Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Virgin Mary Toast & the Neanderthal Mask
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Spirituality vs Skepticism
truethat

While looking around google for information on dating and Neanderthals I found information about a supposed flute that was found and purported to be that of a Neanderthal. It was a bone seemed made with intent, and there were four holes in the the bone that fit the thumb and fingers and actually played do rei mi when blown.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_f...erthal_flute.22



Some people have suggested that it was just a coincidence. The whole debate got me to wondering about the way we determine whether an artifact is made by an intelligent creature or just an accident. I was going to put this in one of the science forums but the implications of the arguments take on some very interesting perspectives when you discuss this in the same manner that people often discuss religious observers who believe they have "witnessed a miracle" or seen the Virgin Mary etc etc. The article I am posting addresses this concept in its examination of the "Neanderthal Mask"

Here's info on the mask

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3256228.stm


Nephelococcygia pronounced ne-fê-lê-kak-'si-jee-yê is a term used when people find familiar objects within the shape of a cloud.

http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=423940


Its very easy to mock a religious person for doing this but I don't think we'd ever accuse an archaeologist of doing this, we seem to take it for granted that if a person sees something then its really there. But there are controversies in science regarding this. The Bosnian Pyramids are one sort of example that's been in the news recently.

This article discusses the Neanderthal Mask its a short and interesting read. I recommend that everyone read it before discussing it.


http://www.greenwych.ca/hid-imag.htm

Here's the part that caught my eye. It echoes some of the Creationist arguments I've heard, so this is why I put it in this thread. I thought perhaps it brought up some interesting points regarding where Science and Creationism do seem to overlap in the way people SEE things and ANALYZE the data.



QUOTE
They cannot learn this simple rule: If it (an object or apparent image) lacks *orderly* detail, that's evidence of a probable lack of intelligence (or life) in its making; it may even be evidence that it's naturally made. And vice versa: If it has lots of detail & order, then it cannot prima facie be dismissed as just being naturally made. (E.g., such as the Neanderthal flute). But they act ignorant of this basic biophysics concept of entropy & anti-entropy.

They look at a few dents and scratches and think that's all that's needed so they can read the story of the ages. To an extent they can. But they tend to ignore "outside" evidence & concepts. Taphonomy is "it." But much of "it" has become like the movie dog Lassie who scratches the ground: "Scratch, scratch!"
"What's she saying?" asks the sheriff. Lassie's owner replies:

"She says that little Annie fell down the well out at Slayter's place. Uncle Bart is trying to climb down to get her out, but he doesn 't have enough rope. He needs cousin Jeb to get more rope and drive it up to Bart in his Chevy pickup, pronto! And bring the first-aid kit."

All that from: "Scratch, scratch...."


Link to the wiki on Taphony http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taphonomy

linked-imagelinked-image


Scratch scratch, what say you?
IamsSon
Wow! 121 views and no posts even attempting to explain this interesting dilemma away. Good job true!

The most obvious answer to me is that we must remember scientists are people too. They have personal opinions and biases, just like the rest of us do, and even when they attempt to remain objective and even promote objectivity by scrutinizing their peers' work, if the majority of them have similar biases, they will actually end up unconsciously subverting the processes which are intended to insure objectivity. I believe the vast majority of them will do so not because they are active participants in a conspiracy to lie to the rest of us, but will simply be victims of the same prejudices and biases the rest of us contend with. I'm always reminded of the question: "Who will watch the watchers?"




Sorry true... I think I can already hear the "creationist!" "Anti-science" "Science-basher" "Hater of the scientific process" and "Christian" picket signs being produced. It's too bad the people brandishing them don't realize they are actually exemplifying what I just posted.
Lilly
Ok, let's say (for the sake of argument) the flute object isn't an artifact at all, just some wishful thinking upon the part of some paleontologist...a mistake if you will. So what? There are many artifacts from the Paleolithic and Neolithic time periods that are verifiable works by ancient hominids see link here. Sorry the link's in French, I couldn't find an English version.

