174 replies to this topic

[Habitat]

Henry, if you keep talking in riddles, it's gonna do my head in, O.K. ?

[Shang Di]

Edited by shangdi, 07 February 2011 - 06:17 AM.

[Shang Di]

kmt_sesh, on 27 January 2011 - 12:27 AM, said:

Greetings, megabyte, and welcome to UM.

I echo the sentiments of others who have commented and must stress the fact that human lifespans are hardly static. In the Bronze Age, when the Sumerians, Akkadians, Egyptians, and others were honing the their creation myths, the average lifespan was approximately 35 years. Approximately thirty percent of all children died before their fifth year of life; 20% of all pregnancies ended in spontaneous miscarriage.

Today, on the other hand, the average lifespan (in the West, at least) is around 76 years. Further, the average human is significantly taller than his ancestor of some 3,000 years ago. Whereas most Westerners get married in their twenties and have children in their twenties or early thirties, in the Bronze Age a bride could be as young as twelve or thirteen years of age and her husband only a few years older. When you were eighteen years old and "middle-aged," you started a family by what we modern folks would consider to be extremely young--still kids, really.

A multiplicity of factors determine lifespan, and it's all well understood through scientific principles. Aliens are not needed. The most obvious factors are good nutrition and modern medicine. The absence of something so basic as vaccinations is one main reason the infant mortality rate in the ancient world was so universally high. And something many people don't realize is that one of the greatest inventions in all of human history was the capability to produce clean, safe drinking water; that alone lengthened average lifespans.

When trying to tackle these subjects in the course of one's studies, the critical factor is the quality of sources to which one turns. While there is an abundance of high-quality and reliable research material that is available to everyone, I cannot agree enough with something TheSearcher mentioned in the second post of this discussion: sources like Ancient Aliens are not to be trusted. I've seen numerous episodes of this program, myself. TheSearcher said that when you watch this program, you must take it's information with "a big bag of salt." I might extend this analogy and suggest there is not a bag of salt in this world that's large enough. The information dispensed on Ancient Aliens is so lacking in substance and scientific evaluation that, in my opinion, it has no research value whatsoever. In other words, you won't learn a single thing that's pertinent to real-world historical facts.

Finally, on the subject of aliens, I am not the least shy about stating my own opinion. I am absolutely certain that aliens had nothing whatsoever to do with the developments of ancient cultures around the world. Indeed, these ancient societies did not need the assistance of aliens. This is the sort of thing of which TV shows like Ancient Aliens are so unforgivably guilty: at the same time that they dispense oodles of intellectual flotsam, they rob ancient societies of the great things ancient peoples achieved. Give credit where credit is due.

I agree to that every detail of yours!


Give credit to ancient people for their civilizations!

The worst will be giving credit to aliens for the Great wall of China.LOL


probably because its the only man-made structure visible to the moon.


Why are those ancestors of our less intelligent than us? Then what if the following generations they'll take wikipedia, google and yahoo even the internet credit to the aliens?


Is it not insulting for our generation? That's what these people are doing to the past.


If indeed there were aliens why not make pyramids out of steel, cement or strange materials not out of bricks and limestone.

[Shang Di]

Habitat, on 07 February 2011 - 04:26 AM, said:

Really ? Perhaps you might like to think that through, no-one dies but we still have children ? Won't be too long before we're crowded out !

it is nice to live forever. but if your loves ones are gone, too many friends die soon, your left alone, what is worth living for?

[Rlyeh]

physicsolved, on 06 February 2011 - 08:57 PM, said:

This argument of supposed “good nutrition” seems to be less than scientific in my opinion.

Seems that your definition of scientific has nothing to do with science.

Quote

As for the idea that medical “factors” explain the seeming “uplift” of human age I would ask. How does this explain the scientific reason why those before the deluge eclipsed mans average modern life expectancy. ( Ancient preflood= 969 years / Modern post flood= “76”). In order for a scientific postulate to be acceptable it must answer questions related to both sides. Your scientific proposal therefore is lopsided. While it may “explain” 9 verses truly define) the one it fails to do so with regard to the other. Or: Perhaps the medicine before the flood was much more superior to modern medicine. To say this would be to accept things about the pre flood world that would make many so called “opinionists’ shift in their seat .

There is nothing scientific about what you've said. The sumerians also had longevity myths, with kings living for tens of thousands of years.

