You are free to that view. And if that is what your decision is soley based upon, then Mesopotamia is for you, regardless of the lack of geologic layers showing any kind of massive flooding out side the river basins and the swampy area near the sea.
I think I said,was, Even if he is right and he might be". That doesn’t mean there was water all over Iraq. The reason I can’t say he is totally wrong is the same reason he mentions in his article that the sand dunes hide much of that geology. Bastawesy is interpolating from a bunch of different spots, and joining lakes together that might or might not really have been joined. He said:
“Regionally, the extensive fields of sand dunes have masked most of wadis and lacustrine deposits, and thus, the palaeohydrological relationship between widely spaced areas has not been previously investigated.” page 6
He might be right, maybe there are lacustrine sediments under those dunes, but maybe he is wrong… Using what you can’t see as evidence for a theory is not good, but one equally can’t say the theory is wrong if one can’t see the area which holds crucial evidence. I hope you understand this. The dunes are a limitation on both of us from knowing what is there.
But I can say the flood would be quite small if all he has is 78 cubic miles of water spread over the area IP wishes it spread over.
Well, I call my self a historicist. I know there are translation errors, different witnesses saw things differently etc. I think there are two things we have yielded to the atheist movement which arose in the 19th century. We agree with the atheists that Genesis 1 is untrue, that Genesis 2 is untrue, that Genesis 6-8 is untrue, that miracles in the Bible didn’t happen (floating axhead, etc) yet we want to believe that this utterly false book leads us to salvation. I find that inconsistent. If God is real, I would expect him to have a small amount of power in this universe if he is to resurrect me at the last trump(which probably most here don’t believe either).
If a history book says Augustus Caesar lived in 400 AD in England, we would say the history book is wrong. We wouldn’t try to figure out what the author really meant by this and change things so as to try to make the book look a bit better. I think we should view the Bible as a history book and not change what it says, but just say it is false if we can’t find the answer for what it says.
Not necessarily. IF Noah built a fire 5.3 my years ago on the Mountains of Ararat, would any evidence of it still exist? No, it would have eroded away. Thus to say I am wrong is based upon you saying that something that can’t be observed couldn’t have happened. Like with Bastawesy above, I can’t say he is wrong because we don’t have the data. Same with this.
Secondly, maybe he didn’t have to ‘make’ his own fire. Maybe you should think about the fires of Chimaera, Turkey, and consider that even without the technology, gas seeps like this are found over the world. The Flaming Rocks of Chimaera, Turkey | Amusing Planet
Here is a picture of them–they are, on he Mountains of Ararat and have been burning for thousands of years.
Kovexius, one doesn’t find solutions if they just say no solution exists and they sit down and don’t think of alternative ways of solving a problem.
edited to add. Should you think these seeps are rare they are not. Any one of these green triangles could catch fire with lightening if the rate of seep is high enough for a while. Rates of seep will vary over time.
I’m not saying that you need to show me the wood of the ark. What I am saying is that it was impossible for the hominids that lived 5.3mya to construct an ark. Or make a tent. Or any of the other things I mentioned.
IP’s videos on Genesis show that we can, in fact, accept Genesis as true without claiming it is a metaphor. And it all interconnects just so well.
Secondly, maybe he didn’t have to ‘make’ his own fire. Maybe you should think about the fires of Chimaera, Turkey, and consider that even without the technology, gas seeps like this are found over the world. The Flaming Rocks of Chimaera, Turkey | Amusing Planet
Noah lit his sacrificed animals on fire with a gas seep? The amount of speculation that you’re injecting into sustaining this stuff is just gigantic.
Let’s go back to that point about the 2.2 feet. I got some word back from IP and it seems as though you misread the paper. The quote on pg. 4 isn’t actually referring to the whole mega-lake, it’s referring to one area of Tuwaiq. Bastawesy writes “The DEM for sub-catchment shown in Fig. 5 was used to estimate the flooding extent and depths required to overflow the barriers of Tuwaiq. The extent of lakebeds, canyons and higher funnel cuts in Tuwaiq were traced from the satellite image. The quantitative estimation has assumed that all the sub-catchment boundaries are as high as the surrounding escarpments of Tuwaiq; thus, the hydrological interconnection with the surrounding was neglected. The maximum depth of water column is approximately 117 m above the lakebeds, and the lake has submerged nearly 6,500 km2 and contained up to 326 billion m3 of water (Fig. 6).”
I have had 50 years to think about thiese issues and I generally have a ready answer. I will give you a preview. The smallest brained Homo Sapiens we know of had a brain the size at the lower end of Homo Habilis who lived over 2 myr ago. Yet he lived a perfectly normal late 19th and early 20th century life. Here is where his brainsize was compared to other hominids. I think it is a total bias that believes brainsize = intelligence among the hominids.