As for this being one in the same type of reasoning as seeing the Virgin Mary on toast...I don't see this as being at all supported.
IamsSon
Of course you don't.
Lilly
QUOTE (IamsSon @ Feb 17 2008, 03:37 PM) *
Of course you don't.


Of course, because Paleolithic stone tools are known to exist (empirical evidence); miraculous portraits of religious figures on toast are completely subjective in nature (faith based). To make such a comparison goes even beyond classic 'apples and oranges'...more like 'apples and angels' (one needs the element of faith for angels).
Beckys_Mom
QUOTE (IamsSon @ Feb 17 2008, 01:57 PM) *
Wow! 121 views and no posts even attempting to explain this interesting dilemma away. Good job true!

Its early days yet lol
Daughter of the Nine Moons
QUOTE (truethat @ Feb 16 2008, 03:49 PM) *
Its very easy to mock a religious person for doing this but I don't think we'd ever accuse an archaeologist of doing this, we seem to take it for granted that if a person sees something then its really there. But there are controversies in science regarding this. The Bosnian Pyramids are one sort of example that's been in the news recently.


It's interesting that you bring up the Bosnian "Pyramids" as an example. Semir (Sam) Osmanagic is not an archaeologist. He is an author and a contractor. His "archaeological" claims regarding Visočica hill are widely disputed within archaeological circles and his credibility is dubious.

sam12six
http://www.satireandcomment.com/0208toast.html
Lt_Ripley
could there have been a 'bright' Neanderthal ? sure . but more likely unintentional . just like the burnt Mary toast. People see what they want to see.

the difference is one was tooled by a being highly unlikely with the capability of thoughtful sculpting and one was made by a woman making toast with an modern education.

the Neanderthal rock may resemble just a person. not a religious myth then sold on ebay by someone with a greedy streak.
Beckys_Mom
QUOTE (truethat @ Feb 16 2008, 08:49 PM) *
Link to the wiki on Taphony http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taphonomy

linked-imagelinked-image


Scratch scratch, what say you?

Hey I wondered who stole my toast this morning grrr true I was hungry loll

Anyhoo.. it does look like a face but that doesnt mean it was Mary...it just looks like a womans face...I call it a coincidence!!!!!!!
Lt_Ripley
QUOTE (Beckys_Mom @ Feb 17 2008, 08:36 PM) *
Hey I wondered who stole my toast this morning grrr true I was hungry loll

Anyhoo.. it does look like a face but that doesnt mean it was Mary...it just looks like a womans face...I call it a coincidence!!!!!!!


exactly , I read not long ago about a tree that had the likeness of a dead city mayor who helped save the tree. maybe it's the trees way of saying thanks.---


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19097891/
Belle.
Good find Truthat.

I think archaeologists are often looking for the outer limits of 'symbolic thought". This can be evidenced materially by art, carvings etc. We really have an unquenchable desire for knowledge about “When did we become human" and this type of find ties into the evolution of language/symbolic thought, blahdy blah blah blah.

I think in this area - archaeologists will be especially prone to overstepping the boundaries. The way we view the Neanderthals leads us to do the same thing with them. Were they different to us - if so, how different? Did they have symbolic thought? Language? What is the furthest date back we can see this? Is the stereotype of them as hulking brutes correct or are they unfairly maligned sensitive little souls?

Perhaps the archaeologists had seen similar carvings that were more advanced and obviously human and were thinking that this looked similar and maybe it was a sort of prototype.

The stone has been 'worked' by someone but I am suspicious of the claim it represents a 'mask'.
Orcseeker
The "mask" is a joke, sure it may be an artifact but may have broke of something such as a tool, nothing to do with a face.
Inner Space
QUOTE (truethat @ Feb 16 2008, 03:49 PM) *
Here's the part that caught my eye. It echoes some of the Creationist arguments I've heard, so this is why I put it in this thread. I thought perhaps it brought up some interesting points regarding where Science and Creationism do seem to overlap in the way people SEE things and ANALYZE the data.


