Native Americans Found to Have Lived 23,000 Years Ago on a 6000 Year Old Earth
"How long have humans been living in the Tularosa Basin? The latest research from White Sands confirms for the first time that humans have been living in North America for at least 23,000 years - many thousands of years older than previously thought. This research also confirms that people were living with the ice age megafauna much longer than previously known.
The new dates of the human presence were discovered by digging a trench in the gypsum soil on the park's western playa. Human footprints were found at different depths below the surface. Above and below these nearly discovered human footprints were ancient grass seeds (Ruppia cirrhosa). These seeds were analyzed using radiocarbon dating, and calibrated dates of 22,860 (∓320) and 21,130 (∓250) years ago were revealed."
https://www.nps.gov/whsa/learn/news/092321nr.htm
35 comments:
Armstrongists, who acknowledges an Earth billions of years old, may appreciate this discovery of pre-Adamic hominids displaying the kinds of instinctual intelligence found in some of the higher primates as well as animals such as porpoises and elephants. This information is only faith-destroying to Young-Earth Creationists who need to deny what's in front of them.
Anonymous said...
Armstrongists, who acknowledges an Earth billions of years old, may appreciate this discovery of pre-Adamic hominids displaying the kinds of instinctual intelligence found in some of the higher primates as well as animals such as porpoises and elephants.
================================================
"Overview Homo sapiens, the first modern humans, evolved from their early hominid predecessors between 200,000 and 300,000 years ago. They developed a capacity for language about 50,000 years ago. The first modern humans began moving outside of Africa starting about 70,000-100,000 years ago."
"Pre-Adamic Hominids" is a useless term implying that before the mythical Adam and Eve, humans were not quit like Adam and Eve. This is false. The tale of Adam and Eve is not one of "first humans" or "first real humans" The realities of Golbeki Tepe, the existence of Jericho and the fact that the completely human Natufian culture, 15,000 to 11,500 years old in the Levant show this conclusively. And of course, modern humans, like us, go back a long way before that as noted above.
"displaying the kinds of instinctual intelligence found in some of the higher primates as well as animals such as porpoises and elephants..." is an absolutely ridiculous way to define "pre-adamic hominids"
Your faith restrictions are showing. Is that you NEO? :)
It's the Last Great Day holy day, so Dennis had to respond with a anti bible article. Noah's flood leached out your seeds and similar, giving rise to these highly inaccurate radiocarbon dates.
For 23,000 years (or is it 3 million?) humans and viruses have coexisted, but now we are all going to die if we don't wear a face burka and get our genes altered by fake RNA "therapy." Smells fishy to me.
The vast majority of WCG splinter ministers and members are Young Earth Creationists. The 6000 year plan of God is what informs them on everything from their Sabbath rest to their breathless belief that it won't be long now and the 6000 year plan is almost up. Bob Thiel, of course has the compulsive need to be inform everyone that the numbers are off while Dave Pack assures us all that the math is correct. (BTW Dave Pack says today is Jesus obvious last chance to come as Dave has determined with his correct math wrong now quite a few times over the past couple of years.
It is this group to which the posting is obviously directed, who are most of the remnants of the WCG and their gurus and not endeavoring to ignite the whole Pre-Adamic man apologetic to give credence to both the First Parents story of Genesis and the science of genuinely human origins
I always knew the Indians were not the first peoples in America.
Anonymous (6:28) wrote, "Armstrongists, who acknowledge an Earth billions of years old, may appreciate this discovery of pre-Adamic hominids"
It is important to make a distinction between what science says about these people who left their tracks at White Sands and the Hoehist idea of Pre-Adamites. Herman Hoeh believed that those men who lived prior to the creation of Adam were a separate creation. Adam was a separate, later creation. Adam was not connected to Neanderthal, Homo Erectus and other early hominids.
Science does not recognize this Hoehist discontinuity. They know that genetic structures found in the Malta boy near the shores of Lake Baikal in Siberia are found in all modern Native Americans. The Malta boy lived 24,000 years ago. They know that Native Americans are a blend of Ancient North Eurasians and Ancient East Asians and came out of Beringia. Ancient Native Americans when analyzed genetically are found to be about 30% European. These people are not a separate creation as Hoeh had conjectured.
