Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Chronological order of the bible


  • Please log in to reply
166 replies to this topic

#76    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,379 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 10 July 2013 - 04:32 PM

View PostMr Walker, on 10 July 2013 - 03:33 AM, said:

Any presently  scientifically inexplicable phenomena is either presently paranormal or supernatural by definition.
Walter Cassels ("Supernatural Religion," available online) has written six chapters on the relationship of miracles to the Bible.  In essence, Christianity cannot survive without miracles because a lack of them would mean that whatever knowledge is laid out in the Bible is accessible to rational thought - and that is not a miracle.

If you are going to claim that "miracles" are the product of an advanced technology, then science would require you to present some evidence supporting the conclusion that such a technology actually exists (or has existed).  Your beliefs have been arrived at through "faith" and may be valid for you, but because they can't be verified by impartial observation, have no validity outside of yourself.  We all have beliefs that we arrived at through "faith" (even us "scientists") that are valid only to us.  This is an important issue whether we believe in god or not - because god is in your mind does not imply that you are in god's mind.
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#77    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 10 July 2013 - 05:19 PM

View PostDoug1o29, on 10 July 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

There is nothing magical about an advanced degree.  Anybody with average intelligence can do it.  It takes opportunity and a high level of persistence.  But one does not have to be particularly brilliant.  All an advanced degree does is indicate that a (presumably) impartial entity is willing to certify that the holder of the degree knows what he is doing in a certain field.  Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) are in demand because they certify that the bearers are competent in a certain type of problem solving.  That's all scientific work is - problem solving.

Science is not a set of findings or discoveries; it is a process for looking at nature.  Those finds you listed are not science; it is the process of examining them that is (or isn't) science.  More than anything else, research involves running down and tying up all the loose ends.  And that is the one thing the posted articles didn't do.  Perhaps in 1852 there were loose ends that couldn't be checked out, or perhaps the people who made the finds disturbed them so that the data was no longer available, or perhaps the people who made the finds didn't know what to check out or how to do it. At any rate, it wasn't done, so you (and we) are left with nothing but speculation and some useless artifacts.

People who disagree with scientific findings are not ignorant hicks - scientists do it all the time (Send a paper through peer review if you'd like to find out how nasty things can get.  Even if you're right, you'll likely get your ears pinned back.).  But people who do not know that they do not know the techniques of rational thinking and research and persist in putting out unsupported drivel instead of reliable work - those people ARE ignorant hicks.
Doug

I just want to point out that this is not entirely true. Later information which was not available to the original discoverers has, in many cases, shown that the original presentation was in error. This does not mean that the original discoverers were fabricating anything, just that their information was incomplete and therefore wrong, which happens quite often. Subsequent presentations, such as we've seen above (to which, in part, I posted a reply about earlier) that either don't know or purposely ignore that later information ARE both ignorant and fabricating their own "truth". The first of which can be cured through research, the latter of which shouldn't be taken seriously by any means.

cormac

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#78    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 8,026 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 08:21 PM

View PostFrank Merton, on 10 July 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

That is indeed an odd definition.  I think you constructed it so as to be able to feel persecuted.

I cannot feel persecuted by something that doesn't have the power to do so... and words don't make me feel persecuted... frustrated by others ignorance on certain subjects, yes that is a definite problem

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#79    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 8,026 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 08:47 PM

View PostDoug1o29, on 10 July 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

There is nothing magical about an advanced degree.  Anybody with average intelligence can do it.  It takes opportunity and a high level of persistence.  But one does not have to be particularly brilliant.  All an advanced degree does is indicate that a (presumably) impartial entity is willing to certify that the holder of the degree knows what he is doing in a certain field.  Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) are in demand because they certify that the bearers are competent in a certain type of problem solving.  That's all scientific work is - problem solving.

