Archaeologica.org

Do you know what worries me most Min? That one day we will know all the answers. When I was a kid it was suggested that science was a dead end career because the scientists of the day were close to knowing all the answers.

I don't worry about that at all.

There are still way too many Archies out there who believe in invisible old men in the sky.

There are still way too many Archies out there who believe in invisible old men in the sky.

Alright, if he's invisible how do the Archies know that he has a beard?:shock:

They created him in their own image.

Cognito wrote:

Lack of evidence not infrequently means that we simply haven't found it yet, not that it doesn't exist.

Digit, you are correct. However, the scientific method does not allow for speculation and where some people have a problem (not you) is when they start building one speculation upon another to arrive at some sort of conclusion, whether accurate or not (re: Sitchin, Hancock, etc.). Some articles get really confusing when speculation is interlaced with known facts, thereby creating rhetorical crap that passes as scientific treatise. I enjoy sailing on the GOOD SHIP SPECULATION as much as anyone else, but we still need to follow the scientific method in archaeological discussions to get from one point to the next ... otherwise it becomes pseudoscience and there's way too much of that in print for comfort.

I suppose we need to institute a caution that states: WARNING: SPECULATION TO FOLLOW! when going off on a tangent.

WARNING...GOOD SHIP SPECULATION...

I've been doing some reading on the tribes in Indonesia, in particular the "near stone age" tribes of Papua New Guinea the Kombai and Korowai. I've read descriptions of some other tribes that have had little if no contact...seen them described as near stone age, or rather "they've changed little if any since the stone age."

I saw a Kombai man speaking about a case of adultery and murder...the woman was put to death for sleeping with two men, one guy was murdered by the other guy who ended up getting nearly murdered in revenge (a pig offering by his family save his life...sort of a eye for a pig kind of thing).

In any case, the Kombai man described his obligation to marry his brother's widow, (he had four such wives), and we know that this is a Hebrew law *re the piteous Onan*(and most likely other close cultures), and the adulterous woman was put to death, another Hebrew et. al. law.

What I'm wondering about, is that the Kombai did not say their "great spirit" had this rule, it was a community rule. They apparently didn't need a GOD to hand them these rules. In fact so little attention was paid to their oral history that I have become even more curious. As these people open up to outsiders and begin to share their oral traditions (that's all they have) I wonder what their story will be of how they came to be, if they too have a flood myth...where did they come from? What does their folklore say?

Why is anthropology basically ignoring these folks when there is a chance to step into "the stone age" and get a bird's eye view of what THEIR story is? Ok I know, some folks have been eaten in the area But still, some hardly souls have been "accepted" into the tribe and are getting some insight. Learning their oral traditions just might be the most valuable thing that COULD be learned from them. If we let the XIAN missionaries corrupt their history we may never learn about them. (for a clear, recent look at the devastation wrought on a native culture by XIAN missionaries, one need look no further than the Hawaiian Islands.)

Another thought struck me concerning their clear genetic similarities with other isolated groups in SA. Not the mighty Aztec, Incans, or Mayans, but seriously isolated, remote tribes with physical similarities with the Indonesian tribes, and Abo tribes in Australia that certainly tweaks the imagination and sparks questions.

Why aren't people sparked?

Also, upon watching this people live their daily lives, one is struck immediately as to how little archeological "evidence" would be left as a trace of their presence should they suddenly dissapear. It would be a sheer stroke of luck to stumble upon one of their FEW stone tools. Evidence of their homes would soon be lost to the jungle, their bodies certainly would not preserved well enough in that environment to survive to be studied.

My question is, suppose there were human types on earth far sooner than we could imagine? Based on what I've seen of the Kombai et. al. there'd be literally close to zero chance of proving it with our current technology.


I appologize for my slack participation..I seem to still be "recovering" from my last few months in the S. of France where I was on a Cathar misson...and somehow ran into a chap called Montezuma.

I saw a Kombai man speaking about a case of adultery and murder...the woman was put to death for sleeping with two men

They do that in Pakistan, too.

Minimalist wrote:

I saw a Kombai man speaking about a case of adultery and murder...the woman was put to death for sleeping with two men

They do that in Pakistan, too.

Yes but Allah told them to, or so they say. My point was that there was not GOD myth at all involved in the laws/customs with the Kombai. How is it that their culture determined the exact same rules/customs ect. that the Hebrews et. al. claim were directives from their GOD??