Barring the discovery of a skeleton and the extraction of DNA, we do not know who the White Sands people were with certainty. But the larger, scientifically established archaeological context of the New World argues that they are Native American. They may have existed before Adam chronologically but they are genetically contiguous with modern, present-day humanity. Which says, wait for it, all of humanity is not descended from Adam. Adam, if he is not allegorical, gave rise to a collection of tribes who lived in the Middle East including the Jews. The Bible is about the Jews.
There is a known effect that might make these radiocarbon dates appear to be older than they really are. But that effect may not be present at White Sands and it would make a difference of no more than a few hundred years anyway. The tracks are for sure older than 20,000 BP.
Since I belong to a Plains Indian tribe, I find this all intriguing. No doubt I have a genetic connection with these people. It is likely that they did not give rise to North American Indian tribes but, rather, long ago migrated on into South America. The ancestors of the present North American tribes arrived later. Since Native Americans are quite homogenous genetically, this train of migratory events really makes no difference.
I doubt that Armstrongists will find anything here to appreciate.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Anonymous (8:12) wrote, "I always knew the Indians were not the first peoples in America."
How did you always know that?
******* Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Anonymous said...
For 23,000 years (or is it 3 million?) humans and viruses have coexisted, but now we are all going to die if we don't wear a face burka and get our genes altered by fake RNA "therapy." Smells fishy to me.
What's fishy is your lack of historical understanding of how many millions of indigenous people, Europeans and other assorted humans have been wiped off the face of the Earth by what you perceive as coexisting viruses. Your politics and ignore-ance of the facts is showing.
PS The historical realities of pandemic and plague is not hard to look up. For starters.https://www.livescience.com/worst-epidemics-and-pandemics-in-history.html
“For the layman, the most important thing about science is this:that it isn’t a search for truth but a search for error. The scientist lives in a world where truth is unattainable, but where it’s always possible to find errors in the long-settled or the obvious. You want to know whether some theory is really scientific? Try this simple test: If the thing is shot through with PERHAPSES and MAYBE’S and HEMMING and HAWING, it’s probably science; if it’s supposed to be the the final answer, it is NOT.
So-called ‘scientific’ books that are supposed to contain final answers are never scientific. Science is forever self correcting and changing; what is put forth as gospel truth cannot be science.”
Oh, it was the seeds beside the footprints they tested.
The true first-century COG members! Nothing like Boobie Thiel's group!
Anonymous 11:52 quoted "So-called ‘scientific’ books that are supposed to contain final answers are never scientific."
Whoever wrote this is sifting through the obvious. Scientists understand that their work is subject to revision as further experimentation takes place. Einstein said that no amount of experimentation would ever prove him right but a single experiment could prove him wrong.
The writer of this quote seems to want to implicitly arouse a distrust in science by making it sound like some kind of a con. Whereas, I have found it is some of the creationist ideas backed by religion that are touted as unquestionable because they are ostensibly backed by the Bible.
There is a sweet spot where science and the Bible are not in conflict. It is surprising how many people, both theist and atheist, don't want to find that spot.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Anonymous Anonymous said...
“For the layman, the most important thing about science is this :that it isn’t a search for truth but a search for error. The scientist lives in a world where truth is unattainable, but where it’s always possible to find errors in the long-settled or the obvious. You want to know whether some theory is really scientific? Try this simple test: If the thing is shot through with PERHAPSES and MAYBE’S and HEMMING and HAWING, it’s probably science; if it’s supposed to be the the final answer, it is NOT.
So-called ‘scientific’ books that are supposed to contain final answers are never scientific. Science is forever self correcting and changing; what is put forth as gospel truth cannot be science.”
======================================
I don't believe I have ever read as far fetched and inaccurate definition and description of science as this little rant . No genuine scientist would ever agree it is a search for error, final answers or defined by perhaps's and maybe's. I suppose you can say this because "God said it, I believe it, That does it for me" has to be your mantra and when science chips away at your faith restrictions, it is searching for error because you already know the truth of everything. Nice twist.