"There is an universal tendency among mankind to conceive all beings like themselves, and to transfer to every object, those qualities, with which they are familiarly acquainted, and of which they are intimately conscious. We find human faces in the moon, armies in the clouds; and by a natural propensity, if not corrected by experience and reflection, ascribe malice or good- will to every thing, that hurts or pleases us." --David Hume*


Hi True, interesting OP. original.gif

My late husband had a passion for archaeology, and acquired a degree in this field solely for the purpose of enhancing his favorite hobby. I sometimes assisted him during these digs, and also helped with cleaning, categorizing & cataloging, etc. In the area that we lived, flint was the main material used to make tools, ceremonial burial bowls (contained the bones of the dead), and weapons, i.e., tomahawks, arrowheads, etc. We often found objects that looked as though they had purpose, but later discovered that these objects were actually the product of damage.

Flint can chip or splinter easily if struck by a hard object. Little info on flint

Just thought I'd post some information that might be relevant.

Apophenia: Apophenia is the experience of seeing patterns or connections in random or meaningless data. The term was coined in 1958 by Klaus Conrad, who defined it as the "unmotivated seeing of connections" accompanied by a "specific experience of an abnormal meaningfulness". Source

"Philosopher Daniel Dennett says in his 2006 book, Breaking the Spell, “Humans are creatures that crave to find order and meaning in their environment. Not only do we want to find meaning in our surroundings, but we need to do this.” A common illustrative example is this scenario: imagine you are warily traveling through a wooded area, aware that there have recently been incidents of other travelers being robbed in the vicinity. You see a dark outline behind some bushes. What should you do? If you believe the outline to be a robber and it turns out to be a shadow, well, rather safe than sorry. But if you assume the outline to be only a shadow and it turns out to be a robber, well, you lose. In an evolutionary sense, then, there is great advantage to assuming to see forms in randomness, robbers in shadows. Dennett puts this category of thinking as a “Good Trick… that is so useful to so many different ways of life that it evolves over and over again in many different species.”

Traveling through life without seeing or making assumptions about patterns would be not only dangerous, but nearly impossible. Tomatoes, introduced to Europe in the 16thcentury, were almost universally considered poisonous throughout the continent and Britain - and rightly so. They are a member of the nightshade family, have a strong resemblance to those fruits and contain glycoalkaloids, a neurotoxin, in their leaves and stems. If you’ve already learned (patterned) that fruits of one plant are poisonous, why would you eat some from a very similar plant8? We may know now that, regardless of their association, tomatoes are nutritious and safe to eat, but it would be foolhardy for us to eat anything we find, using the assumption “safe until proven otherwise.”

Pre-historic peoples learned to pattern the changing of the seasons and track game and harvests by it. But this strong inducement has become a cup that overfloweth. Now we hear of baseball players, when having a good season won’t change their socks, or thousands claiming to have “felt something so deep in my heart” because of an “image” of the Virgin Mary formed by road salt on a highway underpass in Chicago (BBC, 2005)." Article conts/Source

Pareidolia: Pareidolia describes a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant. Common examples include images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hidden messages on records played in reverse. The word comes from the Greek para- — beside, with or alongside — and eidolon — image (the diminutive of eidos — image, form, shape). Pareidolia is a type of apophenia. Source

Astronomer Carl Sagan claimed that the human tendency to see faces in tortillas, clouds, cinnamon buns, and the like is an evolutionary trait. He writes:

As soon as the infant can see, it recognizes faces, and we now know that this skill is hardwired in our brains. Those infants who a million years ago were unable to recognize a face smiled back less, were less likely to win the hearts of their parents, and less likely to prosper. These days, nearly every infant is quick to identify a human face, and to respond with a goony grin (Sagan 1995: 45).

