch of his ship to look around and saw the slopes of Mount Nisir, where he rested his ship for seven days. On the seventh day, he sent a dove out to see if the water had receded, and the dove could find nothing but water, so it returned. Then he sent out a swallow, and just as before, it returned, having found nothing. Finally, Utanapishtim sent out a raven, and the raven saw that the waters had receded, so it circled around, but did not return. Utanapishtim then set all the animals free, and made a sacrifice to the gods. The gods came, and because he had preserved the seed of man while remaining loyal and trusting of his gods, Utanapishtim and his wife were given immortality, as well as a place among the heavenly gods.

NAMASTE*******

peter vlar
A project I worked on once involved measuring attachment point scars for muscles and tendons on Neanderthal's and I can assure you, they were built like tanks. They were at least as smart as us and certainly had larger brains and had many of the hallmarks of what we would call civilization. They buried their dead with grave goods, took care of their sick and injured, practiced trepanation as well as other medical practices, used jewelry, built shelters and at least in some instances were friendly with us and we likely shared a bit of knowledge back and forth. An interesting side note is that at one of the Levantine sites the tool making skills of the Neaderthals who lived there was actually inferior to older European populations and improved after contact with AMH.

I share your sentiment. Neanderthals were sturdy and intelligent and were artistic and ingenuitive. My favorite piece of archaeological find is the Neanderthal flute that was found, measured to be around 50,000 years old. It was designed to play music in the do-re-mi scale.

Is there any evidence as to how old they became?

reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

is there a connection randyvs.

I'm sure there is, not seeing a lot of room, for coincidence in the simalarities.
But the way I would explain it, from a believers point of view? Is really easy
IMO. First having two stories, of a flood, that goes back to prehistory?
Well, no one can call that the Bible, corroborating the Bible.
So what do we have? One story is just that, a story, A story which was
handed down, possibly, by one of those who were on the Ark.
This is the story that gets polluted thru an untold amount of generations.
Even being influenced at times by new beliefs springing up along the way.

Then God refreshes the truth thru Moses and because the truth lives forever
that's the story, that is not just a story, or a fable or a lie. Because that is
the story that comes to us in scripture.

I apologize I took so long to respond.

randyvs

This is the story that gets polluted thru an untold amount of generations.
Even being influenced at times by new beliefs springing up along the way.

Then God refreshes the truth thru Moses and because the truth lives forever
that's the story, that is not just a story, or a fable or a lie. Because that is
the story that comes to us in scripture.

I apologize I took so long to respond.

1 agrees randyvs. I was discussing today with a friend a concept that goes as so-

You got 5 perspectives interpreting or seeing something and you want to pick up the information shared from these perspectives.

Perspective 1 sees a red square
Perspective 2 sees a big square
Perspective 3 sees a moving square
Perspective 4 sees a small square
and Perspective 5 sees a Multiplying square making many other squares

The Data compiled shares that a Square was observed to exist...
And this is how 1 formulates the information shared from various perspectives thru time & existence to find truth as objective as possible from subjective perspectives including 1z own.

Change square to

ALPHA/OMEGA
CREATOR
ET
GOD
HGHER BEING(S) then Humans in objective reality interaction, perception and understanding

And we got something going on it appears...

Thanks for taking time to respond 1 knows many are busy @ times

reply to post by Ophiuchus 13


Common sense leaves no reason to doubt scripture, not just IMO either.

randyvs
Atheists today can give no account, nor ryhme no reason,
whyif mankind simply evolved ? Why he would evolve with a knowledge of a deity,
in his literary memory and culture.

Why we are superstitious

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing

Bruce Hood believes that this is all a result the way the brain is designed.

Designed? I'm sure you are aware of what that word suggests.
The very use of one word defeats everything he says.

reply to post by randyvs


Well, it might do if you have a certain mindset.

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing


You mean if your mind is made up?
Which reminds me of a joke I made up a while back.

Why did the blonde put lipstick on her forhead?
She was trying to make up her mind.

reply to post by randyvs


Well, if you are coming to a piece like that with a pro-creationist bias looking for any little crack you can find to criticise it.

Guess what, biologists use the word 'designed' all the time, yet they do not mean intelligent design or to imply a creator. People with a creationist agenda will usually seize upon it as a 'AHA! GOTCHA!!' moment, but that moment exists largely in their own minds..

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing


No, I disagree, the words they use do imply the truth. I fail to see how that's just
in my mind. It's more an inescapable truth. That's whats in my mind. How can
anyone use the word design without implying a designer. That's not even ignorance.
It's stupid. And I'm not at all implkying an, " AHA gothcha". I'm saying if one is to be
taken seriously? One should pay attention to the words they use. They're many subs
that could 've replaced the word design.

boncho

edmc^2

rupertg
Noah was nine hundred and fifty years old when he died.

They should have at least put some elements of reallism in such fairytales.