Good science will adjust to new information and not only has historically, but has to. Your pious convictions based in your marginal information is showing. What exactly do you believe in the world of human occupation and origins do you feel is "long settled or obvious"? Adam and Eve? Noah's Flood? A 6000 year old Earth? Genesis 1-11 as literal history?
That "So-called ‘scientific’ books" terminology gives away your Bible programming and "that are supposed to contain final answers are never scientific" is about as far off base in the goals of science as I think I have ever encountered. Insanely ignorant actually. Where do you get the idea that science is about "final answers"? Bounce that one of a professional and see the lecture you get or maybe just a puzzled look.
The Bible claims to be true because it says it is true. Now there's a real sound pathway to getting to the truth and reality of any matter.
Faith has been misplaced and misapplied by many folks. My faith in God and Jesus Christ is NOT contradicted by the fact that modern humans have existed for over 200,000 years on this planet. These facts do, however, destroy the Armstrongist 6,000 year narrative and the Literalist/Fundamentalist view of Scripture. Faith should be confined to God and our Savior, not invested in a book that humans have composed about them. The Bible contains many uplifting/inspiring things, but it was NEVER intended to be a Scientific or Historical tome!
As usual Dennis you assume too much to try and protect your accusations.
Bible Programming? See if that fits the real situation pointed out by these “bible programed?” individuals:
“As we shall see, the idea that the distinctive feature of scientific knowledge is that it is derived from the facts of experience can only be sanctioned in a carefully and highly qualified form, if it is to be sanctioned at all.” — A. F. Chalmers, Biologist, What is this thing called science?, 1976, 1982, 1999
“According to the most extreme view that has been read into Feyerabend’s later writings, science has no special features that render it intrinsically superior to other kinds of knowledge such as ancient myths or voodoo. A high regard for science is seen as a modern religion playing a similar role to that played by Christianity in Europe in earlier eras. It is suggested that the choices between scientific theories boils down to choices determined by the subjective and wishes of individuals.” ibid
As to Dennis’ derogatory comment about the author of the previous quote… it is a quote by Rudolph Flesch, Ph. D.
in his book, The Art of Clear Thinking. The chapter title is The More or Less Scientific Method.
Another great chapter is, How Not to Be Bamboozled.
Dennis
Do I believe the bible "to be true because it says it is true." Absolutely not. I know it to be true because God has on many times answered my prayer requests, and on occasion has spoken a bible verse into my mind. So that's how I know that it is God's inspired word and not some human poetry book as claimed by Miller Jones.
The legitimate point that you make is that Armstrongites do not follow God instruction to "prove all things," which is an ongoing life long endeavour. The result is building on sand rather than rock, a fear, if not scorn of science, and a vulnerability to the likes of Dave Pack-of-lies.
Wrong Dennis! My people were here 24,000 years ago, not 23,000. :-)
Anonymous 9/28 @ 9:16,
I too have experienced answered prayer, and it strengthens my faith in God and the power of Christ's offering on my behalf. I have also experienced the phenomenon of particular verses coming to mind that perfectly fit some circumstance or need. These things prove the presence and power of God in my life and yours, but they in no way support the claims of Fundamentalists and Literalists about Scripture!
I too believe that the Bible was inspired by God - that those writings were touched by the Divine, but that inspiration did not remove or negate the part played by the very human men and women who actually wrote those words. Just as the Holy Spirit does NOT make us incapable of error, it did NOT prevent the intrusion of human imperfection into those writings!
The Bible contains some beautiful poetry, but I did not say that it was a "human poetry book." And, while the Bible does contain some of the words of God, Jesus Christ is THE WORD OF GOD. The Bible is a book about the OBJECTS of our faith - it was never intended to be the focus of it! I believe that Scripture serves the purposes which the first epistle to Timothy informs us it serves - "teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness." Once again, there's nothing there to indicate that it's a reliable source of scientific or historical information.
Anonymous (9:16) wrote, "I know it to be true because God has on many times answered my prayer requests. . ."
