Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:59 am
this evidence doesnt support your claimsi am honestly curious how people interpret that evidence.
Archaeologica.org
Your source on the web for daily archaeology news!
https://archaeologica.org/forum/
Current Biblical Archaeology
Page 58 of 122
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:23 am
You'll have to wait till tomorrow for my answer - my copy of Path of the pole is at home (I post on the internet whilst at work) and I'd like to check the original sources.archaeologist wrote:Non of the latter are scientists
i am curious as to how objective you really are and how much you letthe evidence speak.
I would also want to see whether any further research has been carried out - bearing in mind Hapgood was writing 50 years ago.
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:34 am
Another possibility is that these were caves belonging to the predator animals and humans were part of their prey. Although, being buried in the clay would seem to indicate a flood event. What was the elevation? If it's near a lagoon as Bob says the name suggests, then floods could be quite common and also the CO2 thing could have been at work. I get the feeling that all this stuff occured long ago and back then some of the guys doing this had very vivid imaginations. Such as Savage-Landon claiming human bones found with giant lizard bones, alluding to humans and dinosaurs being contemorary, which we all know isn't possible. I don't know what to make of the Punin skull.archaeologist wrote:that is not true at all.Non of the latter are scientists
i would have to doubt that especially when i find so much evidence discarded and ignored. this is what you want to believe is happening but in reality it doesn't.Science - look at the evidence. All the evidence. And then draw a conclusion based on that evidence.
nor is this true. christianity has the answers and the place to go for the answers and for our daily lives we really don't need the details but we are supposed to live like Christ. the details are needed when we have to talk to those outside the faith 'to give an answer why we believe' and for those times we need to strengthen our faith.Religion - draw a conclusion
the secular world, whether they acknowledge it or not, have influences upon them which enable them to think they are pursuing the answers when in reality, they miss the mark. (as has been demonstrated in the many quotes provided). there is no motivation to interpret according to the Bible and many of their , or most of, interpretations come from the bias of their previously held beliefs, their pre-drawn suppositions and their lack of faith, plus the restrictions they place upon their work and field of endeavor.
with such operating standards it is not hard to see why they would come up with conclusins that differ from the Biblical record. case in point:
taken from the Path of the Pole by Charles Hapgood pg. 290-1
"In a limestone cavern on the borders of the lagoa do Sumidouro, some three leagues from Santa Lucia, Dr. P.W. Lund excavated the bones of more than thirty individuals (human) of both sexes and various ages. The skeletons lay buried in hard clay overlying the original red soil forming the floor of the cave and were found mixed together in great confusion--not only with one another but with the remians of the Megatherium and other Pleistocene mammals...All the bones, whether human or animal showed evidence of having been contemporary with one another.
In other caves investigated by Lund, bones of ancient manwere found alongside those of the formidable Smilodon, a giant feline which became extinct during the last Pleistocene times. Referring to the evidence from these and other Brazillian fossiliferrous caves, Marquis de Nadaillac wrote:
'...Doubtless these men and animals lived together and perished together, common victims of catastrophes, the time and cause of which are alike unknown'(42:25
Two further cases are of particular interest. The first of these concerns the discovery, by Savage-Landor, of the remains of primitive humanoid mammals, associated with the bones of creatures regarded by him as giganticsaurians, in volcanic ash and lava deposits encountered in Matto Grosso State (34:vol. i, 371-4)
The second case relates tothe occurance of the remains of mastodons, camels and an extinct species of horse in beds of volcanic ash high in the andes near punin in Ecuador. Associated with these mammalian bones was the fossilized skull of a woman of Australoid type (33:311-2). This cranium, which is dolichocephalous (9:145) was scientifically described in 1925 by Dr. Louis R. Sullivan and Milo Hellman (51) and has since become generally known as the 'Punin' skull.
The presence of an Australoid type in Ecuadorian South America during geologically recent times poses questions about prehistoric human popluations in the continent...The critical importance of the Punin and Matto Grosso discoveries in the present context, however, lies in the stark demonstration that in South America human and animal denizens of the late Pleistocene world were exposed to, and perished by, geological upheavals of inconceiveable violence and extent."
let's do an experiment. you know what my interpretation is going tobe and yes i can relate this to the genesis account but let's see how objective and honest you all are at interpretating the evidence described in this quote. do not let the words Pleistocene or megatherium, among others, influence your conclusions but really try to be biased free and post your conclusions here
i am curious as to how objective you really are and how much you letthe evidence speak.