Science is not a set of findings or discoveries; it is a process for looking at nature.  Those finds you listed are not science; it is the process of examining them that is (or isn't) science.  More than anything else, research involves running down and tying up all the loose ends.  And that is the one thing the posted articles didn't do.  Perhaps in 1852 there were loose ends that couldn't be checked out, or perhaps the people who made the finds disturbed them so that the data was no longer available, or perhaps the people who made the finds didn't know what to check out or how to do it.  At any rate, it wasn't done, so you (and we) are left with nothing but speculation and some useless artifacts.

People who disagree with scientific findings are not ignorant hicks - scientists do it all the time (Send a paper through peer review if you'd like to find out how nasty things can get.  Even if you're right, you'll likely get your ears pinned back.).  But people who do not know that they do not know the techniques of rational thinking and research and persist in putting out unsupported drivel instead of reliable work - those people ARE ignorant hicks.
Doug

I have a degree, thank you in comparative religion, I also minored in a number of different fields that I was interested in, archaeology being one of them.

Science is a process of determining the fundamental laws and influences of nature, as such there can be no doubt that it is always an area in constant mutation, but there is such a thing as obstructionism in the field, not by the science itself, but by the scientists that populate it.

In the field of archaeology the loose ends as you call them are consistently ignored and relegated to the dark corner of the room and only become an issue when those findings threaten entire careers of many decades...

Influence, power and politics play as much a role in science as outside it, something many people are ignorant of and by some of the responses here, they don't even know the facts. But it is much easier to state that an error has been made than to accept the cold numbers those facts proclaim...

Leaky was blackmailed into backing down, or get his funding cut off. There were NO red pebbles of a higher strata buried at the level of the skeleton, both Reck and Leaky checked in painstaking detail, it is there in his notes.

The red pebbles and limestone chips were found in the crate after it was unpacked in Germany, they are not original to the burial site and this is even admitted in the Louis Leaky article on Wikipedia...

While he was gone, the opposition worked up some "evidence" of the intrusion of Olduvai Man into an earlier layer, evidence that seemed convincing at the time, but is missing and unverifiable now.

Numerous Archaeologists, Paleontologists, Geologists and other professionals have lost their jobs because of their insistence of the facts...

And you guys seem to just eat it all up as if it were gospel.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#80    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 8,026 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 08:55 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 10 July 2013 - 05:19 PM, said:

I just want to point out that this is not entirely true. Later information which was not available to the original discoverers has, in many cases, shown that the original presentation was in error. This does not mean that the original discoverers were fabricating anything, just that their information was incomplete and therefore wrong, which happens quite often. Subsequent presentations, such as we've seen above (to which, in part, I posted a reply about earlier) that either don't know or purposely ignore that later information ARE both ignorant and fabricating their own "truth". The first of which can be cured through research, the latter of which shouldn't be taken seriously by any means.

cormac

You neglect one or two points, purposeful manipulation of data and evidence to undermine facts found by the very professionals in charge of the digs.

Such as the convenient red pebbles found by geologists Percy Boswell and J. D. Solomon that then conveniently disappeared after the find was discredited as being of extreme antiquity.

Such as the firing of Geologist Virginia Steen-McIntyre after her find and her refusal to back down from the age of the artifacts she found that were tested and confirmed...

The list goes on and on and on...

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#81    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 10 July 2013 - 09:24 PM

View PostJor-el, on 10 July 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:

You neglect one or two points, purposeful manipulation of data and evidence to undermine facts found by the very professionals in charge of the digs.

Such as the convenient red pebbles found by geologists Percy Boswell and J. D. Solomon that then conveniently disappeared after the find was discredited as being of extreme antiquity.

Such as the firing of Geologist Virginia Steen-McIntyre after her find and her refusal to back down from the age of the artifacts she found that were tested and confirmed...

The list goes on and on and on...

