Evidence of Human Activity in Northern Siberia 45,000 years ago.

by fulltimestudent 26 Replies latest social current

  • Phizzy

    Of course JDubs and others who stupidly give credence to the Bibles chronology will say that the dating techniques for this find are not reliable.

    Not so, the error margin is known with these techniques, and factored in, any error remaining over this time-frame of 45,000 years is only measured in months really.

  • Fisherman
    As time passes days get longer. There was a time when a day of creation was only 7000 years long and the earth was not billions of years old. All be it, at most, all that can ever be shown is a dilemma (paradox) but no dilemma could ever disprove the existence of God although evidence could (only) show at most that Bible interpretations are wrong..
  • cofty
    no dilemma could ever disprove the existence of God - Fisherman

    Yes it can.

    Natural disasters prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the god of christian theism does not exist.

    See summary of replies halfway down this page...

  • LoveUniHateExams

    Nice pic, Fink.

    It appears the street sweepers have done a good job - otherwise everybody would be knee-deep in dino crap.

  • fulltimestudent
    Makemeanunbeliever : Oh boy here we go again. Another clueless do gooder evolutionist wanna be.
    No one can prove or disprove a creator or no creator. Pick the one you want and stop wasting your time and ours.

    I seem to have upset you. Sorry about that! But why do you feel I MUST believe in a creator?

    To be bluntly honest I really don't care very much, whether you believe or unbelieve (or, even whether you want to be a faithful JW).

    But for some curious reason I find myself wanting to talk about this with you, perhaps you may like to listen.

    I need to talk a bit about myself first - so you know where I'm coming from,

    I used to be a faithful JW, from about the age of 17. At that time Jesus became my model, I tried very hard to become a footstep follower of him (1 Peter 1:21). I'm not sure that I was a very good at that, but I tried very, very hard. IF I could not exactly accept all the things the WT said, I had the ability to park them in a corner of my brain and wait. And, I think that's likely why I spent near 40 years as a JW. But the last 10 years of that, particularly after 1975, that particualr corner of my mind got a bit crowded.

    Having read the bits about 1975 in Freddy Franz's 1966 opus (Life Everlasting in the Freedom of the Sons of God) I knew that Freddy had a few escape clauses planted there. I'd even told my wife not to be surprised if the big A did not come in 1975, in spite of the WTS/GB doing such a big "rah, rah, rah-Stay alive in 75" job in the preceding years. So that crowded corner of my mind started to ferment and by the end of the 80's I'm just a lump of sh*t in the minds of my former loving brothers and sisters, and therefore chucked out onto the garbage dump.

    And that made life complicated, my former wife came from a "zealous" family - and you can guess the rest. I decided not to make it even more confusing for my kids, so just gave my wife everything (a nearly paid for house, a car, etc) and walked away from the mess I'd created by refusing to ask questions. (Yeah! and I'd even known that 'faith' is based on knowledge and knowledge comes from getting answers to questions).

    OK - enough about me. But you surely understand that if the Bible is the word and work of God, that it must stand up to scrutiny. Does it? I can no longer accept that it does. The OT of Bible is just a collection of documents that some (and quite possibly not all ) Jewish people thought explained things from a viewpoint that they valued. The same for the NT when Emperor Constantine sat the bishops down at the Council of Nicaea and forced them to think about the unity and beliefs of the church. When they finally got around to 'defining' truth and selecting the documents they valued most as 'special, or 'sacred,' a couple of hundred years had elapsed. What do you know about writings that are 200 years old? For example, William Miller?

    The biblical documents therefore 'sees' things from the perspective of people living in Palestine. But note, it doesn't talk about lots of things. You'd never know from the biblical documents that Palestine was once part of the Egyptian Empire, would you? AND, have you ever read Genesis 10 and tried to understand how the families of Noah's sons became the ancestors of all humans?

    "These are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their lines of descent, within their nations. From these the nations spread out over the earth after the flood." (Genesis 10:32.NIV)

    Does that really make sense to you? Some creationists set the date of the flood as 2348 BCE, a little over 4300 years ago.

    I can demonstrate to you that by that time, there were millions of people living in East Asia. Chinese recorded history goes back about nearly 5000 years (The Chinese by the way have their own flood stories, because floods on the Yellow and Yangzi rivers have had an affect on their lives).

    Not to mention the Siberian hunters mentioned in my posted overview. As Nelim, in a ;previous post, points out the remains of the mammoth shows clear evidence of human activity.

    If that's true, somethings wrong with the biblical record. If it was recorded under divine instruction, then the divinity involved did not know a lot about human history.

    If I had asked more questions when I was 17 I would have had better answers and therefore choices in my life. I've asked them now, but you express bitterness at my doing so. Why?

    Would you like to respond?

  • Fisherman
    Natural disasters prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the god of christian theism does not exist.-Cofty

    Your argument is not a proof. It is only an argument that purports to show your formula to work.

  • Earnest

    What evidence does the Russian team provide for the dating of the mammoth?

    The mammoth carcass was found in a river channel as can be observed in the link to the mammoth site below. Above the river channel was a flood plain, a peat bog, and layers of sand and peat.

    • The peat bog was carbon-dated to beween 16,000 and 20,800 years ago.
    • The flood plain below the peat bog but above the river channel in which the mammoth was found was carbon-dated between 33,500 and 38,500 years ago.
    • A small willow branch fragment from the flood plain was carbon-dated between 43,200 and 57,800 years ago.
    • The collagen of the mammoth's tibia bone was carbon-dated between 43,870 and 45,520 years ago.

    As this dating is largely dependent on the collagen extracted it would be useful to have :

    • the method used to rule out contamination of the bone collagen for dating
    • confirmation of the dates on the bone by another lab

    before rushing to conclusions.

    mammoth site

Share this