I think Sagan is right about the tendency to recognize faces, but I don't see any reason to think there is an evolutionary advantage in seeing replicas of paintings, ghosts, demons, and the like, in inanimate objects. There is, of course, an evolutionary advantage in seeing images of dinner or predators against a varied environmental background. There would be no advantage for, say, a hawk to be dive-bombing shadows on rocks, however. It seems likely that the modern mind is making associations with shapes, lines, shadows, and the like that are connected to current desires, interests, hopes, obsessions, and the like. Most people recognize illusions for what they are, but some become fixated on the reality of their perception and turn an illusion into a delusion. A little bit of critical thinking, however, should convince most reasonable people that a potato that looks like the Hindu god Ganesh, a cinnamon bun that looks like mother Teresa, or a burnt area on a tortilla that looks like Jesus are accidents and without significance. It is more likely that the Virgin Mary one sees in the reflection of a mirror or on the floor of an apartment complex or in the clouds has been generated from one's own imagination than that a person who has been dead for 2,000 years should manifest herself in such a mundane and useless fashion.
Article conts/Source


Interesting studies about brain chemistry. Take for instances Dopamine. Dopamine is an important chemical involved in the brain's reward and motivation system, and in addiction.
It appears that people with high levels of dopamine are more likely to find significance in coincidences, and pick out meaning and patterns where there are none.

Peter Brugger, a neurologist from the University Hospital in Zurich, Switzerland, has suggested before that people who believe in the paranormal often seem to be more willing to see patterns or relationships between events where sceptics perceive nothing.

To find out what could be triggering these thoughts, Brugger persuaded 20 self-confessed believers and 20 sceptics to take part in an experiment.

Brugger and his colleagues asked the two groups to distinguish real faces from scrambled faces as the images were flashed up briefly on a screen. The volunteers then did a similar task, this time identifying real words from made-up ones.

Seeing and believing

Believers were much more likely than sceptics to see a word or face when there was not one, Brugger revealed last week at a meeting of the Federation of European Neuroscience Societies in Paris. However, sceptics were more likely to miss real faces and words when they appeared on the screen.

The researchers then gave the volunteers a drug called L-dopa, which is usually used to relieve the symptoms of Parkinson's disease by increasing levels of dopamine in the brain.

Both groups made more mistakes under the influence of the drug, but the sceptics became more likely to interpret scrambled words or faces as the real thing.

That suggests that paranormal thoughts are associated with high levels of dopamine in the brain, and the L-dopa makes sceptics less sceptical. "Dopamine seems to help people see patterns," according to the studies.

Sources/Studies

Swiss Society for Neuroscience

ScienceDirect/Brain and Paranormal Phenomena

Magical Ideation Modulates Spatial Behavior

Visions/Hallucinations

Sorry so long. blush.gif

edited to add info/source on flint.
momentarylapseofreason
QUOTE (Inner Space @ Feb 18 2008, 03:32 PM) *
[i]
Sorry so long. blush.gif

edited to add info/source on flint.



Wow, fascinating. I love reading about stuff like this.

Thanks Inner Space, and I wish you could visit by the forum more often. thumbsup.gif
Inner Space
QUOTE (momentarylapseofreason @ Feb 18 2008, 11:08 AM) *
Wow, fascinating. I love reading about stuff like this.

Thanks Inner Space, and I wish you could visit by the forum more often. thumbsup.gif


Thanks MLOR. original.gif
Tangerine Sheri
Inner space that post couldn't come at a more suitable time, I am currently taking a course the philosophy of religion and gained sound data from your post..You are a joy my freind and I too wish you came here more..but I understand busy....(((HUGS))
Inner Space
QUOTE (Supra Sheri @ Feb 18 2008, 01:12 PM) *
Inner space that post couldn't come at a more suitable time, I am currently taking a course the philosophy of religion and gained sound data from your post..You are a joy my freind and I too wish you came here more..but I understand busy....(((HUGS))


Yay!!! Glad the info was timely and pertinent. thumbsup.gif

Oh, and btw...Thank you!!! The feeling's mutual. yes.gif
Beckys_Mom
QUOTE (truethat @ Feb 16 2008, 08:49 PM) *
linked-image

Scratch scratch, what say you?