Oldowan Man proved to be recent.jpg

You've been purposefully misrepresenting the evidence from the start. In the case of Oldowan Man, the bed was determined NOT to be as old as originally believed as well as the age NOT being anywhere near the original date. Which BTW was claimed by Reck to be half a million (500,000) years old. That you didn't know that neither the bed nor Oldowan Man is as old as originally claimed does not negate the fact.

Kind of sad that you'd bring up Virginia Steen-McIntyre considering the discovery in question was NOT hers to begin with, but that of Cynthia Irwin-Williams who didn't agree with her interpretation either. A good bit of information on the situation can be found in the "Ancient Coverup" thread from 2010, Post #69 by Swede. Who BTW is an expert in the field.

So I'd agree with another poster here who said you cherry-pick your facts. I think that's obvious to many at this point.

cormac

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#82    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,379 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 10 July 2013 - 09:47 PM

View PostJor-el, on 10 July 2013 - 08:47 PM, said:

Leaky was blackmailed into backing down, or get his funding cut off. There were NO red pebbles of a higher strata buried at the level of the skeleton, both Reck and Leaky checked in painstaking detail, it is there in his notes.

The red pebbles and limestone chips were found in the crate after it was unpacked in Germany, they are not original to the burial site and this is even admitted in the Louis Leaky article on Wikipedia...

While he was gone, the opposition worked up some "evidence" of the intrusion of Olduvai Man into an earlier layer, evidence that seemed convincing at the time, but is missing and unverifiable now.

Numerous Archaeologists, Paleontologists, Geologists and other professionals have lost their jobs because of their insistence of the facts...
What you are talking about is professional misconduct.  What did the review board say about this when charges were brought before it?  If they weren't brought before it, why not?  If you genuinely know of something, why are you bringing it up on UM instead of filing charges with the appropriate professional societies?  You could get the unethical folks fired if you're right.
Doug

Edited by Doug1o29, 10 July 2013 - 09:57 PM.

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#83    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,379 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 10 July 2013 - 09:59 PM

View PostJor-el, on 10 July 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:

Such as the firing of Geologist Virginia Steen-McIntyre after her find and her refusal to back down from the age of the artifacts she found that were tested and confirmed...

The list goes on and on and on...
The list should include the Americas.  There has been an on-going debate among archeologists over the last 20 or so years concerning pre-Ice Age human habitation of North America.  I have a copy of a report claiming a 22,000-year age for a site in South America at a time when 12,000 YBP was thought to be the maximum age for paleo-Indians.  That's a significant difference and there was a lot of rancor over it.  But it is now accepted that Indians (or someone) occupied the Americas long before the ice-free corridor opened in the Wisconsinan Ice Sheet.

I also know of some firings that had nothing to do with findings.  More accurately:  they had everything to do with a lack of findings.  These folks then tried to blame the firing on their contrary findings - give me a break.  People lie about such things all the time.

I have never personally encountered a problem with contrary findings when I had done the work needed to back them up.  Usually bad science gets shot down prior to publication.  I'm wondering if that's what happened in the cases you cite.
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#84    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,379 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 10 July 2013 - 10:08 PM

View PostJor-el, on 10 July 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:

You neglect one or two points, purposeful manipulation of data and evidence to undermine facts found by the very professionals in charge of the digs.
I deal with statistical data.  Tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of measurements go into even a small project.  Do you have any idea how hard it is to fake data without getting caught?  I'll give you an example:  off the top of your head, name 100 digits.  Bet you can't create a random distribution without actually counting them.

Remember Gregor Mendel?  A fine god-fearing Christian.  And a monk.  He faked some of his data and the cheating was detected, albeit a couple centuries after the fact.  He was right about genetics, but for the wrong reasons.