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:00 am
According to British anatomist Arthur Keith (1886-1955):
"When the expedition returned to New York from Ecuador, the skull was transferred to the Anthropological side of the Museum, where it was examined and described by Drs. Louis R. Sullivan and Milo Hellman. Both anthropologists were struck by its resemblance to the skulls of the native women of Australia. I agree with them; the points of resemblance are too numerous to permit us to suppose that the skull could be of a sort produced by an American Indian parentage. We cannot suppose that an Australian native woman had been spirited across the Pacific in some migratory movement and that afterwards her skull was buried in a fossiliferous bed in the high plateau of Ecuador...The discovery at Punin does compel us to look into the possibility of a Pleistocene invasion of America by an Australoid people."
this skull isn't partuclarly surprising in its presence or its date when you consider these people
http://wikitravel.org/en/Tierra_del_Fuego_National_Park
The first humans occupied Tierra del Fuego 10,000 years ago. The area covered by the national park was inhabited by the Yamana, who camped on its beaches and often travelled in canoes made of "lenga" to hunt sea mammals and collect shellfish. When settlers (initially missionaries) appeared in 1880, disease spread and the Yamana began to die out. In 2005, there is allegedly only one full-blooded native-speaking Yamana left, living on Isla Navarina.
The area was given national park status in 1960. Nowadays, the only evidence you will see of the former Yamana inhabitants are piles of mussel shells overgrown with grass near the shore, which indicate areas of Yamana settlement.
the Yamana dna is australian in origin
"When the expedition returned to New York from Ecuador, the skull was transferred to the Anthropological side of the Museum, where it was examined and described by Drs. Louis R. Sullivan and Milo Hellman. Both anthropologists were struck by its resemblance to the skulls of the native women of Australia. I agree with them; the points of resemblance are too numerous to permit us to suppose that the skull could be of a sort produced by an American Indian parentage. We cannot suppose that an Australian native woman had been spirited across the Pacific in some migratory movement and that afterwards her skull was buried in a fossiliferous bed in the high plateau of Ecuador...The discovery at Punin does compel us to look into the possibility of a Pleistocene invasion of America by an Australoid people."
this skull isn't partuclarly surprising in its presence or its date when you consider these people
http://wikitravel.org/en/Tierra_del_Fuego_National_Park
The first humans occupied Tierra del Fuego 10,000 years ago. The area covered by the national park was inhabited by the Yamana, who camped on its beaches and often travelled in canoes made of "lenga" to hunt sea mammals and collect shellfish. When settlers (initially missionaries) appeared in 1880, disease spread and the Yamana began to die out. In 2005, there is allegedly only one full-blooded native-speaking Yamana left, living on Isla Navarina.
The area was given national park status in 1960. Nowadays, the only evidence you will see of the former Yamana inhabitants are piles of mussel shells overgrown with grass near the shore, which indicate areas of Yamana settlement.
the Yamana dna is australian in origin
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:39 am
Yeah, marduk, arch has two unrelated ideas going here. On the one hand, these finds would seem to be another body blow to the Siberian land bridge entry theory...and heaven knows that theory has taken a beating lately. I suspect that as far as mainstream science is concerned this is by far the most important aspect of the find.
The secondary issue is the condition of the finds. Found as they were, in a pile, an argument for a flood as the agent of death is not unreasonable.
However, there is an enormous difference between a flood and the flood.
From the data given, we know nothing about the cave in question. Was it large? Did it have a large or small opening? Might people take refuge in it during a storm? We don't know if it was a dwelling or a shelter. Was there any associated pottery or tools? Given the early date of Lund's excavation one has to wonder about the state of field craft at the time. He could have been the Oz of his age!
The secondary issue is the condition of the finds. Found as they were, in a pile, an argument for a flood as the agent of death is not unreasonable.
However, there is an enormous difference between a flood and the flood.
From the data given, we know nothing about the cave in question. Was it large? Did it have a large or small opening? Might people take refuge in it during a storm? We don't know if it was a dwelling or a shelter. Was there any associated pottery or tools? Given the early date of Lund's excavation one has to wonder about the state of field craft at the time. He could have been the Oz of his age!
