Calm Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) Looks like a podcast interview. Just talking with the Foerster guy...not credible. No references actually given. No names given. Nothing that can be falsified as of ten minutes. Not going to waste anymore. Edited December 24, 2015 by Calm
Zakuska Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Calm said: Looks like a podcast interview. Just talking with the Foerster guy...not credible. Heres a semi side view of the above skulls so you can see how far back they go. the second from the right and the one all the way on the left both have larger than normal (Modern Human) brain capacities. They also have only 1 perenial Plate instead of 2 like modern humans. I'll try and find the history channel video when I get home. Edited December 24, 2015 by Zakuska
Calm Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 Thank you, I would appreciate it. Quote the second from the right and the one all the way on the left both have larger than normal (Modern Human) brain capacities. They also have only 1 perenial Plate instead of 2 like modern humans. documentation please
Zakuska Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 One more before I go... If the skull on the right had the same DNA as the one on the left there should be visible sutuerts between the parietal plates they are missing. I see if I can find some better "documented" images later.
Stargazer Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 CUT IT OUT, YOU GUYS!!! YOU'RE DRIVING ME NUTS!!! JUST STOP IT!!! CAN YOU SAY "PILTDOWN MAN"??? 1
Zakuska Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) 1 minute ago, Stargazer said: CUT IT OUT, YOU GUYS!!! YOU'RE DRIVING ME NUTS!!! JUST STOP IT!!! CAN YOU SAY "PILTDOWN MAN"??? 300+ skulls and counting... does not a "piltdown" make. Edited December 24, 2015 by Zakuska
Stargazer Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 7 minutes ago, Zakuska said: 300+ skulls and counting... does not a "piltdown" make. Whoever forged the Piltdown skull had to work with rather primitive tools and techniques. Modern mass production techniques make 300+ examples a snap. I say this is entirely a massive hoax. Prove me wrong.
Ahab Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 RE: the OP - When considering the time frame of such things it helps to realize the elements used to create the Earth were not brand new, without age, when the Earth was created, so it's not as if you should expect all of the elements of the Earth to be only 7 days old after the first week of correction. Or that you should expect any rock you pick up today to be only as old as the number of days since the creation of the Earth. So carbon dating doesn't tell you much of anything except maybe how old the carbon is, regardless of how long ago it was that the Earth was created/organized from matter that already existed. 1
Zakuska Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) Whoever forged the Piltdown skull had to work with rather primitive tools and techniques. Modern mass production techniques make 300+ examples a snap. I say this is entirely a massive hoax. Prove me wrong. Elongated Skulls similar to the Paracas Skulls found at Stone henge August 2015... ITS A WORLD WIDE CONSPIRACY I TELL YOU! Edited December 24, 2015 by Zakuska
Cold Steel Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 Science versus religion is one of those things that haven't bothered me. Yes, I know there are paradoxes, but they're only paradoxes. The problem is that we don't know enough about either to make or come to any conclusion or even enough to intelligently speculate about it. The Lord gave this great revelation about the day we can reconcile these two presently strident topics: "Yea, verily I say unto you, in that day when the Lord shall come, he shall reveal all things—things which have passed, and hidden things which no man knew, things of the earth, by which it was made, and the purpose and the end thereof—things most precious, things that are above, and things that are beneath, things that are in the earth, and upon the earth, and in heaven." (D&C 101:33-36) https://youtube.com/watch?v=Pn8atxGyb-k 1
Traela Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 1 hour ago, Zakuska said: Heres a semi side view of the above skulls so you can see how far back they go. the second from the right and the one all the way on the left both have larger than normal (Modern Human) brain capacities. They also have only 1 perenial Plate instead of 2 like modern humans. I'll try and find the history channel video when I get home. Unfortunately, I don't consider the History Channel particularly reliable anymore. 2
Zakuska Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) 2 hours ago, Calm said: Looks like a podcast interview. Just talking with the Foerster guy...not credible. No references actually given. No names given. Nothing that can be falsified as of ten minutes. Not going to waste anymore. Ok here he talks about the 25% bigger and the 2 Pertial Bones and shows the skulls. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnERUZNqwbc I think the bird seed experiment I was incorrectly remembering with the Star Child skull. 18 different elongated Paracas Skulls. https://youtu.be/CJlUWbpFtII Several More shoing the missing Peretial plates. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx9Vwc4JuT8 Edited December 24, 2015 by Zakuska
Calm Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) He has given no reason why we should trust his research. Not saying that someone who lacks a college degree at all, let alone in the field he is attempting to practice in (I may be getting the two mixed up, this one may have a degree in sports information) can't be intelligent (he certainly comes across that way), insightful and well read...but all we are getting is it 'is this way because I am telling you so'. I don't even accept that from my physics profs, they have to demonstrate why it is so before I will accept their claims. Math profs I am more forgiving on because like logic arguments, sometimes you have to assume things you can't prove in order to get started. If I understand it correctly the "2 Parietal bone" version happens on occasion, it is not unique to the Paracas skulls: Quote The parietal bone is ossified in membrane from a single center, which appears at the parietal eminence about the eighth week of fetal life. Ossification gradually extends in a radial manner from the center toward the margins of the bone; the angles are consequently the parts last formed, and it is here that the fontanelles exist. Occasionally the parietal bone is divided into two parts, upper and lower, by an antero-posterior suture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parietal_bone The information is a direct quote from the anatomy standard Gray's Anatomy Bottom of the page under Development: https://books.google.com/books?id=ogE5AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA78&lpg=PA78&dq Edited December 24, 2015 by Calm
VideoGameJunkie Posted December 25, 2015 Author Posted December 25, 2015 Where's the history DNA of Asians found in scripture? Where did they come from?