Professional misconduct does occur, particularly when there are large amounts of money involved.  But when it happens, it should be brought before the professional societies for review.  The person who knows of professional wrongdoing and does not report it is as guilty as the perpetrator.
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#85    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 8,026 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 10:15 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 10 July 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

Attachment Oldowan Man proved to be recent.jpg

You've been purposefully misrepresenting the evidence from the start. In the case of Oldowan Man, the bed was determined NOT to be as old as originally believed as well as the age NOT being anywhere near the original date. Which BTW was claimed by Reck to be half a million (500,000) years old. That you didn't know that neither the bed nor Oldowan Man is as old as originally claimed does not negate the fact.

Let me continue quoting directly from where your image leaves off...

The news only momentarily depressed Louis. He was still convinced that the basic premise behind Olduvai Man—that Homo sapiens was of great antiquity—was correct, and he felt certain that his Kanam and Kanjera finds carried the proof. "Everyone admits that Homo sapiens must go back to the beginning of the Pleistocene at least—somewhere," he wrote to Burkitt about his new fossils. 'The question has always been, Where? And the evidence ... seems to suggest that the answer is 'the region of the great central African lakes.'" Hut even Louis knew that proving his claim was not easily done. "1 can forsee great rights when I get back," he wrote to Hopwood from his last camp at a site called Apis Rock. "Enough. Life is hard but good & somehow we will get results worthwhile & make the world believe."

http://books.google....an,&f=false

It seems that the statements did not convince Leaky... go figure.

Posted Image

The layers of rock found at Olduvai Gorge are labeled in the sketch above. The bed in which the anatomically modern skeleton was found by Reck, Bed II, is currently dated as being 1.15 million to 1.7 million years old.

Reck identified a sequence of five beds at Olduvai Gorge. The first four beds are water-laid volcanic tuffs of various colors. bed I is grey and yellow. Bed II is generally of a buff color, although the upper portion has a reddish tint. Bed III is bright red, while Bed IV is grey, or brownish. Bed V, a loesslike deposit, is brownish. 628.
The conventionally accepted ages of these strata are currently:
  • Bed I: 1.70 million to 2.00 million years old
  • Bed II: 1.15 million to 1.70 million years old
  • Bed II and IV: 700,000 to 1.15 million years old
  • Bed V: divided into several formations dating back to about 400,000 years
Reck understood the general ages of the strata, which were considered slightly younger than they are today but still placed Bed II at around 800,000 years old (when the supposed distant predecessors of man such as Java man were thought to have been living), and knew that the finding of an anatomically modern skeleton at such an early period would call into question modern man's descent from Java man, and therefore he "carefully considered the possibility that the human skeleton had arrived in Bed II through burial or earth movements" (Cremo & Thompson 630).

Reck himself wrote in 1914:

The bed in which the human remains were found, without any accompanying cultural objects, showed no signs of disturbance. The spot appeared exactly like any other in the horizon. There was no evidence of any refilled hole or grave.


Quote

Kind of sad that you'd bring up Virginia Steen-McIntyre considering the discovery in question was NOT hers to begin with, but that of Cynthia Irwin-Williams who didn't agree with her interpretation either. A good bit of information on the situation can be found in the "Ancient Coverup" thread from 2010, Post #69 by Swede. Who BTW is an expert in the field.

So I'd agree with another poster here who said you cherry-pick your facts. I think that's obvious to many at this point.

Cormac

She didn't agree but the dating stands and is verified... you have an explanation for that?

http://www.bibliotec...ncia_life18.htm

During the microscopic examination of the phenocrysts, Dr. Steen- McIntyre detected a phenomenon she described as resembling a picket fence. The samples, instead of having fresh-looking crystal surfaces, looked rather shaggy, having a “picket fence” appearance. The volcanic glass fragments were also weathered and had absorbed water from the soil in which they lay until excavated.


Some of the vesicles had puddles of water in them, indicating they were of considerable age. In previous research, Dr. Steen-McIntyre had performed dating procedures on ash layers at Yellowstone National Park (Steen McIntyre 1980). The samples from Hueyatlaco bore a striking resemblance to those from Yellowstone dated at 251,000 years.