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:46 pm
the first case just says --'the bordrs of lagoa de sumidouro about three leagues from santa lucia'--so i guess we are forced to look on a map.What was the elevation
the second case says --'high in the andes'
i will respcetfully disagree with you here as Rehwinkel states the same type of finds. giant bones with smaller ones and i do think dinosaurs and humans were contemproraies so we may have to agree to disagree.Such as Savage-Landon claiming human bones found with giant lizard bones, alluding to humans and dinosaurs being contemorary, which we all know isn't possible
okay but how about considering a pre-flood emmigration as a possibility? we do not know what the members of the civilization prior to the flood look like thus we could have evidence of those people. (remember, i am just presenting my side here for discussion)The discovery at Punin does compel us to look into the possibility of a Pleistocene invasion of America by an Australoid people
to an extent i can agreee with that but you have to take into account, the elevation of the finds, the different types of animal bones, then other evidence found in other parts of the world and so on.However, there is an enormous difference between a flood and the flood.
so these discoveries lend a lot of credibility to the Biblical account. i am looking for any mention of evidence for the type and extent of the catstrophe.
i don't discount the siberian land bridge theory except to say that it wasn't the only option available at the time. with the discoveries in the Black Sea and in India, it is safe to assume that the modern day oceans were not at the same level as in pre-flood days and that travel throughout the world was much easier than it is now.On the one hand, these finds would seem to be another body blow to the Siberian land bridge entry theory
this is a detail that Hapgood does not record and i am not sure if Lund did either. Rehwinkel doesn't talk about the sizeof openings either that i recall.From the data given, we know nothing about the cave in question. Was it large? Did it have a large or small opening
to the first, i think a 'yes' answer would be safe. the second is a possibility but doesn't change the outcome or the cause of their deaths. no mention of such were made, attention was focused on the state, condition, and the position of the bones. Hapgood is just reporting the find and is not going into the detail that Lund should have done in his work. i willhave to look up Lund and see if i can find any more details.Might people take refuge in it during a storm? We don't know if it was a dwelling or a shelter. Was there any associated pottery or tools? Given the early date of Lund's excavation one has to wonder about the state of field craft at the time
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:21 pm
The one that mentions the bones being in a clay matrix was near a lake so flooding is possible. The one "high in the Andes" doesn't mention any evidence of anything which would point to a flood. If this is your best evidence for "the" flood you ain't got much to go on. This is really old stuff too...I mean the reports and, as has been mentioned before, conjecture and speculation was rampant in the early days of archaeology and palaeontology. Also their methods for recording finds weren't very thorough. This is an interesting discussion, but as for proof of the flood I don't see this as a serious contender for same.
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:45 pm
you would have to look at what was found with the skull highin the andes---'bones of mastodons, camels and horses' along with that skull -- to see how it would apply to the flood thenadd that evidence tothe fissures discoveries reported in "The Flood" by Dr. Rehwinkel.one "high in the Andes" doesn't mention any evidence of anything which would point to a flood
granted but the modern world makes many mistakes as well and the same allowances need to be made for the early research.Also their methods for recording finds weren't very thorough
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:49 pm
well the punin skull is the same race as the Yamanaokay but how about considering a pre-flood emmigration as a possibility? we do not know what the members of the civilization prior to the flood look like thus we could have evidence of those people. (remember, i am just presenting my side here for discussion)
and the yamana are the same race as the australian aborignes who have been in australia for 40,000 years
so what date was this global deluge iyo ?
oh and we do know what the members of the civilisation looked like all over the world before and after the flood
they looked like us
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:48 pm
most likely that is the case, though i have a theory that the so-called neanderthal society could also be part of that pre-flood civilization and the artist just off a bit with their reconstruction. but that is another debate for another time.they looked like us
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:31 pm
not if you know anything about genetics it wasn't
the reason for the Neanderthals demise was nothing to do with H20
the reason for the Neanderthals demise was nothing to do with H20
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:00 pm
'bones of mastodons, camels and horses' along with that skull
Mastodons, camels and horses are not tyranosaurs, stegosaurs and pteradactyls.
Why are you surprised that animals living in the Holocene are found in a Holocene level?
In order to prove a global catastrophic flood ( in a Young Earth environment, yet) you need a site which has dinosaur bones, with Cro-Magnon bones, occuring all over the world at the same time.