Sorry but the story of Noah as told in the Scripture is no fairy tale.

It's real, indeed!

Real as today's events.

Real as if todays events were being recorded by a schizophrenic only to be later studied/discussed two thousand years from now.

You posted in an earlier post about Moses or whoever being really high on psychedelics. You seem to discredit his discovery based on this.

Perhaps you have no experience with this sort of thing, but this is precisely the type of mental environment one should be in when "seeing the big picture" or communicating with Gods, which I have always taken this story (and all of the OT) to mean "Alien caretakers".

Also, Schizophrenics as well should have an easier time with communication at that level then say, some average overly skeptical person, like I don't know...

FinalCountdown

boncho

edmc^2

rupertg
Noah was nine hundred and fifty years old when he died.

They should have at least put some elements of reallism in such fairytales.

Sorry but the story of Noah as told in the Scripture is no fairy tale.

It's real, indeed!

Real as today's events.

Real as if todays events were being recorded by a schizophrenic only to be later studied/discussed two thousand years from now.

You posted in an earlier post about Moses or whoever being really high on psychedelics. You seem to discredit his discovery based on this.

Perhaps you have no experience with this sort of thing, but this is precisely the type of mental environment one should be in when "seeing the big picture" or communicating with Gods, which I have always taken this story (and all of the OT) to mean "Alien caretakers".

Also, Schizophrenics as well should have an easier time with communication at that level then say, some average overly skeptical person, like I don't know...

That's a very cool argument towards spirituality. Too bad the organized religions don't really count any of that though eh?

*That would also mean we have continuing communication with our gods and should not be ruled simply by revelations long since dead.

reply to post by randyvs


I'm shocked you disagree, randy. Shocked!!

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing


I wish I was.
But you're a good egg as always, I have noticed.
Peace my good man.

reply to post by randyvs


Well, I doubt you'll give it anymore of a look in than the last one (you made it as far as, what, the first third of the first paragraph before you dismissed it? Reminds me of something that Jesus bloke said about "Pearls before swine.."), but here is a rather interesting paper submitted to the royal society back in 2008 which suggests natural selection favours the superstitious.

The evolution of superstitious and superstition-like behaviour

I don't think they use the word 'designed', but there will no doubt be something you can seize upon to hand wave it away. It's terribly godless, after all..

randyvs
Common sense leaves no reason to doubt scripture, not just IMO either.

Common sense leaves no reason to believe that the Noahs Ark story was anything more than a myth.

If Noahs Ark happened .. then this 80,000 year old tree colony wouldn't have survived.
PANDO Tree Colony

Pando (Latin for "I spread"), also known as The Trembling Giant,[1][2] is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) determined to be a single living organism by identical genetic markers[3] and one massive underground root system. The plant is estimated to weigh collectively 6,000,000 kg (6,600 short tons),[4] making it the heaviest known organism.[5] The root system of Pando, at an estimated 80,000 years old, is among the oldest known living organisms.[6][7]
Pando is located 1 mile southwest of Fish Lake on Utah route 25.[8] in the Fremont River Ranger District of the Fishlake National Forest, at the western edge of the Colorado Plateau in South-central Utah, at N 38.525 W 111.75.

Science Daily
At this time there are 6.5 million land animal species on the planet. There were even more back in what was supposedly Noahs time. Two of each animal would mean at least 13 million animals on that boat. NOT A CHANCE!! Couldn't happen.

Light doesnt penetrate the ocean more than about 500 ft. if the earth were submerged under 29,000 ft. in order to cover mt. everest, no marine plant life would have survived and the oceans would be dead. Obviously that didn't happen.

Could Noahs' Ark Have Actually Happened?

If the 2350 date were correct, then human civilization would’ve had to undergo an extreme population explosion in the millenium following the flood. According to Biblical sources, there would have been millions of Jews leaving Egypt, so assuming a global population of 40 million around that time (~1350 BC), and comparing that to global population estimates later in history (an estimated 200+ million by 0 AD), would require an incredibly high population growth between 2350 BC and 1350 BC (5,000,000 fold increase in 1,000 years), and a much lower population growth after 1350 BC – usually less than 5 fold population growth within any 1,000 year period between 1350 BC and 1800 AD.

(3) The distribution of animals is not what we would expect if there were a global flood killing all life. If all life was limited to the top of a mountain in the Middle East in 2350 B.C., then how to explain the distribution of animals across the world? All the kangaroos on the Ark went to Australia? How did the animals get to the Americas? If they crossed via an ice-bridge in the Bering Strait, then the Americas should be limited to animals that are warm blooded and capable of traveling hundreds of miles across snow. This means no reptiles, no spiders, etc. Yet, the Amazon contains a wide variety of animal biodiversity. And why didn’t American desert animals stay behind in the deserts of the Old World? (See related post: “Creationism versus Animal Biodiversity”)

(4) Genetic evidence shows that human beings are far to genetically diverse to be descended from a single family in 2350 B.C. If Noah’s Ark were true, then all men alive today would’ve gotten their Y-chromosomes from Noah, and all human mitochondrial DNA would come from Noah’s wife and the three daughter-in-laws. Studies of the human Y-Chromosome show that you’d need far more than 4,300 years to accumulate that many mutations. Human beings could not be descended from a single male in 2350 B.C. What the studies show, instead, is that, in order to explain the number of mutations in the human Y-Chromosome, you have to allow for roughly 60,000-90,000 years. Similarly, human mitochondrial DNA requires roughly 160,000 years to accumulate that many mutations — showing that Eve could not have lived 6,000 years ago as the Bible says.