Some zircon crystals from two of the volcanic layers, the Hueyatlaco Ash and the Tetela Brown Mud, were given by Dr. Steen-McIntyre to another geochemist, C. W. Naeser, to process for dating. Naeser used the zircon fission-track dating method, which relies on radioactive properties of certain elements. The results from this process demonstrated the Tetela Brown Mud to be 600,000 ± 340,000 years BP, and the Hueyatlaco ash was determined to be 370,000 ± 200,000 years BP.


The minimum age ranged from 170,000 years to 260,000 years BP (Steen-McIntyre, personal communication with Suzanne Clark).


Szabo’s results, using the uranium-series method, ranged in age from 180,000 to 260,000 years BP. Naeser’s zircon fission-track method showed ages ranging from 170,000 years to 260,000 years BP. Both sets of dates agreed with Dr. Steen-McIntyre’s observations of 251,000 years. Three separate methods, calculated by three separate geologists, yielded similar results, yet the results met with skepticism and hostility.


As members of the team began to complete their respective dating methods and the results were presented to her, Irwin-Williams became critical of the results and indicated her dissatisfaction in all of the publications regarding the Valsequillo project by various team members. Irwin-Williams was clearly distressed that date estimates place human presence at Valsequillo long before 30,000 BP, the earliest date she could accept.


It is not improbable that Irwin-Williams feared her career was in jeopardy in light of such dates.


It is very easy to divert attention from the facts... especially when they can't be undermined.

Edited by Jor-el, 10 July 2013 - 10:20 PM.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#86    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 8,026 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 10:19 PM

View PostDoug1o29, on 10 July 2013 - 09:47 PM, said:

What you are talking about is professional misconduct.  What did the review board say about this when charges were brought before it?  If they weren't brought before it, why not?  If you genuinely know of something, why are you bringing it up on UM instead of filing charges with the appropriate professional societies?  You could get the unethical folks fired if you're right.
Doug

My friend, the parties are long dead in one case and the other has been publicized all over the world but happened over 30 years ago, I think everyone who is interested in the subject has already formed an opinion...

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#87    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 8,026 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 10:22 PM

View PostDoug1o29, on 10 July 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

The list should include the Americas.  There has been an on-going debate among archeologists over the last 20 or so years concerning pre-Ice Age human habitation of North America.  I have a copy of a report claiming a 22,000-year age for a site in South America at a time when 12,000 YBP was thought to be the maximum age for paleo-Indians.  That's a significant difference and there was a lot of rancor over it.  But it is now accepted that Indians (or someone) occupied the Americas long before the ice-free corridor opened in the Wisconsinan Ice Sheet.

I also know of some firings that had nothing to do with findings.  More accurately:  they had everything to do with a lack of findings.  These folks then tried to blame the firing on their contrary findings - give me a break.  People lie about such things all the time.

I have never personally encountered a problem with contrary findings when I had done the work needed to back them up.  Usually bad science gets shot down prior to publication.  I'm wondering if that's what happened in the cases you cite.
Doug

Form your own opinion before you decide then...

http://www.bibliotec...ncia_life18.htm

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#88    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 8,026 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 10:27 PM

View PostDoug1o29, on 10 July 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

I deal with statistical data.  Tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of measurements go into even a small project.  Do you have any idea how hard it is to fake data without getting caught?  I'll give you an example:  off the top of your head, name 100 digits.  Bet you can't create a random distribution without actually counting them.

Remember Gregor Mendel?  A fine god-fearing Christian.  And a monk.  He faked some of his data and the cheating was detected, albeit a couple centuries after the fact.  He was right about genetics, but for the wrong reasons.

Professional misconduct does occur, particularly when there are large amounts of money involved.  But when it happens, it should be brought before the professional societies for review.  The person who knows of professional wrongdoing and does not report it is as guilty as the perpetrator.
Doug

Who said anything about faking all the data, I stated that not all the data is taken into account, something quite different... that not taking into account incudes faking reasons to invalidate the data.... ie "a mistake must have been made".... heck even you did it...