Do you have such a site?
Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:10 am
i think i have. Taken from 'The Flood' pg. 234 (i will return to hapgood later)Do you have such a site?
"Dr. Allen, professor of geology at the University of Alberta, in speaking of the fossil beds along the Red Deer river, once made this observation in his classroom lecture: These reptiles, whose fossils remains are found in such great abundance along the Red Deer seem to be driven together by a common danger and to have perished in the same great catastrophe...
Charles H. sternberg, a pioneer fossil hunter in Kansas, Texas,Wyoming and other western states, wrote aninteresting account of his experiences as fossil hunter. Inthe closing chapter of his book entitled 'Life of a Fossil Hunter' (pp.269-70), Mr. Sternberg says: 'How rich are the strata thatcompose the earth's crust only a fossil hunter can fully realize. Take, for instance, western Kansas, where the soil beneath our feet is one vast cemetery. Iknow of a ravine in Logan County whichcuts through four great formations. The lower levels, of reddish and blue chalk, are filled with the remains, of swimming lizards, with the wonderful Pterandons, themost perfect flying machines ever known, withthe toothed bird Hesperornis, the roayl birdof the west and the fishbird Ichthyornis...with fishes smalland great...and huge sea tortoises."
then on pg. 235;
"Still higher are the mortar beds of the Loup Fork Tertiary, where the dominant type changes from reptiles to mammals. Here in western kansas, are found great numbers of the short limbed rhinoceros, the large land turtle...several inferior tusked mastodons, the saber tooth tiger, the three toed horse and a deer only 18 inches high.
thenon pag 236:
"The point to be observed here is thatthe authorities quoted seem to agree that water was the agent for both the destruction and the burialk of the animals."
Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:48 am
I forgot to read Hapgood last night .......
But the questions I would ask of any cave find are:-
Were the bones layered (ie some species found a lower levels than others, which might indicate changes to how the cave was used over time) ? Were thet articulated (even flood debris we'd expect them more likely to be broken up and widely scattered, with few whole or partial skeletons)? Are there any signs of teeth or tool parks on the bones? Are there coprolites or dung piles (indicating prolonged habitation)?
The surrounding geography would also need to be known, as others have indicated. The cave may have once had a river flowing through it, for example, as is the case in some limestone areas - if so over millebnia many bodies could accumulate. Or, if it's more of a sink hole, animals may have fallen in from above and again accumulated over a long period of time.
That would be my scientific approach, with these questions needing top be asked before any conclusion can be drawn.
But the questions I would ask of any cave find are:-
Were the bones layered (ie some species found a lower levels than others, which might indicate changes to how the cave was used over time) ? Were thet articulated (even flood debris we'd expect them more likely to be broken up and widely scattered, with few whole or partial skeletons)? Are there any signs of teeth or tool parks on the bones? Are there coprolites or dung piles (indicating prolonged habitation)?
The surrounding geography would also need to be known, as others have indicated. The cave may have once had a river flowing through it, for example, as is the case in some limestone areas - if so over millebnia many bodies could accumulate. Or, if it's more of a sink hole, animals may have fallen in from above and again accumulated over a long period of time.
That would be my scientific approach, with these questions needing top be asked before any conclusion can be drawn.
Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:53 am
This structured layering of animal types seem incongrous to a single flood theory for their deposition - surely it'd be expect that all the species would be equally mixed together?archaeologist wrote:i think i have. Taken from 'The Flood' pg. 234 (i will return to hapgood later)Do you have such a site?
" The lower levels, of reddish and blue chalk, are filled with the remains, of swimming lizards, with the wonderful Pterandons, themost perfect flying machines ever known, withthe toothed bird Hesperornis, the roayl birdof the west and the fishbird Ichthyornis...with fishes smalland great...and huge sea tortoises."
then on pg. 235;
"Still higher are the mortar beds of the Loup Fork Tertiary, where the dominant type changes from reptiles to mammals. Here in western kansas, are found great numbers of the short limbed rhinoceros, the large land turtle...several inferior tusked mastodons, the saber tooth tiger, the three toed horse and a deer only 18 inches high.
How does the Flood hypothesis explain marine and air reptiles in one layer, with land mammals in a completely distinctive seperate layer, and other sediments between?