[Rlyeh]

physicsolved, on 07 February 2011 - 03:19 AM, said:

This is a statement of scientific and mathematic fact. Facts that would refute any who refer to the historical biblical account of a world wide deluge  as ...impossible. That event ( aside from mythos "copy cat" stories of floods found in just about all cultures that have ever existed) occurred about 2370 B.C.E and is recorded in the history book referred to as the bible.

Yet the Epic of Gilgamesh is older but it must be a "copy cat".

[Henry Morgan]

Habitat, on 07 February 2011 - 06:06 AM, said:

Henry, if you keep talking in riddles, it's gonna do my head in, O.K. ?

Riddle?  There were no question marks in my post.  


If you can’t experience death, then death cannot really exist.
  -That is to say, if at the end of it all my awareness simply vanishes, then in the subjective, the only point of view which is self-evident, there is no such thing as death.


If you can experience death, then death cannot really exist either.
  -If I experience, who knows, let's say, going down a long tunnel, uh spiritual guides that say or do this or that, uh, Saint Peter at the pearly gates, uh, reincarnation.  Well then, that is all once more direct self-evident subjective experience too and not really "death", in the sense of the end of it all.


Either way it doesn't matter, and death cannot really exist.
  -Subtract your fear from the situation and maybe you will understand the clarity of the logic better.


However, death can be a really good advisor, an advisor of how to live each moment more intensely.
  -I don't know about death, but life can be lived at various levels of intensity, and that can warp the subjective experience of time.  The notion that death is stalking us is a useful ploy that can allow us to live the present moment more intensely.  If anything, the experience of time is one of the hallmarks of life, and memory is an essental cornerstone to experience life and gives it a useful definition.

People see living things become non-self-sustaining, and have one useful definition among eachother for the word "death".  However we (I) have been trained to project into my own mind the idea that the world experienced through the senses has it's own reality apart from my experience, and even develop elaborate ideas about what "others" experience, but not based on direct knowing.  This scenario seems to "work well" within itself, and we call that "scientific", or "objective", but it does nothing to help me understand about things like death.  

I don't concern myself much about things I don't have some direct control over.  I am aware at this very moment.  The past is only a memory, it doesn't exist.  The future is a pure abstract unknown, and exists even less.  
I am alive in the eternal now = I am eternal, there is no death.

I think that if me and most people really think about it, what they fear is not death, but pain associated with possible deaths.  I have had a number of serious injuries and near death experiences and no longer fear pain much either, because beyond a certain point the experience of pain sort of cancels itself out too and becomes a non issue.

I think that when we clear away the layers and layers of abstract thought, we come to a surprising conclusion, that our most basic desire is to really fall asleep, that is to say, to die.

Edited by Henry Morgan, 07 February 2011 - 02:14 PM.

[Emma_Acid]

physicsolved, on 06 February 2011 - 08:57 PM, said:

How does this explain the scientific reason why those before the deluge eclipsed mans average modern life expectancy. ( Ancient preflood= 969 years / Modern post flood= “76”).

Which do you think is more likely - that after a certain period of time humans stopped living for hundreds of years, or from a certain point record keeping became better and the lives of humans were more accurately recorded?

Its no coincidence that the recorded life of Sumerian kings drops down from tens of thousands of years to a mere 100 years right around the time that written records began to be kept.

[physicsolved]

Swede, on 07 February 2011 - 03:32 AM, said:

Thank you for finally defining your base-line date. Matters can now be addressed in a more succinct manner.

1) Are you now suggesting that the aquatic borne microbes/parasites are only a product of the last 6000 years? Please provide documentation.

2) Please provide qualified documentation for a global inundation within the last 3 billion years.

3) It would appear that your understanding of geologic processes/plate tectonics may be rather lacking. Please see below:

http://www.scotese.com/sfsanim.htm

http://en.wikipedia....ctionGlobal.gif

4) Your references to members of the hominid line prior to or contemporary with H. sapiens or H. sapiens sapiens would also appear to indicate a lack of understanding regarding the current state of knowledge in this regard. Please see below:

http://anthro.paloma.../mod_homo_4.htm

http://www.eurekaler...u-toh021105.php

5) As you will (hopefully!) observe, the above has been presented in such a manner as to progressively (and very briefly) narrow the time range down to a period closer to your 6000 BP figure. Now one must be willing to address the quite voluminous bodies of evidence that clearly support the presence of a fully modern members of your own ancestry (and their cultures) that predate your 6000 BP figure. For starters:

http://www.catalhoyu...iocarbon01.html

http://www.roperld.c...Haplogroups.htm

http://www.sciencedi...=/sdarticle.pdf

http://www.google.co...org.mozilla:en-
US:official%26biw%3D1350%26bih%3D597%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=416&vpy=172&dur=6118&hovh=185&hovw=273&tx=144&ty=72&ei=9QB_TN6XNZPWtQON4JX1Cg&oei=9QB_TN6XNZPWtQON4JX1Cg&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=23&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0

The above are, yet again, just for starters. More in-depth references can be readily supplied.