I also know of some firings that had nothing to do with findings.  More accurately:  they had everything to do with a lack of findings.  These folks then tried to blame the firing on their contrary findings - give me a break.  People lie about such things all the time.

I have never personally encountered a problem with contrary findings when I had done the work needed to back them up.  Usually bad science gets shot down prior to publication.  I'm wondering if that's what happened in the cases you cite.


You subconsciously made a choice on how to proceed... but your choice is already made...

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#89    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:10 PM

View PostJor-el, on 10 July 2013 - 10:15 PM, said:

Let me continue quoting directly from where your image leaves off...

The news only momentarily depressed Louis. He was still convinced that the basic premise behind Olduvai Man—that Homo sapiens was of great antiquity—was correct, and he felt certain that his Kanam and Kanjera finds carried the proof. "Everyone admits that Homo sapiens must go back to the beginning of the Pleistocene at least—somewhere," he wrote to Burkitt about his new fossils. 'The question has always been, Where? And the evidence ... seems to suggest that the answer is 'the region of the great central African lakes.'" Hut even Louis knew that proving his claim was not easily done. "1 can forsee great rights when I get back," he wrote to Hopwood from his last camp at a site called Apis Rock. "Enough. Life is hard but good & somehow we will get results worthwhile & make the world believe."

http://books.google....an,&f=false

It seems that the statements did not convince Leaky... go figure.

Posted Image

The layers of rock found at Olduvai Gorge are labeled in the sketch above. The bed in which the anatomically modern skeleton was found by Reck, Bed II, is currently dated as being 1.15 million to 1.7 million years old.

Reck identified a sequence of five beds at Olduvai Gorge. The first four beds are water-laid volcanic tuffs of various colors. bed I is grey and yellow. Bed II is generally of a buff color, although the upper portion has a reddish tint. Bed III is bright red, while Bed IV is grey, or brownish. Bed V, a loesslike deposit, is brownish. 628.
The conventionally accepted ages of these strata are currently:
  • Bed I: 1.70 million to 2.00 million years old
  • Bed II: 1.15 million to 1.70 million years old
  • Bed II and IV: 700,000 to 1.15 million years old
  • Bed V: divided into several formations dating back to about 400,000 years
Reck understood the general ages of the strata, which were considered slightly younger than they are today but still placed Bed II at around 800,000 years old (when the supposed distant predecessors of man such as Java man were thought to have been living), and knew that the finding of an anatomically modern skeleton at such an early period would call into question modern man's descent from Java man, and therefore he "carefully considered the possibility that the human skeleton had arrived in Bed II through burial or earth movements" (Cremo & Thompson 630).

Reck himself wrote in 1914:

The bed in which the human remains were found, without any accompanying cultural objects, showed no signs of disturbance. The spot appeared exactly like any other in the horizon. There was no evidence of any refilled hole or grave.




She didn't agree but the dating stands and is verified... you have an explanation for that?

http://www.bibliotec...ncia_life18.htm

During the microscopic examination of the phenocrysts, Dr. Steen- McIntyre detected a phenomenon she described as resembling a picket fence. The samples, instead of having fresh-looking crystal surfaces, looked rather shaggy, having a “picket fence” appearance. The volcanic glass fragments were also weathered and had absorbed water from the soil in which they lay until excavated.


Some of the vesicles had puddles of water in them, indicating they were of considerable age. In previous research, Dr. Steen-McIntyre had performed dating procedures on ash layers at Yellowstone National Park (Steen McIntyre 1980). The samples from Hueyatlaco bore a striking resemblance to those from Yellowstone dated at 251,000 years.