It doesn't really do to argue the ministry of the Holy Spirit with an atheist. They simply invoke arguments of delusion no matter how unassailable the experience may be to you.
But the statement "to be true because it says it is true" does need to be unpacked. Some atheists, if they can find a jot or a tittle that is not explainable, they discount the entire Bible. It is in principle like the religious anti-evolutionists who savor the Piltdown Man episode. Somehow this single error permits them to deny all of science just like, for the atheist, even one unexplainable or discrepant point in scripture permits them to discard the entire Bible.
But Biblical literalists set themselves up to be easy targets for atheists. Literalism is patently untenable and atheists always go for this target of convenience. This makes it important to recognize the fact that the Bible is true in principle but bears the marks of human editing and curation in its detail. "God let his children tell the story." Studying the history of the development of the Bible is an antidote for ardent literalism. I'm not sure there is an antidote for atheism.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Neo
I know that the ministry of the Holy Spirit will not persuade Dennis, and he has already accused such posters of being delusional. But comments aren't exclusively directed to other posters. There are readers of this blog who never post. The alternative to not responding to Dennis and others is an echo chamber which can imprison people's minds with flawed beliefs.
With my post, it's up to the reader to reality test whether answered prayer proves or disproves the bible.
In the case of Dennis, his drive to discredit the bible and belief in God cannot be that of a genuine atheist.
Neo, you write: "I'm not sure there is an antidote for atheism."
Probably not. Are you implying that one is needed?
HWA taught that the earth was "remodeled" 6,000 years ago, after God's war with Lucifer. It's the young earth evangelicals who believe the universe was created 6,000 years ago. If we're gonna get the other side, let's get them clean. That counts. Getting them in a dirty manner, as in exaggeration, lying, using a strawman, etc does not.
Answered prayer comes from demons when they want to string people along. Many people were led into the cult of Armstrong through answered prayer.
All religions claim miracles and answered prayer.
Anonymous 9/29 @ 4:37,
Yes, HWA taught that the earth was remodeled 6,000 years ago, but part of that remodeling (according to him) included the creation of Adam and Eve. Hence, the above criticisms are completely consistent with his teachings on the subject of a human presence on this planet and are, therefore, fairly critiqued here. Dennis' comments (along with most of the rest of us) were focused on humans, not dinosaurs.
Miller
In 1987, under Tkach the teaching changed to that humans were prototyped before Adam. I believe HWA also taught a version of that albeit the prototypes were formed by Lucifer sent to rule earth and later cast to earth being of warped character.
Of course HWA was from the age of "construction" Henry Ford, as we are better in understanding software, agile, scrum, sprint, development processes. Testing, testing, testing, bring viable product to market.... UX, testing, adapt..... bring next version to market.....
Nck
The earth being remodeled:
That is the view the WCG acquired at some point. Maybe back in the Seventies. I remember reading an article published by the WCG that placed Neanderthal in time after Adam but before the Flood. The article seemed to be asserting that the early hominids were pre-Flood degenerate forms descended from Adam. This would mean that the WCG at that time likely believed in Young Earth Creationism with the Satanic rebellion taking place almost immediately after the creation and Genesis 1:1 opening on the aftermath. The first time I heard Hoeh declare the idea of pre-Adamic man was in the mid-Seventies. I was sitting in the Field House in Big Sandy just prior to Passover when he let that one fly. A few people were intensely interested. So something else was believed before that time.
I do recall someone (man, this is getting vague) talking about how the deep beds of sedimentary rock on the earth were caused not by the Noachian Flood but by the Satanic Rebellion of 6,000 BC. None of this comports with the findings of geology.
-----------------------
Retired Prof: In my view, atheism needs an antidote. No doubt, atheists do not see it that way.
-----------------------
As regards Dennis: If the loyal opposition were not here to stir up controversy, think how glum we would all be. In a sense, Dennis is a "Christian" in orientation. It is Christianity he is conversant with and it is the Christian God he does not believe in.
-----------------------
Wasn't Jesus supposed to return yesterday? I am worried the next step in the escalation might well be that He did return but in secret and only a few have contact with Him and the few are now functioning as His only bona fide spokespersons.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
5.31 PM
So? Therefore?