AND MORE INFORMATION AT THAT SITE.

Adam and his Eves - A lesson on DNA and population distribution for you

Creationism vs Biodiversity

Additionally, once the animals left the Ark, there are a lot of nearby regions they could inhabit, but didn’t. For example, all varieties of rattlesnakes are found in the Americas (33 species, and numerous subspecies). There are none in the Old World – despite the fact that there are regions similar to the American deserts – the Sahara, the Middle East, the Gobi Desert, etc. Llamas fit this same pattern – found in the New World, but not in the Old World. The Caucus (where the Ark supposedly landed) and Himalaya mountains have different species than the Rocky Mountains and Andes. Why didn’t some of the Rocky Mountain species stick around in the Caucus Mountains – they were already there the minute they stepped off the Ark. Similarly, the species in the South American tropics aren’t found in Old World tropics (Southeast Asia and Africa), and vice-versa. For example, New World cats and monkeys are different species than Old World cats and monkeys. Theoretically, with the movement of creatures caused by the global flood, one could find the same species living in distant places. Somehow, we don’t.

National Geographic - Human DNA Journey
For Noahs Ark to have happened exactly as the bible claims, we'd expect the highest levels of genetic diversity to be in the Middle East. But the fact is that the highest levels of human genetic diversity occur in Africa where humanity evolved.

Noahs Ark Doesn't Float

Miles of coral reef, hundreds of feet thick, still survive intact at the Eniwetok atoll in the Pacific Ocean. The violent flood would have certainly destroyed these formations, yet the rate of deposit tells us that the reefs have survived for over 100,000 undisturbed years. Similarly, the floodwaters, not to mention the other factors leading to a boiling sea, would have obviously melted the polar ice caps. However, ice layers in Greenland and Antarctica date back at least 40,000 years.

Impact craters from pre-historical asteroid strikes still exist even though the tumultuous floodwaters would have completely eroded them. If these craters were formed concurrently with the flood, as it has been irresponsibly suggested, the magnificent heat from the massive impacts would have immediately boiled large quantities of the ocean, as if it wasn’t hot enough already. Like the asteroid craters, global mountain ranges would exhibit uniform erosion as a result of a global flood. Unsurprisingly, we witness just the opposite in neighboring pairs of greatly contrasting examples, such as the Rockies and Appalachians.

Even if we erroneously assume there to be enough water under the earth’s surface in order to satisfy the required flood levels, the size of the openings necessary to permit passage for a sufficient amount of water would be large enough to destroy the cohesive properties of the earth’s crust. However, the outer layer is firmly intact, and there’s no evidence indicating that it ever collapsed. All this hypothetical escaping water would have greatly eroded the sides of the deep ocean fissures as well, but no such observable evidence exists for this phenomenon either.

We can also observe algae deposits within the fossil layers, a phenomenon that could not have formed during the flood because they require sunlight to thrive. It’s quite reasonable to assume that the clouds would have thoroughly obstructed the sunlight during such a tremendous rain indicative of the flood. Setting aside this and all other known fossil inconsistencies with the Bible, archaeologists have found human footprints within the upper layers. Moving water simply could not have deposited these markings. As I alluded to earlier, this seemingly endless list of geological problems was completely unforeseeable to the primitive authors, thus the Bible offers no justifications or explanations for our discoveries.

MORE INFORMATiON AT THE SITE.

Besides the DNA and fossils ... the atmosphere of Earth doesn't carry enough water to 'cover the Earth past the highest mountains'. The water from the Noahs Ark flood wouldn't have evaporated into space ... and it's not underground .. so where did it supposedly go?

COMMON SENSE - No reason to believe the Noahs Ark story is literal truth.
Therefore - it doesn't matter how Hollywood presents the movie. It's not a true story anyways.

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing

Well, I doubt you'll give it anymore of a look in than the last one (you made it as far as, what, the first third of the first paragraph before you dismissed it? Reminds me of something that Jesus bloke said about "Pearls before swine.."), but here is a rather interesting paper submitted to the royal society back in 2008 which suggests natural selection favours the superstitious.

Don't under estimate Randy so much.
He did read the whole article but, only answered to the part
that stuck out the most to him. The exact same way any one
would. That didn't cross you're mind ?