Something is missing in this pic...................some coffee and a cigarette, yup thats it yes.gif

now excuse me while I go pop the kettle on!!
CAptain Scuttle Tew
Someone help me out. A number of years ago someone in the US found a lot of rock formations that looked like bones. One even looked like a human skull. This person was not a scientist. He was ridiculed by the scientific world and, as I recall, the Smithsonian wouldn’t even look at his evidence. I remember seeing some of the photos and I agreed that the formations did look like bones and one did look like a fossilized human skull. I lost track of the story, so have no idea how it turned out. Here is my point; the “Neanderthal Mask” doesn’t look like a mask to me. It just looks like an interesting rock. So, why does a “scientist” get people believing in this rock and a ‘nobody” is treated like a fool? Reminds me of when it was first put forth about water erosion around the Sphinx. Because the guy making the clam was not a “scientist” at the time, nobody wanted to listen to him. But, now some very important people are taking a closer look at the Sphinx. Just because people have a PhD, it doesn’t make them all knowing, and just because some doesn’t have a PhD, it doesn’t make them stupid.
Siara
QUOTE (Beckys_Mom @ Feb 19 2008, 02:01 PM) *
Thats why I said of course its photoshopped


** giggle ** I've always thought that cheese sandwich image looked like Bernadette Peters. Since when did the Virgin Mary have a perm?
Beckys_Mom
QUOTE (Siara @ Feb 19 2008, 02:03 PM) *
** giggle ** I've always thought that cheese sandwich image looked like Bernadette Peters. Since when did the Virgin Mary have a perm?

no one knows what Mary looked like..........it looks like a womans facem but that could be anyone
Siara
QUOTE (truethat @ Feb 16 2008, 08:49 PM) *
Its very easy to mock a religious person for doing this but I don't think we'd ever accuse an archaeologist of doing this, we seem to take it for granted that if a person sees something then its really there. But there are controversies in science regarding this. The Bosnian Pyramids are one sort of example that's been in the news recently.


Actually, archaeologists accuse each other of this on a regular basis. Things get very ambiguous when you get into some paleolithic craftsmanship. The archaeological debates aren't generally discussed by the general public because they tend to be very technical. Page after page of chemical and structural analysis trying to determine whether a hole is random or drilled, whether a rock would naturally crack along specific lines, etc., etc.

Now I'm going to check out these interesting links, true...
MissMelsWell
OH you know, all those biblical people all look alike anyway... pffft. LOL
Beckys_Mom
QUOTE (MissMelsWell @ Feb 19 2008, 07:06 PM) *
OH you know, all those biblical people all look alike anyway... pffft. LOL

LOL I know...every time ya come on here you just see this dogs butt LOL
norwood1026
QUOTE (Beckys_Mom @ Feb 18 2008, 02:36 AM) *
Hey I wondered who stole my toast this morning grrr true I was hungry loll
Anyhoo.. it does look like a face but that doesnt mean it was Mary...it just looks like a womans face...I call it a coincidence!!!!!!!


I agree I see the face too on the toast & who ever it is a hottie the rock there is nothing on it.

My guess why no one jumped on board with this thread is because people cliam to see these things almost every day & it gets old.
Beckys_Mom
QUOTE (norwood1026 @ Feb 19 2008, 07:18 PM) *
I agree I see the face too on the toast & who ever it is a hottie the rock there is nothing on it.

My guess why no one jumped on board with this thread is because people cliam to see these things almost every day & it gets old.

I have a baby scan photo..and when you look real close you can make out a ghostly image of another chlids face..well I did loose a child before I got pregnant with becky...fo figure
norwood1026
QUOTE (Beckys_Mom @ Feb 19 2008, 07:22 PM) *
I have a baby scan photo..and when you look real close you can make out a ghostly image of another chlids face..well I did loose a child before I got pregnant with becky...fo figure



This place that we rent as that popcornstuff on the celiing & if I look hard enough I can see faces doesn't mean there is anything religous about it.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.