ERayR Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 "There are no lakes and rivers in the area"So what washed them into the cave, Tiki? Wait I have a better story. The cave bears dragged her into the cave when she wandered away from the tribe.
thesometimesaint Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 Wait I have a better story. The cave bears dragged her into the cave when she wandered away from the tribe. Possible but not likely. The precise arrangement of the bones speaks against a cave bear.
ERayR Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 We have her bones. They match those of a person from the Far East some 12,000 years ago. That is what the article says. She could have been a girl from modern day Timbuktu captured by the Martians and time traveled back to 12,000 years ago. Killed in a sex experiment on the Mother Ship and the remains thrown down a hole. Talk about conjecture. At least one is presented as conjecture and the other as a scientifically factual narrative.
thesometimesaint Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 At least one is presented as conjecture and the other as a scientifically factual narrative. I'll stick with the one in the article, and leave the conjecture to others.
katherine the great Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 Just to clarify, the gist of this article is that because Paleo Indians look different than modern Native Americans there have been theories positing different origins for the two groups. Genetic testing on this ancient skeleton however shows that people with Paleo Indian features have at least one of the haplogroups as modern day Native Americans. All the other stuff is just an interesting way to propose how this particular scenario played out. No one is saying that that is exactly how it happened Tiki. If you want to read the meat of the article then you will have to refer to the scientific journal. This is just a summary written by a reporter. 1
katherine the great Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 that's interesting! I wonder if what she found can be seperated from all that drama, like take her out but take her findings and do something with that. Even better would be if she would humble herself and make herself amenable to working respectfully with other people. Then maybe she could continue her research and the people who she previously bullied might be more supportive of her. I have worked with some jerks but it is very rare that a scientist would be dismissed like that and not given access to their own research. She must've really been difficult for almost everyone to work with. Head researchers in charge of a project need to work cooperatively with the people who are hired to help them. 2
Rob Osborn Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 No it is NOT. Radioactive decay dating is well established science. Well established opinion.
thesometimesaint Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Well established opinion. SEE Half Lifehttp://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/halfli.html
cdowis Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) If we are going to judge our discussion on chronology and carbon dating, then we have a problem because there was no Adam, the scriptures are false, the entire Christian religion is false. This discussion is then moot, because there is no common ground for a discussion. May I suggest that we suspend the chronology issue in order to continue the discussion, because we are going nowhere if we cannot have a basic assumption on Adam. For those who are unable to do this should continue their discussions on talkorigin. Edited May 19, 2014 by cdowis
thesometimesaint Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 If we are going to judge our discussion on chronology and carbon dating, then we have a problem because there was no Adam, the scriptures are false, the entire Christian religion is false. This discussion is then moot, because there is no common ground for a discussion. May I suggest that we suspend the chronology issue in order to continue the discussion, because we are going nowhere if we cannot have a basic assumption on Adam. For those who are unable to do this should continue their discussions on talkorigin. I've resolved the issue of chronology for myself. While I believe A&E were real live humans. Their story can just as easily been figurative, a morality tale of how we handle our quest for knowledge, our temptations, sins, our lives in our responsibilities to our mates, and to our God, using Priesthood power. I certainly have no issue with Talkorigins when it comes to science. But the legitimate questions raised by my religion predate/permeate Mormonism. To me it how we interact with both that I find is endlessly interesting.
cdowis Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 My resolution is to compartmentalize the issue until the Lord chooses to reveal the missing peaces, "I don't know". So I am able to go to mormondiscussion and talkorigin for a discussion, using the chronology of that discussion group. In this discussion group, if we cannot *assume* the scriptural chronology, but start talking about the sons of Adam 12Kya here in the Americas and use that as an arguing point, then we really have no common ground for a discussion.
Rob Osborn Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 SEE Half Lifehttp://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/halfli.htmlAnd there is a myriad of factors that can effect carbon dating and change the date. One of them is the innundation of water. The global flood totally screws up carbon dating.
thesometimesaint Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 My resolution is to compartmentalize the issue until the Lord chooses to reveal the missing peaces, "I don't know". So I am able to go to mormondiscussion and talkorigin for a discussion, using the chronology of that discussion group. In this discussion group, if we cannot *assume* the scriptural chronology, but start talking about the sons of Adam 12Kya here in the Americas and use that as an arguing point, then we really have no common ground for a discussion. The idea that the planet is just somewhere between 7000-10,000 old is certainly an old transplant from broader Christianity. Probably from Archbishop Ussher of the 17th Century CE. The Bible itself gives no such dating.SEE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology On a happier note JS thought the planet was 2.5 Billion years old. His methodology was way off for pretty much the same reasons as Ussher was. But far closer to reality than Ussher was. Personally I see not such conflict between the 12,000 year old bones of a girl, and the Book of Mormon peoples. The Book of Mormon concerns itself with much later peoples.
thesometimesaint Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 And there is a myriad of factors that can effect carbon dating and change the date. One of them is the innundation of water. The global flood totally screws up carbon dating. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-c14.html
cdowis Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Personally I see not such conflict between the 12,000 year old bones of a girl, and the Book of Mormon peoples. The Book of Mormon concerns itself with much later peoples. I agree. She is probably pre-flood, and has nothing to do with the BOM.