NCK wrote, "Testing, testing, testing, bring viable product to market."
This, unfortunately, was the view of Herman Hoeh. He did not believe in an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God as do Christians. (Interestingly, at least one anonymous person commented on this blog some months back that viewing God as "omni-" was a Hellenistic viewpoint. There is a suggestion here that this omni- characterization of God came out of Pauline theology as opposed to a more Judaic view. Paul is considered to be a Hellenized Jew.)
I read notes from a ministerial conference where Hoeh gave a presentation. He viewed God as if He were a human engineer - he had to work from progressive models. Hence, we find the fossilized remains of the early prototypes embedded in the earth's crustal layers. I spoke with Joe Tkach, Jr. about this and he said that God had to do no such experimentation.
This Hoehist concept reduces God to the status of a Gnostic demiurge. A demiurge, according to Wikipedia is:
"...an artisan-like figure responsible for fashioning and maintaining the physical universe. The Gnostics adopted the term demiurge. Although a fashioner, the demiurge is not necessarily the same as the creator figure in the monotheistic sense, because the demiurge itself and the material from which the demiurge fashions the universe are both considered consequences of something else."
This demiurgic view of god also comports with the Armstrongist idea that God did not create time but is subject to time. He did not create space but lives in space. Armstrongism departs from the purely Gnostic model by positing that God created matter and energy. This view of God, nevertheless, is a denial of the Christian understanding of Creatio Ex Nihilo.
And rooted in this is the idea that God is not transcendant and necessary but immanent and contingent.
Do Armstrongists actually worship the God? That call is above my pay grade. I don't know how God feels about it. Maybe God will cut them some slack. They may be acceptable after a light purgation, thanks to the grace of God - the grace that they now diminish.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Excellent Neotherm
I like the Armtrongist God better.
The Artisan creative God.
The who for certain does not know many things. For instance my next decision. He might be 99 percent right in guessi g. But he doesn't know, nor can he influence it.
I like the God who is bound by rules that go for all. Science might not have discovered much of those rules, for instance how twins get produced but bound anyway.
We don't know IF we are matter. At the heart we might be something else, regarding, that relatively, there is, as much space between some of our atoms as there is between the furthest planets and earth. Yet we are percieved as "one piece of work."
Nck
"Some atheists, if they can find a jot or a tittle that is not explainable, they discount the entire Bible."
I discount the Bible for the same reason I discount the Koran or any other work that claims the supernatural exists- it's fantasy.
neo therm at 7:25
Where in the world, or elsewhere, do you get this warped and untrue, version of what Hoeh taught, and what became the WCG??????? Yes, he did make some changes after the internal takeover of the wcg, which he had no control over.
You are claiming things I never heard taught or preached! You seem to misread and misinterpret every thing taught prior to the mid 1960’s.
And, who cares what Tkach, Jr. or Sr.
So, you read A paper? So what? You don’t seem to have the slightest idea of the real teachings and beliefs of the ones you criticize. Give us some real proof of your claims.
I spent 7+ years around Hoeh, and others you misdescribe. 4 years with him being my student counselor, his classes, in his home, writing short articles at his request for the PT and Good News. I never heard him describe any subject mentioned by you as you described. What gives?
I think Hoeh described you decades ahead of time by quoting a historian he had read, “historians have this bad habit of making great creative leaps in their writings.”
Common neo, just give us provable facts without your “creative leaps.”
Also, the teaching of the pre-adamic world, and reforming of “tohu va bohu” was being taught in the 50’s and before, NOT something he or the church picked up in the 70’s. And, before that Schofield, Bullinger, and many other “standard” christians were teaching it, and many others still today. Just check the internet. So, why no cry from you about them?
Anonymous (11:53)
You again. For a moment I took you seriously.
Bye.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
If you are leaving a splinter, and don't know what to do with your tithes, send them to your local Native American tribe as reparations for the genocide Christians inflicted upon them. They'll accomplish much more good there than supporting false prophets could ever hope to.
Post a Comment