Monster Posted December 25, 2015 Posted December 25, 2015 On December 23, 2015 at 3:08 PM, VideoGameJunkie said: What I mean by that is Adam and Eve left the garden of Eden around 6,000 B.C. Yet scientists have determined the earth is billions of years old, and have determined dinosaurs and primitive humans and other animals lived millions of years ago from fossil evidence and bones. So how do both work together to make it true? Are there just different epochs of time that happened, or is there a connection? My only educated guess is that the creation of the earth was very long and obviously not just 6 days, and that Adam and Eve were either in the garden for billions or millions of years since they wouldn't age, or Adam and Eve were not really the first people on earth, but the first people of the current epoch. Thoughts? Its easy when you realize the story of Adam is myth. It is only when you try to mesh myth and reality that theres seems a conflict.
VideoGameJunkie Posted December 25, 2015 Author Posted December 25, 2015 10 minutes ago, Monster said: Its easy when you realize the story of Adam is myth. It is only when you try to mesh myth and reality that theres seems a conflict. If it's a myth then why is the story of Adam also in the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price and the endowment ceremony?
Stargazer Posted December 25, 2015 Posted December 25, 2015 (edited) 7 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: If it's a myth then why is the story of Adam also in the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price and the endowment ceremony? You do realize you're responding to a nonbeliever, don't you? Edited December 25, 2015 by Stargazer
VideoGameJunkie Posted December 25, 2015 Author Posted December 25, 2015 3 hours ago, Stargazer said: You do realize you're responding to a nonbeliever, don't you? I did not. Whoops.
BCSpace Posted December 26, 2015 Posted December 26, 2015 On 12/23/2015 at 3:08 PM, VideoGameJunkie said: What I mean by that is Adam and Eve left the garden of Eden around 6,000 B.C. Yet scientists have determined the earth is billions of years old, and have determined dinosaurs and primitive humans and other animals lived millions of years ago from fossil evidence and bones. So how do both work together to make it true? Are there just different epochs of time that happened, or is there a connection? My only educated guess is that the creation of the earth was very long and obviously not just 6 days, and that Adam and Eve were either in the garden for billions or millions of years since they wouldn't age, or Adam and Eve were not really the first people on earth, but the first people of the current epoch. Thoughts? Official LDS doctrine allows for a billions of years old earth (OT Student Manual Ch 2 iirc) and pre Adamite races of man (1931 FP Statement). And there are also other doctrinal and scriptural evidences for Evolution as God's method of creation as we have discussed elsewhere. My personal opinion is that Ussher's chronology, which the Church and other christian churches draw on, is flawed because it lacks sources both archeological and spiritual/revelatory sources. For example, I like to place the Fall closer to 8000 B.C. coinciding with the rise of the first civilization (Sumer). The connection between science and religion though, imho, is John 7:17 and Alma 32:27; as that is the scientific method in a nutshell. In other words, one can't find God, or even gain a testimony for that matter, without using science.
Stargazer Posted December 26, 2015 Posted December 26, 2015 11 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: I did not. Whoops. I am actually not as familiar with Monster's faith history as I am with some others (and sorry, M, I'm talking behind your back), but he has chosen his avatar wisely; i.e. the evil Spock -- or, more accurately the Mirror Spock that Kirk encountered in the TOS episode Mirror, Mirror. Monster, like Spock, is highly logical (or tries to be), and thus does not believe because there is no objective evidence. If I am misstating your outlook, M, please feel free to correct me!
BCSpace Posted January 2, 2016 Posted January 2, 2016 (edited) On 12/25/2015 at 7:14 PM, VideoGameJunkie said: If it's a myth then why is the story of Adam also in the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price and the endowment ceremony? Does the Adam and Eve account have to be all literal? We know from official LDS doctrine that Eve being created from Adam's rib is "surely figurative". I would say Adam and Eve and their choices would have to be historical, but one does not know, and likely will not know until the end, how much of the details are figurative or metaphorical. Edited January 2, 2016 by BCSpace accuracy
thesometimesaint Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 On 12/24/2015 at 4:14 PM, theplains said: Science relies on its own faith for things it cannot prove or reproduce. Jim Incorrect. Faith is the evidence of things unseen. Science is the evidence of things seen.
thesometimesaint Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 On 1/2/2016 at 1:31 PM, BCSpace said: Does the Adam and Eve account have to be all literal? We know from official LDS doctrine that Eve being created from Adam's rib is "surely figurative". I would say Adam and Eve and their choices would have to be historical, but one does not know, and likely will not know until the end, how much of the details are figurative or metaphorical. If Adam and Even were the first man and woman to have the Priesthood and worship God. That solves a whole lot of problems.
Zakuska Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: Incorrect. Faith is the evidence of things unseen. Science is the evidence of things seen. And yet science posits much on things that cannot be observed. eg. How man different types of "Particles" are there that cannot be directly observed? Edited January 4, 2016 by Zakuska
theplains Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 8 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: Incorrect. Faith is the evidence of things unseen. Science is the evidence of things seen. Science cannot prove evolution so it is referred to as a theory. Thanks Jim
Recommended Posts