Prisca Sapientia, Science in Cryptomnesia, Dissident and Heretical Natural Philosophy, Abiotic Hydrocarbon Origin, Infinite Oil, The Cold Mantle, Expansion Tectonics, Pacific Biogeography, Euclidean Geometry, Electric Universe, Electromagnetic Gravity, Colliding Worlds, The Birth of Venus, The Reversal of Retrograde Rotation, Catastrophism, Global Pyramids, Atlantis In Antarctica, Extreme Human Antiquity, Ancient Technology, Giants and Dragons, Alien Astronauts, & Intelligent Design
"Now this has the form of a myth, but really signifies a declination of the bodies moving in the heavens around the earth, and a great conflagration of things upon the earth, which recurs after long intervals..." -- Sonchis of Sais, priest, 6th century B.C.
You must think Plato was the dumbest man who ever lived. But that award goes either to Charles Lyell or to Isaac Newton.
Why would Plato spend so much money and effort on myths?
"He [Philolaus] wrote one book, which Hermippus reports, on the authority of some unknown writer, that Plato the philosopher purchased when he was in Sicily (having come thither to the court of Dionysius), of the relations of Philolaus, for forty Alexandrian minae of silver; and that from this book he copied his Timaeus." -- Diogenes Laertius, historian, 3rd century
"And some people, (of whom Satyrus is one,) say that he [Plato] sent a commission to Sicily to Dion, to buy him three books of Pythagoras from Philolaus for a hundred minae; for they say that he was in very easy circumstances, having received from Dionysius more than eighty talents [$1.6 million in 2004], as Onetor also asserts in his treatise which is entitled, Whether a Wise Man Ought to Acquire Gains." -- Diogenes Laertius, historian, 3rd century
All I'm saying is that you place so much faith on these ancient sources. It's that simple. Some of it might be accurate as these were bright guys as we have discussed.
There's got to be tons of exaggerations, sensationalism and outright falsehoods in those ancient texts. However, you said 90% of all ancient religious texts were accurate. If you want to beleive all that without question, that's awesome.
It's okay, as it's your delusion and not liable to cause anyone else harm. So no big deal.
Just please don't you go startin' no religions around it...
"You right on believing that stuff, kid, I'm not going to stop you."
Why don't you believe in history?
"Physical scientists were outraged in 1950 when Immanuel Velikovsky published historical evidence from around the world suggesting that the order and even the number of planets in the solar system had changed within the memory of man. Ideas in nearly every field of scholarship were challenged, but most seriously challenged of all were certain dogmas in the field of astronomy which had only in recent centuries succeeded in convincing mankind that Spaceship Earth was a haven of safety. The emotional outburst from the community of astronomers that so blackened the name Velikovsky and so successfully - if only temporarily - discredited Worlds in Collision has been laid to many causes, from the psychological and the political to simple resentment against invasion of the field by an outsider. Whatever the nature of such intensifying factors, however, I believe it is only fair to acknowledge an underlying and totally sincere scientific disbelief in the historical record." -- Ralph E. Juergens, engineer, 1972
You want another sequence? Transitional creatures are scattered through the fossil record like those little candy sprinkles on ice cream.
And not a mermaid in the lot! They didn't have Bruckheimer, Bay and Spielberg. They had painters and story tellers and authors who wove wonderful tales (tails?) of fantastic critters that I'd personally love to thank, as without them, we wouldn't have D&D.
You're probably going to say roosters are myths too?
Nope. I've seen a rooster. However, when a Naga walks up to me in the mall asking directions back to Epislon Eridani, I'll be the first to post here that you were right.
It's not a belief in history I lack, it's faith in history.
Unlike the rooster, you have never seen any of those animals because they are all extinct. What evidence do you have that one of those animals evolved from the other?
Unlike the rooster, you have never seen any of those animals because they are all extinct. What evidence do you have that one of those animals evolved from the other?
"You want another sequence?"
Yes please. Let's talk about a mythological Greek creature that you have seen with your own eyes -- the rooster. What animal did the rooster evolve from? Do you think that the velociraptor (another animal you haven't seen) magically grew wings and flew off into the sunset?
I think chickens are a member of a clade that had its roots with animals like Yixianosaurus, not Dromeasaurus. If you knew a thing about evolution, you'd know the lineages properly.