6) Re: Human life-span - It would be incumbent upon you to provide data supporting your claim. The proof of a negative is a logical fallacy.

.

Succinct! Respectful

1) Please provide “scientific” proof that “fresh clean water” is a modern phenomenon. Please provide scientific evidence that “microbes/parasites” are NOT a product of creation.

Note: As for when these “living organisms” were created the bible does not define the exact length of time nor the exact time theses creative events transpired .  However the bible does state that these creatures ( Genesis 1:20: “ let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living things”) were created on the 5th “day”. This day came after the 1st through 4th day. Thus living organisms dependent on processes of light and photosynthesis( 1-4 day)  naturally and scientifically proceeded the “coming to be “ of light and luminary.  The word “day” has many meanings in the Hebrew language. Thus the “day” when these “microbes/parasites” were created could have represented thousands of years BEFORE the 6th day( when man was created).  As it is the term “day” has a broader meaning than just a 24 hour period. One thing for sure it took more than “144” literal hours to accomplish all the works of creation. Thus when these “aqua-swarms” were created and how long the process took is not specifically stated in the bible. However the bible does indicate that the extra terrestrial that is God certainly predates the creation of the heavens and earth. As well the bible indicates that “one day to Jehovah is 1000 years”( to man). Thus if each creative day represented a complete 1,000 years( inferential verses any defined methodology of chrono) then this could “indicate” that the “microbes/parasites” could have came into existence about 12,000 years ago. However this is not definitive. What we do know is that the earth is billions of years old. Take into consideration the broad use of the Hebrew word “day” then from the strictest standpoint all time preceding the 6th day could have been used in the creative processes.

2) Many geological, anthropological, cultural, and geographical “qualifications”. Equally as feasible as the “lack of proof” you would seek to “prop up” relegating this possibility.

3) Not interested in your “interpretive references.” Been there, saw the movie, have done the research ( open mindedly)…not convinced. Moved on!


4)  Correction: Human! ( verses “hominoid”= a witty preposterous evolutionary “term”). “current state” of evolutionary dogma is inferior to the “current state” of creation(ary) evaluations. ( save evolutionary “peer review”)
“..lack of understanding..” No! Rather: A better ability of perceiving the principles of creation as demonstrative relative to what you call ’indicatives.”

Equally indifferent to your references. Many if not most of which I have entertained.

5) Rhetoric! “..more in depth references..”= selectively choosing ones ideals and subsequently framing a RELIGIOUS belief system around them. Religion in the particular being….”chance.”

6) I will choose logical over “illogical chance fallacy” at all times. ( Note: Where the word “fallacy is necessarily removed from the “logical” equations)

You will admit: History/science/anthropology/geology...all of these human endeavors represent actualities "orchestrated" to conform to mans ideologies. I know it is a travesty of historic justice but it is a phenomenon that cannot be denied. Thus true history is only obscured or distorted relative to mans way of thinking.

History= orchestra (aich+ eye+es+te+owe+are+y)....akestory....."orchestra"

Humans "playing the keys of history" in a way that appeals to themselves.

orchestrate ( defined): to arrange or manipulate, especially by means of clever or thorough planning or maneuvering: to arrange, organize, or build up for special or maximum effect.

Some of those who "arrange, manipulate," history do so with the purpose of "stretching the strings", "warping the sounds" ..so as to produce "distorted, false" histories. Others "play the instruments" by closely adhering to the "true" sounds" and do not deviate into "wantonness" of historical musicality.

[physicsolved]

Emma_Acid, on 07 February 2011 - 04:10 PM, said:

Which do you think is more likely - that after a certain period of time humans stopped living for hundreds of years, or from a certain point record keeping became better and the lives of humans were more accurately recorded?

Its no coincidence that the recorded life of Sumerian kings drops down from tens of thousands of years to a mere 100 years right around the time that written records began to be kept.