Leviticus 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with [another] man's wife, [even he] that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

Same shit. That's probably where the Arabs got it from.

Minimalist wrote:

Leviticus 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with [another] man's wife, [even he] that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

Same shit. That's probably where the Arabs got it from.

yeah but where did the Kombai get it from?

Doesn't it dimmish the "word of God" if stone age peoples in a remote jungle area have the same rules WITHOUT having been told so by a GOD?

How is it that their culture determined the exact same rules/customs ect. that the Hebrews et. al. claim were directives from their GOD??

what do you feel like doing when you find out your girlfriend has been cheating ?
are you divinely inspired
or is it human nature

Alright, if he's invisible how do the Archies know that he has a beard

that could just be a guess
how do they know he wears sandals

They do that in Pakistan, too.

and in Judea

Now look, no-one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle, do you understand? Even if they do say "Jehovah"!

marduk wrote:

How is it that their culture determined the exact same rules/customs ect. that the Hebrews et. al. claim were directives from their GOD??

what do you feel like doing when you find out your girlfriend has been cheating ?
are you divinely inspired
or is it human nature

Alright, if he's invisible how do the Archies know that he has a beard

that could just be a guess
how do they know he wears sandals

They do that in Pakistan, too.

and in Judea

Now look, no-one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle, do you understand? Even if they do say "Jehovah"!

OK so we can agree that mere human emotions (anger, desire for revenge ect.) are the models by which humans organize their cultures? They create a man-friendly set of rules and blame it on GOD? What about the cultures that do NOT have those practices? Or have practicies that for a time were quite prevelent and which society apparently forgot to notice were against the rules? (for example in Greek society for a while it was common for men married or not to indulge in relationships with young boys...) In some deep jungle Amazon cultures this is also a practice...and considered to be quite normal. (I saw that in Keep the River on Your Right...very good documentary about first contact ect.)

I hazzard a guess, and this is just a guess, that man man relationships were outlawed by GOD because the Hebrew tribe was quite concerned with proliferation....they needed to get bigger in order to control...if steve and steve were partying with each other, they were not making little hebrews?

clubs_stink wrote:

Minimalist wrote:

Leviticus 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with [another] man's wife, [even he] that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

Same shit. That's probably where the Arabs got it from.

yeah but where did the Kombai get it from?

Doesn't it dimmish the "word of God" if stone age peoples in a remote jungle area have the same rules WITHOUT having been told so by a GOD?

I think this joke will explain that:

A missionary who had spent years showing a tribe of natives how to farm and build things to be self-sufficient gets the word that he is to return home.
He realizes that the one thing he never taught the natives was how to speak English, so he takes the chief and starts walking in the forest. He points to a tree and says to the chief, "This is a tree." The chief looks at the tree and grunts, "Tree."
The missionary is pleased with the response.
They walk a little farther and the padre points to a rock and says, "This is a rock." Hearing this, the chief looks and grunts, "Rock." The padre is really getting enthusiastic about the results when he hears a rustling in the bushes. As he peeks over the top, he sees a couple in the midst of Heavy sexual activity.
The padre is really flustered and quickly responds, "Riding a bike."
The chief looks at the couple briefly, pulls out his blow gun and kills them. The padre goes ballistic and yells at the chief that he has spent years teaching the tribe how to be civilized and kind to each other, so how could he just kill these people in cold blood that way?
The chief replied, "Him riding MY bike."

I hazzard a guess, and this is just a guess, that man man relationships were outlawed by GOD because the Hebrew tribe was quite concerned with proliferation....

where did God say that ?
are you claiming that God actually wrote the bible
its funny because hes not mentioned as the author on the dustjacket and last time i checked his picture was not on the back cover
as far as I am aware there are claims in the bible that state that you must not lie with a man as you would a woman and that homosexuals will not inherit the house of the lord
but realistically all that means is missionary position is out and that as long as homosexuals already have a house to go to then theres no problem really

for example in Greek society for a while it was common for men married or not to indulge in relationships with young boys

choose

greek woman

greek boy

Under the Torah Min adultery is only commited with a married woman as I recall. If the man is married and the woman is not, no adultery.

Naturally.


Men wrote the torah.