But since you probably won’t go read what I wrote I will put one account here. I tracked down the scientific paper on this guy and well, he had a small brain.
Proof That Size of Organ Does Not Measure Intellect . What is believed to be the smallest _train ever found in a normal human being was revealed as a result of an autopsy performed at the New York city morgue upon the body of Daniel Lyons , a watchman , employed in the Pennsylvania tunnel excavation , Lyons became ill suddenly while at ¦ work , and , having had no medical attendance , his death came technically under the investigation of the coroner , Dr . Philip O’Hanlon , who , with Prof . John E . Larkin , of the College of Physicians and Surgeons , made the autopsy , found that the brain of Lyons weighed only 24 ounces , although the normal weight of the human cerebrum is from 48 to 50 ounces .
Lyons was 40 years of age , five feet five inches in height and weighed . 140 pounds . Those who had known him for many years testified that he was of average intelligence . The cause ol the man s death was inflammation of the kidneys . The man s brain seemed in every way normal except as to size*
"It is one of the most remarkable brains I have ever seen , said Dr , O’Hanlon , who has made thousands of autopsies , and it shows that the size of the brain does not necessarily : measure the intellect of man . Lyon was , from all that I can learn , intelligent and capable . The quality of the brain , and not the size of it , counts . One of the smallest brains known to anatomists was that of Gambetta , at one time president of France , and a brilliant and forceful thinker . Comparative tables of the weights of human brains bear out the idea of Dr . O’Hanlon that there Is little connection between the weight of the brain and the power of the intellect
Then he never presents a case for how much water he says flooded the area, and that is a major failing for his view. If one doesn’t know how much water is impounded, how can one say there was a big flood?
The water was impounded in the hypothetical lake of figure 5 (shown below) holds less water than Bastawesy claims existed. The 78 cubic miles is from his write up and I used it, which I thought was quite fair. . And besides, I have shown, there is NO four-way topographic low with which to hold the water.and flood up to Mt. Judi… Have IP draw the 4 way topographic low on the Arabian elevation maps.
I can understand why you might not like my view. OK. What I can’t understand is why you defend obvious distortions of the laws of physics here with water going up to 1500 ft to the feet of Mt. Judi. It is one thing to say that my views are unbeleivable. It is another then to say you are holding to a second unbelivable view. IN such a case, one should search for a third view that one likes and which matches the data.
I calculated that this basin is about 140 km long and 30 km wide. Using a box, instead of a planimeter over estimates the water in this little basin. But using it, and filling it up to the yellow, we have about 54 cubic miles of water–again overestimated. 54 cubic miles of water won’t cover the area that film claims. Sheeh.
I must remind people that some of this erosion seen in that break occurred in the Pleistocene, Bastawesy says so, but that won’t matter to what we believe.
I thought I would add this to my reply to Korvexius, who is so absolutely sure that small brained people can’t have a technology. Anthropology says that is not true. H. Floresiensis was found on the Island of Flores a few years ago. Below is a picture of their stone tools–which they attacked to sticks to make spears and went out hunting. They have the smallest brains of any hominid–yet had a stone tool culture.
Just to show you how small their brains were they were at the lower end of the Australopithecus brain size. Thus, it is not correct to say that small brained people can’t do great things.
I don’t think there is much of a theistic evolutionary position because most Theistic evolutionists think the whole story is just myth, so their position seems to be, it didn’t exist and no reason to look for it. I may be the only TE who actually believes in Eden as a real place,with real events.
I am enjoying this conversation. But how do we know what the winters were like 1.6 million years ago? I think you probably have an idea. Teach me! Thanks
Hmmm i dont know.Maybe i should make a thread about it.Whoukd you be unterested in a conversation like this assuming you havevalid points and evidence?
It’s not just that brains were smaller, although that’s one big part of it. No, it’s that everything was a lot different. Pointing to the New World incursion isn’t going to get you around this because those guys just made up that they had smaller brains. And it wouldn’t matter either if you found someone with a really dysfunctional and tiny brain. The problem is that whatever was 5.3mya was not a human. Some of them might have been able to stand upright, but there was no regular bipedalism like we see now. These guys still had features that were adapted to living in trees. They were, I can’t remember, half our size (like Lucy or something). I really want to ask you which species you think Noah was.
Lyons was 40 years of age
This example (which I’m familiar with) wont work. The fact is that it was his human brain, not the size of his brain, that allowed for this. Lyons, with the tiny portion of his human brain, was smarter than any non-human hominid to have ever lived. This doubles up the point. You seem to mistake the point. The argument is not just that we have a brain 2000cm^3 and they have one 1000cm^3 (although that’s very important), it’s also that we have 2000cm^3 of a human brain and they have 1000cm^3 of … like … a Homo erectus brain or something.