Helen47 Posted May 20, 2014 Author Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) Once when I was younger I thought I knew a lot, now older I realise how much I do not know. Reading Finkelstein's books The Bible Unearthed and David and Solomon I realise that much of what was written is not true or exagerated. I could say oh well in the future they will discover evidence of Israel in Egypt or find the walls of Jericho. Highly unlikely. These guys are Jewish I trust they would have had a vested interest in proving the historicity of the story of Israel.But no they don't. They demolish the work of earlier "Biblical" archaologists like Allbright and Yadin.In a way it was shocking for me as an Evangelical. I suppose this same issue in trying to fit the Book of Mormon in the American context. Will they ever find evidence for cities, animals etc mentioned in the book or is all you have your faith and "testimony"? Reading Finkelstein I am starting to have those same feelings of doubt and anxiety I had when I started reading material on the Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon. I wonder how the likes of Sperry, Bennion, Snell, even B h Roberts would deal with these new issues.My partner reads the Bible every day with the Bible Notes they get in the mail every month.I dare not share the results of my readings with them. Too much dissonance. Edited May 20, 2014 by Helen47
thesometimesaint Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) Once when I was younger I thought I knew a lot, now older I realise how much I do not know. Reading Finkelstein's books The Bible Unearthed and David and Solomon I realise that much of what was written is not true or exagerated. I could say oh well in the future they will discover evidence of Israel in Egypt or find the walls of Jericho. Highly unlikely. These guys are Jewish I trust they would have had a vested interest in proving the historicity of the story of Israel.But no they don't. They demolish the work of earlier "Biblical" archaologists like Allbright and Yadin.In a way it was shocking for me as an Evangelical. I suppose this same issue in trying to fit the Book of Mormon in the American context. Will they ever find evidence for cities, animals etc mentioned in the book or is all you have your faith and "testimony"? Reading Finkelstein I am starting to have those same feelings of doubt and anxiety I had when I started reading material on the Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon. I wonder how the likes of Sperry, Bennion, Snell, even B h Roberts would deal with these new issues.My partner reads the Bible every day with the Bible Notes they get in the mail every month.I dare not share the results of my readings with them. Too much dissonance. Here is a Link to some of the best evidences I've seen. Not proof of course.http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml Edited May 20, 2014 by thesometimesaint
cdowis Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) I suppose this same issue in trying to fit the Book of Mormon in the American context. Will they ever find evidence for cities, animals etc mentioned in the book or is all you have your faith and "testimony"? It actually depends on whether one does their homework, or just relies on the antis for their information. For example, have you read "Mormon Codex"? Edited May 20, 2014 by cdowis
Helen47 Posted May 21, 2014 Author Posted May 21, 2014 That's Sorenson's book. I look at a lot of material including Ray Matheny's paper and his wife's paper. Trying to fit the BOM civilations in Mesoamerica seems a stretch in my mind.
cdowis Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) That's Sorenson's book. I look at a lot of material including Ray Matheny's paper and his wife's paper. Trying to fit the BOM civilations in Mesoamerica seems a stretch in my mind. Welll, it really depends on how you read and interpret the text of the BOM. If you think that the BOM says that steel was common throughout Nephite history, that horses survived until Columbus in the Americas, that the Nephites' vernacular was Hebrew, that you would find depictions of the cross and icons of Mary in mesoamerica, that there was no inhabitants in mesoamerica besides the BOM peoples..... etc etcthat would indicate that you are ignorant of the BOM text. In mesoamerica you will find a people with a sophisticated understanding of astronomy, written books (codex), towers used for religious rites, human sacrifice, a highly structured political organization, cement, inhabitants besides the Nephites/Lamantes, etc etc which do indeed fit the BOM text. No need to stretch your brain over that. You can read Nibley, et al, regarding the BOM in the context of the culture and history of the middle east, using authentic names (Paanchi, sheum, NHM,) and accurately describing the locations on the Saudi Arabian pennsula (Valley of Lemuel, Land Bountiful). Before complaining, do your homework and make sure you know what you are talking about. Edited May 21, 2014 by cdowis 1
Helen47 Posted May 21, 2014 Author Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) There is a guy called RT on patheos who has demolished Robert Smith and some of his arguments about language in the BOM. RT deals with some of those "egyptian" names in the BOM and the Hebrew ones. Looks like he has taken Robert Smith to the toolshed. I do my homework by reading a cross section of opinions. Beastie on the other board ('"trailer park")has an interesting site on the Book of Mormon archaeology and has picked up Sorenson for some errors. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2014/05/the-book-of-mormon-as-myth-and-more-on-the-name-alma/ Edited May 21, 2014 by Helen47
cdowis Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) There is a guy called RT on patheos who has demolished Robert Smith and some of his arguments about language in the BOM. RT deals with some of those "egyptian" names in the BOM and the Hebrew ones. Looks like he has taken Robert Smith to the toolshed. I do my homework by reading a cross section of opinions. Beastie on the other board ('"trailer park")has an interesting site on the Book of Mormon archaeology and has picked up Sorenson for some errors. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2014/05/the-book-of-mormon-as-myth-and-more-on-the-name-alma/ Yawn. I personally have used none of these names as evidence, with the exception of NHM. I note that her argument against that name is argumentative and basically an admission that it is a valid name, but she desperately argues that they would not have used that name in the record. Here is a case of an antimormon using her mind reading skills == "Yes, this is a name, BUT you got to understand that I can read their minds and I declare that it is impossible, absolutely impossible. Trust me when I declare that they would NEVER.... blah blah blah blah". I make note that she "forgot" to deal with Amun, sheum, Paanchi, Pahoran. The antis have poisoned your mind. Best of luck to you. Edited May 21, 2014 by cdowis
cdowis Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) You might want to read further on what Beastie forgot to mention: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/19547-the-full-text-of-the-william-albright-letter/ I gave a link to a full discussion of this letter. Please check out his credentials as a nonLDS scholar. Edited May 21, 2014 by cdowis
Helen47 Posted May 21, 2014 Author Posted May 21, 2014 Scholars like Israel Finkelstein have demolished the work of "Biblical" scholars like Albright. See The Bible Unearthed and David and Solomon.
Recommended Posts