We have evidence of these animals existance in the form of bones and feather imprints.
Nagas and centaurs known only from old texts, pottery and paintings constitute (for many of us) fiction. Humans, we know from experience, embellish truth with exaggeration, and write fictional accounts that cannot be trusted.
Except by you and the folks you quoted. I think its safe to say that you buy into stuff I do not, and vice versa.
Its curious, though... how do you think the various species we see across the fossil record came to be?
The skull is abnormal in several respects. A dentist determined, based on examination of the upper right maxilla found with the skull, that it was a child's skull, 4.5 to 5 years in age. However, the volume of the interior of the starchild skull is 1,600 cubic centimeters, which is 200 cm³ larger than the average adult's brain, and 400 cm³ larger than an adult of the same approximate size. The orbits are oval and shallow, with the optic nerve canal situated at the bottom of the orbit instead of at the back. There are no frontal sinuses. The back of the skull is flattened, but not by artificial means. The skull consists of calcium hydroxyapatite, the normal material of mammalian bone.
Dating Carbon 14 dating was performed twice, the first on the normal human skull at the University of California at Riverside in 1999, and on the Starchild skull in 2004 at Beta Analytic in Miami, the largest radiocarbon dating laboratory in the world. Both independent tests gave a result of 900 years ± 40 years since death.
DNA testing DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD, a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes". BOLD was unable to extract any DNA from the maxilla. Further DNA testing at Trace Genetics, which unlike BOLD specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, in 2003 recovered mitochondrial DNA from both skulls. The child belongs to haplogroup C, while the adult female belongs to haplogroup A. Both haplotypes are characteristic Native American haplogroups, but the different haplogroup for each skull indicates that the adult female was not the child's mother. Useful lengths of nuclear DNA or Y-chromosomal DNA for further testing have not yet been recovered.
Explanations Explanations for the skull's unusual features include the use of cradle boarding on a hydrocephalic child, brachycephaly, Crouzon syndrome, congenital hydrocephalus, and progeria.
The wide-eyed fascination with which you view the world is refreshing. Your eagerness, I think, leads you to accept spurious arguments and flimsy evidence. A little digging destroys the notion that the skull is of extraterrestrial origin. As much as I want to believe in visitation, this is not proof.
Nazca? Now there's evidence. But I'm gonna go look for explanations for that, too.
Are you suggesting again that the legends of centaurs and hybrid, chimerical critters are memories of encounters with Aliens?
ReplyDeleteSpecifically, Centaurs from 4.2 ly away?
And moreover, that's why we call the constellation Centaurus?
It never occurs to you that ancient texts might be subject to the same sort of sensationalism we see in today's tabloids.
Hell, Timeaus might be the Greek version of The National Enquirer.
I mean... other than the way they dressed, and the language they spoke, they were just like us of today.
"Suspirium puellarum Celadus thraex. (C.I.L. IV, 4397; in the barracks of the gladiators)
Jeffery,
ReplyDelete"Are you suggesting again that the legends of centaurs and hybrid, chimerical critters are memories of encounters with Aliens?"
Yes. I thought I've made that clear already.
"Specifically, Centaurs from 4.2 ly away?
And moreover, that's why we call the constellation Centaurus?"
Specifically, Centaurs from 4.2 ly away?"
Exactly.
"It never occurs to you that ancient texts might be subject to the same sort of sensationalism we see in today's tabloids."
It occured to me only because I was spoon fed that lie since the time I could crawl.
"Hell, Timeaus might be the Greek version of The National Enquirer."
Anyone who believes that belongs on Jerry Springer.
"Now this has the form of a myth, but really signifies a declination of the bodies moving in the heavens around the earth, and a great conflagration of things upon the earth, which recurs after long intervals..." -- Sonchis of Sais, priest, 6th century B.C.
ReplyDeleteJeffery,
ReplyDeleteYou must think Plato was the dumbest man who ever lived. But that award goes either to Charles Lyell or to Isaac Newton.
Why would Plato spend so much money and effort on myths?