Then he never presents a case for how much water he says flooded the area, and that is a major failing for his view. If one doesn’t know how much water is impounded, how can one say there was a big flood?
Well, if, as if figure shows, there was a deluge over such a vast area, then does it really matter if the specific volume is not known? It surely would have had to be above 2.2 feet, which is all the water that came from a single area in Tuwaiq. I’ll get to looking at the paper again soon enough, but the biggest problem with this view seems to be that you can’t exactly quantify the numbers rather than anything else.
I have looked into this before, not I gotta find it. Let’s start with an important issue. It isn’t the average temperature that will kill a naked person, and H. erectus was a naked of hair as we are. The thing that will kill an unclothed, without fire person is the extreme weather events. 8 hours of 18-19 deg F during a night, will probably do a person in. Why do I say that? Well, lock a person in a big freezer today, even fully clothed, they will probably die in that time frame. So let’s look at Dmanisi, Georgia’s temperatures this year. Febr 2020 had 19 days where the low was below freezing Most were in the 20s, but 2 days in a row were 18-19 deg F.
So now, let’s go back 1.77 myr ago when erectus lived in Dimanisi, which has an elevation of 4000 ft or so, about equivalent to eastern Colorado, Below is a glacial chart and you will see that it is at a time of more glaciation, but…
The average temperature of that glaication was about 3.7 deg C warmer than the Pleistocene glaciations. So, if Feb in an interglacial time today can get as cold as 19 deg F or -7.78 deg C (see chart below), let’s use this interglaicial winter temperture and add make it 3.7 deg C warmer.
Fahrenheit
Celsius
18
-7.78
19
-7.22
20
-6.67
21
-6.11
22
-5.56
23
-5
24
-4.44
25
-3.89
26
-3.33
27
-2.78
28
-2.22
29
-1.67
Doing that means the H. erectus will have to suffer through nights of 29 deg F, or -1.67 deg C. Do you think you can survive a night like that naked and without fire? My guess is no.
There is a strange study by the UK medical system where they tested people in houses with low temperatures, 17 deg c or so. The men war only light cotten pants and the women light cotton blouse and skirt. At 17 deg C they were taken right to the verge of hypothermia which is defined as core temperature at 35 deg C. I think this test was cruel, but they did it and got the data. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1604514/pdf/brmedj00448-0025.pdf
Now, I don’t think H erectus would have survived at -1.67 deg C naked at 4000 ft elevation, without fire and good clothing. And remember, it isn’t the average temperature that does the killing. It is the one bad cold front that is out of normal. If that happens once every 20 years, well, the population can’t make it much longer than that.
Korvexius, you have yet to reply, that I have seen, to my question about why would God give a curse of pain in Childbirth to a woman whose mother experienced pain in childbirth giving her life??? I have asked 3 or 4 times an you have apparently ignored it 3 or 4 times. If you have answered, i missed it.
If the specific volume is not known, then how do you know it was big enough??? Just armwaiving doesn’t make for a theory.
Ok, I will post again the tools made by a small brained hominid, brain the size of the smallest ardepithecines, 300-380 cc who were alive 5.3 my years ago, with a brain in the range of H. floresiensis.
Well, we both know that nothing I offer on any topic will work for you–nothing at all. Your mind is made up that a flood whose volume is indeterminate which made a big lake in an area that had no topographic low, whose waters pushed the ark up 1500 feet to the foot of Mt. Judi, all of which you beleive makes the flood story true. Have at it my friend.
I am putting huge amounts of time in giving you data, not for you, but for any YEC who might have finally realized that evolution is true but who still need a way to have a historical Bible–in other words, for people like me who see no reason to believe a story if it doesn’t match reality, nor believe the Bible if it is just a work of a tribe of Semites.
Oh yeah, here is a modified picture of where Ardeithecus brain size is compared to the tool making H. Floresiensis.
What you say can’t happen is is exactly what anthropologists are waking up to, that small brained hominds might have more capabilities than you allow them to have. I have data here. Where is your data that says this can’t happen. I know you have an opinion, but that isn’t data.
I keep reading and forget to respond to this. My best explanation is that this is an etiological myth, although I’ll look into it some more.
If the specific volume is not known, then how do you know it was big enough??? Just armwaiving doesn’t make for a theory.
At the very least I can say that there was a great deluge in the area where Eden was and that, as IP’s video shows, everything fits so utterly perfectly. Not everything has been proven, or perhaps I just haven’t seen the right part of the paper, but we’re closer than we’ve ever been to such a position for Genesis. The advances in the last two decades have been incredible.
