Jump to content
IGNORED

400,000 year old fossil cranium found in Portugal


MorningGlory

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  17
  • Topic Count:  344
  • Topics Per Day:  0.13
  • Content Count:  7,393
  • Content Per Day:  2.70
  • Reputation:   5,321
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/27/2016
  • Status:  Offline

12 minutes ago, No124get1952 said:

Since Carbon-14 dating has been discredited for being inaccurate for years, it is very difficult to accept any relic as coming from any farther back than what Genesis says as the beginning of history. What the Nephilim and such looked like is really NOT central to the story of the Gospel, so although interesting to consider, I generally ignore those questions as non-essential to my faith.

 

Personally speaking and not to argue, the Bible tells a story of the beginning to the end and what's in between. Every word, jot and tittle is there for a purpose and reason. I believe what the Nephilim were like is central to the story of satan vs. God. As satan tried to contaminate the bloodline of Christ with the introduction of non humans, and kill every Hebrew on the planet, as just a couple of examples. Certainly it is not a Salvation issue, but it is part of the history and story of the coming Messiah and the obstacles and stumbling blocks satan put in the path of God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  159
  • Content Per Day:  0.06
  • Reputation:   184
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/31/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  08/17/1952

In doing a bit more research on Carbon 14 dating, it IS accurate, IF...if you have a "wood" sample of known age as a reference. THEN you have to calibrate your dating process. Since we do not have a lot of "wooden" artifacts of known age available as references, Carbon-14 dating only goes back a maximum of 7000 years....or in other words, about the same time frame as the Biblical record...that is very interesting.

Dating of rocks and geologic formations is a bit more accurate, but still, every radiometric means of dating, including magnetic resonance, is based upon assumptions and reasoned logic that have yet, to be confirmed through actual experimental data. So the dating of fossils, geologic formations, rocks and all other things are still based upon assumptions of what the original values of certain elements or isotopes WERE in the distant past. Unfortunately for them, even a one decimal point inaccuracy can cause a timeline in geologic history to move from billions of years of history down to a few thousand years.....so, the Bible still shows up as highly reputable in the scientific arena.

All of the other theories are just that...very intricately defined theories with complex models and assumptions hung on them to dress them up as science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  713
  • Content Per Day:  0.27
  • Reputation:   351
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/10/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Carbon 14 isn't the only method of dating. Nor is it today easily dismissed as a method. It would be very odd to argue the earth is not more than 10,000 years of age given all the samples and artifacts we have of strata and cultures spanning tens of thousands of years. Also, what would it say if true concerning the fossilized remains of early humans fossils with regard to the story of the garden of Eden?  

Climate records from a Japanese lake are providing a more accurate timeline for dating objects as far back as 50,000 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  17
  • Topic Count:  69
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  1,453
  • Content Per Day:  0.54
  • Reputation:   1,453
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  11/02/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/23/1991

14 hours ago, worthy said:

How do you know if back in the Bible days a day was 24 hours?

Well, I am not sure if every time "day" is mentioned in the Bible it means "Earth days", especially when said by God.

 

But we know that:

"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years"  - Genesis 1:14

 

According to this, while people certainly did not count time as precisely as we do today I believe a day in that time was considered to be the time Sun's light was hitting the Earth at that location; then night came, all dark; then when Sun appeared again: That was the start of a new day.

 

Days could then be counted like that, as it is also mentioned multiple times in the Bible about "days and nights".

1 day and 1 night can be considered "24 hours" today, of course in some locations days can be longer than night (especially at the poles) then some discrepancies are inevitable. But people wasn't living in the poles in Bible locations, then I believe the length of a day/night was not so far to ours today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  28
  • Topic Count:  338
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  15,676
  • Content Per Day:  2.46
  • Reputation:   8,496
  • Days Won:  39
  • Joined:  10/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/27/1985

4 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

I'm by no means an expert on the subject, but it makes me wonder about some of these skulls they find and try to make a family tree out of. If they're not extinct animals which is probable, could what they are finding be men of old, men of renown. In other words hybrids like the Nephilim? It's my understanding these offspring of the fallen angels mating with women (Gen 6:) varied in appearance, statue and size before and after the antediluvian period. 