"He [Philolaus] wrote one book, which Hermippus reports, on the authority of some unknown writer, that Plato the philosopher purchased when he was in Sicily (having come thither to the court of Dionysius), of the relations of Philolaus, for forty Alexandrian minae of silver; and that from this book he copied his Timaeus." -- Diogenes Laertius, historian, 3rd century
"And some people, (of whom Satyrus is one,) say that he [Plato] sent a commission to Sicily to Dion, to buy him three books of Pythagoras from Philolaus for a hundred minae; for they say that he was in very easy circumstances, having received from Dionysius more than eighty talents [$1.6 million in 2004], as Onetor also asserts in his treatise which is entitled, Whether a Wise Man Ought to Acquire Gains." -- Diogenes Laertius, historian, 3rd century
All I'm saying is that you place so much faith on these ancient sources. It's that simple. Some of it might be accurate as these were bright guys as we have discussed.
ReplyDeleteThere's got to be tons of exaggerations, sensationalism and outright falsehoods in those ancient texts. However, you said 90% of all ancient religious texts were accurate. If you want to beleive all that without question, that's awesome.
It's okay, as it's your delusion and not liable to cause anyone else harm. So no big deal.
Just please don't you go startin' no religions around it...
Jeffery,
ReplyDelete"All I'm saying is that you place so much faith on these ancient sources. It's that simple."
I believe in history and you don't.
"Some of it might be accurate as these were bright guys as we have discussed."
That is what I believe.
"There's got to be tons of exaggerations, sensationalism and outright falsehoods in those ancient texts."
Newton, Lyell, Darwin, and Einstein aren't ancient.
Darwin
ReplyDeleteOther than lacking a correct mechanism for inheritance, where was he wrong?
Evolution is a fact. You are in denial (up to your neck in it, in fact).
I believe in history and you don't.
ReplyDeleteWhen legend becomes fact, print the legend.
Eventually, some over eager science nerd will believe you and it will get turned into history.
You right on believing that stuff, kid, I'm not going to stop you.
Jeffery,
ReplyDeleteWhat specific example do you have of one animal evolving from another?
That's right. You don't have one.
Jeffery,
ReplyDelete"You right on believing that stuff, kid, I'm not going to stop you."
Why don't you believe in history?
"Physical scientists were outraged in 1950 when Immanuel Velikovsky published historical evidence from around the world suggesting that the order and even the number of planets in the solar system had changed within the memory of man. Ideas in nearly every field of scholarship were challenged, but most seriously challenged of all were certain dogmas in the field of astronomy which had only in recent centuries succeeded in convincing mankind that Spaceship Earth was a haven of safety. The emotional outburst from the community of astronomers that so blackened the name Velikovsky and so successfully - if only temporarily - discredited Worlds in Collision has been laid to many causes, from the psychological and the political to simple resentment against invasion of the field by an outsider. Whatever the nature of such intensifying factors, however, I believe it is only fair to acknowledge an underlying and totally sincere scientific disbelief in the historical record." -- Ralph E. Juergens, engineer, 1972
The first historical King of Athens, namely Cecrops I, after whom the Acropolis in Athens is named was a merman.
ReplyDeleteThat's history. Now either you believe in history or you don't.
According to the Dogon tribe in Mali, Cecrops I and other Nommo were from the star Sirius.
Denying these historical facts is equivalent to denying the Holocaust.
Deny this Jeffery.
ReplyDelete"They came from outerspace -- and posed for portraits." -- Erich Von Däniken, author, December 3rd 2002
Another portrait of Kekrops.
ReplyDelete"They came from outerspace -- and posed for portraits." -- Erich Von Däniken, author, December 3rd 2002
You're probably going to say roosters are myths too?
ReplyDeleteFish to Tetrapod transitional fossils:
ReplyDeleteOsteolepis, Eusthenopteron, Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Elginerpeton, Obruchevichthys, Acanthostega, Ichthyostega, Hynerpeton, Tulerpeton, Pederpes, Eryops
Whale Transitional Sequence:
Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, Kutchicetus, Artiocetus, Dorudon, Aetiocetus, Basilosaurus, Eurhinodelphis, Mammalodon
You want another sequence? Transitional creatures are scattered through the fossil record like those little candy sprinkles on ice cream.
And not a mermaid in the lot! They didn't have Bruckheimer, Bay and Spielberg. They had painters and story tellers and authors who wove wonderful tales (tails?) of fantastic critters that I'd personally love to thank, as without them, we wouldn't have D&D.
You're probably going to say roosters are myths too?
ReplyDeleteNope. I've seen a rooster. However, when a Naga walks up to me in the mall asking directions back to Epislon Eridani, I'll be the first to post here that you were right.