Some zircon crystals from two of the volcanic layers, the Hueyatlaco Ash and the Tetela Brown Mud, were given by Dr. Steen-McIntyre to another geochemist, C. W. Naeser, to process for dating. Naeser used the zircon fission-track dating method, which relies on radioactive properties of certain elements. The results from this process demonstrated the Tetela Brown Mud to be 600,000 ± 340,000 years BP, and the Hueyatlaco ash was determined to be 370,000 ± 200,000 years BP.


The minimum age ranged from 170,000 years to 260,000 years BP (Steen-McIntyre, personal communication with Suzanne Clark).


Szabo’s results, using the uranium-series method, ranged in age from 180,000 to 260,000 years BP. Naeser’s zircon fission-track method showed ages ranging from 170,000 years to 260,000 years BP. Both sets of dates agreed with Dr. Steen-McIntyre’s observations of 251,000 years. Three separate methods, calculated by three separate geologists, yielded similar results, yet the results met with skepticism and hostility.


As members of the team began to complete their respective dating methods and the results were presented to her, Irwin-Williams became critical of the results and indicated her dissatisfaction in all of the publications regarding the Valsequillo project by various team members. Irwin-Williams was clearly distressed that date estimates place human presence at Valsequillo long before 30,000 BP, the earliest date she could accept.


It is not improbable that Irwin-Williams feared her career was in jeopardy in light of such dates.


It is very easy to divert attention from the facts... especially when they can't be undermined.

Ignoring what it says at the very bottom of Page 66 will not make it go away. To whit:

Quote

Subsequent Carbon 14 tests have dated the skeleton to 17,000 BC.

Quote Reck all you want, it still doesn't alter that fact that the tests done is England on the samples showed he was wrong.

In

Quote

In a letter dated 3 November 1974 to Alan L. Bryan, a colleague in Alberta, she said:


My capsule comment on the situation (expletives deleted) is that this is one of the most irresponsible public announcements with which it has ever been my misfortune to become involved. Of the three dating methods used by Malde on the materials, two are so new that we have essentially no information on their validity. The third (fission-track dating) gave an anomalous result of about 300,000 ± 300,000 (in other words, no date at all).


That's pretty well cut and dried. There were two questionable dating methods used and a third which essentially gave no meaningful date. That's a no-brainer.

cormac

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#90    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence.

  • Member
  • 11,481 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 11 July 2013 - 03:02 AM

The Hueyatlaco site might be genuine. Without confirmation, however, it must remain a genuine puzzle.

Maybe this will help in that regard:

Quote

PHOENIX -- An amateur archaeologist said he has made a discovery that could change the theory of how America was first settled, but the tough part may be getting someone to listen.
Ken Stanton can hardly control his enthusiasm as he shows off a site in north-central Phoenix that he says contains some ancient artifacts.
“You can see them all through here, that's an artifact there,” said Stanton, as he point them out.
And while to most people it may look like a pile of rocks, Stanton said this site could change everything we think about how the Americas were settled.
“This would be the first Acheulean stone tools, proof of it in the Americas period," Stanton said.
Acheulean tools are stone tools that date anywhere from 150,000 to 1.4 million years ago.

Source

Also, more here.

Jor-el should run with this instead of bogus crap long ago disproven.

At least this is recent, and doesn't in fact violate any established theory - it simply indicates previously unknown migrations of either H. Sapiens or one of his predecessors like later forms of Erectus, just like Hueyatlaco might indicate.

Let me point out that it has already been established that Erectus knew at least something about traveling across the ocean, at least for short distances (Flores Island, Malta finds.) (EDIT: Sorry, that was Crete, IIRC, not Malta.)

Drop Cremo, Jor-el, and work with actual science.  It's more exciting because it's real.

Harte

Edited by Harte, 11 July 2013 - 03:16 AM.

Posted Image
See the new Harte Mark III
And the Mayan panoramas on my pyramid pajamas haven't helped my little problem. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Anybody like Coleridge?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users