As far as dating methods, everyone should know carbon 14 dating is a pipe dream and has been scientifically shown how water and the environment make it very unreliable. A little study on how things layer in the earth from a deluge discredits the earth layer fossil record also. 

If only science would approach "science" from a Biblical perspective, think of how much more our knowledge and advancement would be? 

While I'm thinking about it, how often do you hear about any testing and reporting of a DNA analysis? Skull, bone and teeth are often good candidates for extracting viable DNA from extended periods of time. No doubt when they can't reconcile the results to fit their evolution theory, the results are inconclusive or bad samples.  

 

you will find every single "missing link" that has been found, has been discredited as either being fully human or fully ape, or even something else. Take Nebraska man for instance-they created Nebraska man and his entire family, off of a single tooth. Now, if that isnt obvious enough to you as bad science, several years later they found the rest of the skeleton-it wasnt human or ape, it was a species of extinct PIG. And then, to add icing to the cake, the pig was later found not to be extinct, but alive and well living in the congo. Evolution is not science-its make believe. And its sad so many people buy into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  28
  • Topic Count:  338
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  15,676
  • Content Per Day:  2.46
  • Reputation:   8,496
  • Days Won:  39
  • Joined:  10/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/27/1985

3 hours ago, 4LdKHVCzRDj2 said:

Well, I am not sure if every time "day" is mentioned in the Bible it means "Earth days", especially when said by God.

 

But we know that:

"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years"  - Genesis 1:14

 

According to this, while people certainly did not count time as precisely as we do today I believe a day in that time was considered to be the time Sun's light was hitting the Earth at that location; then night came, all dark; then when Sun appeared again: That was the start of a new day.

 

Days could then be counted like that, as it is also mentioned multiple times in the Bible about "days and nights".

1 day and 1 night can be considered "24 hours" today, of course in some locations days can be longer than night (especially at the poles) then some discrepancies are inevitable. But people wasn't living in the poles in Bible locations, then I believe the length of a day/night was not so far to ours today.

it was doubtful anyone lived on the poles in Bible times for the same reasons no one lives there today-and certainly, not the Hebrew writers. the "day and night" (or evening and morning) as found in genesis 1:14 very much indicated a literal, 24 hour day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  8
  • Content Per Day:  0.00
  • Reputation:   10
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  03/02/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/04/1972

There's a few too many zeros on the age I reckon

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  713
  • Content Per Day:  0.27
  • Reputation:   351
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/10/2017
  • Status:  Offline

That was Darwin's dilemma. The Cambrian explosion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  28
  • Topic Count:  338
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  15,676
  • Content Per Day:  2.46
  • Reputation:   8,496
  • Days Won:  39
  • Joined:  10/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/27/1985

2 hours ago, Jewels7 said:

That was Darwin's dilemma. The Cambrian explosion. 

one of them. The other, was trying to explain macro evolution, without ever finding any actual evidence of it.....and the "cambrian explosian" is yet, another example of bad science, yet another extremely weak hypothesis, based more on assumptions and bias then actual science. 

https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution/evolution-timeline/cambrian-explosion-was-the-culmination-of-cascading-causes-evolutionists-claim/

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  21
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,573
  • Content Per Day:  0.52
  • Reputation:   723
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/10/2015
  • Status:  Offline

On ‎14‎/‎03‎/‎2017 at 0:45 AM, MorningGlory said:


The title of this article is a little misleading.  It states a fossil HUMAN cranium in the headline but, if you read the article, you find that it was a NEANDERTHAL cranium that was found.  Neanderthals were not of our species so they were not, therefore, human.  It's interesting to read though because I, personally, didn't know that Neanderthals made and used tools.

http://mashable.com/2017/03/13/human-fossil-evolution-portugal/#fLRfjSDzvEqt

Apes and even a few lower animals use tools.

Neanderthals were human beings. The problem is that secular scientists have taken bits and pieces of human beings deformed by bone diseases and turned that into a whole secular ideology of prehuman anthropoids when there were no such things.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...