It's not a belief in history I lack, it's faith in history.
I have none. Sorry.
Jeffery,
ReplyDelete"Osteolepis, Eusthenopteron, Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Elginerpeton, Obruchevichthys, Acanthostega, Ichthyostega, Hynerpeton, Tulerpeton, Pederpes, Eryops"
Unlike the rooster, you have never seen any of those animals because they are all extinct. What evidence do you have that one of those animals evolved from the other?
"Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, Kutchicetus, Artiocetus, Dorudon, Aetiocetus, Basilosaurus, Eurhinodelphis, Mammalodon"
Unlike the rooster, you have never seen any of those animals because they are all extinct. What evidence do you have that one of those animals evolved from the other?
"You want another sequence?"
Yes please. Let's talk about a mythological Greek creature that you have seen with your own eyes -- the rooster. What animal did the rooster evolve from? Do you think that the velociraptor (another animal you haven't seen) magically grew wings and flew off into the sunset?
Jeffery,
ReplyDeleteHow does this alien skull fit into your evolutionary progression from protozoa to ape man?
I think chickens are a member of a clade that had its roots with animals like Yixianosaurus, not Dromeasaurus. If you knew a thing about evolution, you'd know the lineages properly.
ReplyDeleteWe have evidence of these animals existance in the form of bones and feather imprints.
Nagas and centaurs known only from old texts, pottery and paintings constitute (for many of us) fiction. Humans, we know from experience, embellish truth with exaggeration, and write fictional accounts that cannot be trusted.
Except by you and the folks you quoted. I think its safe to say that you buy into stuff I do not, and vice versa.
Its curious, though... how do you think the various species we see across the fossil record came to be?
"Its nuclear DNA was not able to be recovered"
ReplyDeleteConvenient. He should probably let someone else try.
If, after a second lab confirms this result, I'll buy into it. However, no further results will come from this "alien skull" you can bank on it.
Jeffery,
ReplyDelete"Convenient. He should probably let someone else try.
If, after a second lab confirms this result, I'll buy into it. However, no further results will come from this 'alien skull' you can bank on it."
You should really pay attention to what I present. It was tested 7 times by 7 different labs. 7 is not 1.
Oh. Then I'm wrong. Perhaps there's something to it.
ReplyDeleteBut, oddly, neither are you:
ReplyDeleteThe skull is abnormal in several respects. A dentist determined, based on examination of the upper right maxilla found with the skull, that it was a child's skull, 4.5 to 5 years in age. However, the volume of the interior of the starchild skull is 1,600 cubic centimeters, which is 200 cm³ larger than the average adult's brain, and 400 cm³ larger than an adult of the same approximate size. The orbits are oval and shallow, with the optic nerve canal situated at the bottom of the orbit instead of at the back. There are no frontal sinuses. The back of the skull is flattened, but not by artificial means. The skull consists of calcium hydroxyapatite, the normal material of mammalian bone.
Dating
Carbon 14 dating was performed twice, the first on the normal human skull at the University of California at Riverside in 1999, and on the Starchild skull in 2004 at Beta Analytic in Miami, the largest radiocarbon dating laboratory in the world. Both independent tests gave a result of 900 years ± 40 years since death.
DNA testing
DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD, a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes". BOLD was unable to extract any DNA from the maxilla. Further DNA testing at Trace Genetics, which unlike BOLD specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, in 2003 recovered mitochondrial DNA from both skulls. The child belongs to haplogroup C, while the adult female belongs to haplogroup A. Both haplotypes are characteristic Native American haplogroups, but the different haplogroup for each skull indicates that the adult female was not the child's mother. Useful lengths of nuclear DNA or Y-chromosomal DNA for further testing have not yet been recovered.
Explanations
Explanations for the skull's unusual features include the use of cradle boarding on a hydrocephalic child, brachycephaly, Crouzon syndrome, congenital hydrocephalus, and progeria.
The wide-eyed fascination with which you view the world is refreshing. Your eagerness, I think, leads you to accept spurious arguments and flimsy evidence. A little digging destroys the notion that the skull is of extraterrestrial origin. As much as I want to believe in visitation, this is not proof.
Nazca? Now there's evidence. But I'm gonna go look for explanations for that, too.
Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
ReplyDelete