Before the  “ Chernobyl disaster” occurred, a disater that was called a “ nuclear accident of catastrophic proportions” people lived regular healthy lives. After the disaster of “catastrophic proportions” ( not dissimilar to a world wide deluge) peoples life span was cut short.( either literally dying or following the disaster continuing to suffer and die as a result).

Shortly after the explossion the “radiation levels” were equally as catastrophic. “Four hundred times more radioactive material was released than had been by the atomic bombing of Hiroshima”. We do not have to discuss the long term results of this sudden release of radiation.  Save:

“The radioactive contamination of aquatic systems therefore became a major issue in the immediate aftermath of the accident.”

“After the disaster, four square kilometers of pine forest directly downwind of the reactor turned reddish-brown and died, earning the name of the "Red Forest".[85] Some animals in the worst-hit areas also died or stopped reproducing. Most domestic animals were evacuated from the exclusion zone, but horses left on an island in the Pripyat River 6 km (4 mi) from the power plant died when their thyroid glands were destroyed by radiation doses of 150–200 Sv.[86] Some cattle on the same island died and those that survived were stunted because of thyroid damage. .. robot sent into the reactor itself has returned with samples of black, melanin-rich radiotrophic fungi that are growing on the reactor's walls.”

(note: all words in quotations were extracted from an article related to Chernobyl …Wicipedia)
Thus and then!

Now! Imagine that the Ukraine represents the sphere (obloid)  earth . The nuclear plant represents  space outside the earth. Imagine that the earth at one time had a impregnable canopy separating space from the earth. Imagine that this canopy was either removed or partially deconstructed. Imagine the “volume” of “heavenly radiation” that would now be introduced into the atmosphere of the earth. Imagine that before this event humans lived “a long time” would such be the case after the event? Rhetorical.
[


“It is no coincidence” that: Humans, flora, fauna,..and all other living things on the earth…after this historical event( written in the record of the bible) were greatly diminished as to the potentiality to live  “long lives”.

Add to this “radiation” the pollutions compounded by greedy, selfish, never satisfied humans…and the result inevitably means the following:

“969.to 76”

Also typical of humankind is the following:

Blaming others for the eventuality of their actions.

[physicsolved]

Rlyeh, on 07 February 2011 - 09:27 AM, said:

Yet the Epic of Gilgamesh is older but it must be a "copy cat".

Can you prove this statement? Irrefutabally? Thus no need for me to engage you in conversation about it.

Thus the preceeding post as to "historic orchestrations"

[Emma_Acid]

physicsolved, on 07 February 2011 - 04:51 PM, said:

Now! Imagine that the Ukraine represents the sphere (obloid)  earth . The nuclear plant represents  space outside the earth. Imagine that the earth at one time had a impregnable canopy separating space from the earth. Imagine that this canopy was either removed or partially deconstructed. Imagine the “volume” of “heavenly radiation” that would now be introduced into the atmosphere of the earth. Imagine that before this event humans lived “a long time” would such be the case after the event? Rhetorical.

If you actually think that this is more likely than the decreased ages simply being down to better record-keeping, then this board has reached a new nadir.

Edited by Emma_Acid, 07 February 2011 - 05:10 PM.

[Rlyeh]

physicsolved, on 07 February 2011 - 04:56 PM, said:

Can you prove this statement?

http://fajardo-acost...dlit/gilgamesh/

Quote

Irrefutabally? Thus no need for me to engage you in conversation about it.

To you? The person who re-defined scientific to include mythological events? No.

[Rangkor]

Interesting theory. I don't believe it, but it is fun to think about.

[kmt_sesh]

Abramelin, on 07 February 2011 - 04:44 AM, said:

Yes.

The earth is as smooth as a billiard ball.

... sigh ....

I know your pain, Abramelin. Frustrating, isn't it? And tedious.

I particularly like the date of 2370 BCE for the biblical flood. Theologians of old came up with dates like this one, which is why the Church was so mortified by proper scientific studies of ancient Near Eastern cultures. The more people delved into the past, the more the Church feared its tenets would be upset.

That was in the nineteenth century, however. I should hope we have evolved somewhat since then, intellectually. Well, for the most part, we have. But using this date of 2370 BCE and looking at just pharaonic Egypt alone, this places us in Dynasty 5 of the Old Kingdom. The Egyptians had already been building pyramids nonstop for several centuries and would continue to do so for another dynasty or two, down to about 2200 BCE.

LOL But then all of a sudden comes the Flood! I guess all the pyramids of Dynasty 6 were more difficult to build because of it: "Well, boys, look at all the water. Better build the next ones with big floats at the bottom."