Ok, I will post again the tools made by a small brained hominid
Even some monkeys have been observed using stone tools.
Let’s not assume that this demonstrates much. Here’s a story where a monkey sharpens a rock and uses it to break open out of its glass enclosure.
Well, we both know that nothing I offer on any topic will work for you–nothing at all. Your mind is made up that a flood whose volume is indeterminate which made a big lake in an area that had no topographic low, whose waters pushed the ark up 1500 feet to the foot of Mt. Judi, all of which you beleive makes the flood story true. Have at it my friend.
Yes, my theory has one shortcoming - I don’t know the estimate of the water mass in the deluge. But this isn’t any evidence against it. The evidence against the 5.3myr theory is highly substantial. But I want to ask you a question you yourself didn’t answer that I asked before: what species do you think Noah was? You keep posting these images of the brain sizes of these hominids, all of them vastly inferior to us intellectually. You and I both know that humans have experienced a dramatic expansion in brain size over the last several tens of thousands of years, and that this is associated with rise of symbolic thinking along with a host of other things. The closest thing I’ve seen to what we do is a finding from last 2018 showing Neanderthals painted or something:
I understand, when one can’t explain something, call it a myth. It is the easy way out of the problem.
Yep it sure does, a 2.2 foot deep flood.
You keep debating on areas you have not studied. I can really tell that here. Do you know what the difference between chimpanzee stone tools and human stone tools is? I know you don’t know because you wouldn’t even raise this issue if you really knew stone tools. I will tell you. Sigh.
Chimpanzee tool maker Kanzi the Bonobo > “The first day we started by showing him that stone tools are pretty useful things: a stone flake could be used to cut a cord and open a box containing a treat (of Kanzi’s choice–a bunch of grapes, a piece of watermelon, a cold juice drink, and so forth). By the end of the first day, Kanzi was using flakes that we had made and cutting readily into box after box, developing a true appreciation for stone tools. At the end of the second day he had become an excellent judge of stone knives: given a choice of five different pieces of stone to cut into his box, he could choose the sharpest one nine times out of ten. He was also making casual attempts to hit rocks together to make a tool on his own.” ~ Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones Speak, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p. 136
*> * > “Although Kanzi is still continuing to improve his tool-making abilities, his present level of expertise is significantly below that seen in the Oldowan hominids. His core forms are strikingly similar to the natural eoliths produced by geological forces, which confused prehistorians around the turn of the century. He still doesn’t show the understanding of flaking angles that Oldowan hominids had: Kanzi bashes and cruches the edges of cores with his hammer stone rather than using highly controlled and forceful blows that we can see in the early Stone Age artifacts. Recently throwing has become his favorite technique.” ~ Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones Speak, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p. 139
*> * > “Moreover, Kanzi’s progress so far as a tool maker suggests to us that early Oldowan hominids may exhibit a much greater cognitive understanding of the principles and mechanics of tool making than modern apes seem to be able to develop. This indicates something important about our hard-wiring, the size and complexity of our brain and its connections to the motor control system, at this stage in our evolution. We feel that these hominids probably had surpassed modern apes and probably their australopithecine ancestors in their ability to modify stones.” ~ Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones Speak, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p. 139
*> * > “Chimpanzees in the wild rarely carry tools form more than one hundred yards or so, and they usually fashion a tool just prior to using it.” ~ Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones Speak, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p. 140
“Chimpanzees and apes are thus at the edge of causal understanding as shown by their use of simple tools, such as trimming a grass reed to dig out ants. But in no case of stone tool use is there evidence of modifying the structure of the stone to improve its function. They lack the causal beliefs to transform physical objects into useful tools.” Lewis Wolpert, Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast, (New York: W. W. Norton & co., 2006), p. 59
In other words, they don’t modify the stone in an intentional way.
Do you want to know what tells an anthropologist that a given stone tool is actually a human manuport?
Below he is talking about the core which is shown here
"In addition, a telltale feature signals a geological origin: the angle of the fracture. To flake stone efficiently, humans need a sharp angle on the edge of the core (usually much less than a right angle, or ninety degrees). If the angle is less acute than this, it’s difficult or impossible to initiate and control the fracture. So when prehistoric humans made stone tools, even in the early Stone Age, they were intentionally searching, however intuitively, for acute edge angles on cores where flakes could be readily detached. This angle can easilty be observed and measured on the flakes that have been struck from a core; it tends to be around seventy to eighty degrees in human-made tools, whereas in stone that flakes conchoidally in geological circumstances, the angle averages close to a right angle, or ninety degrees.
“In addition, human-made tools tend to exhibit the repeated removal of flakes in a variety of different directions, showing that the hominid turned the core this way and that, searching for those opportune acute edges. tHis can be seen on stone cores by examining their flake scars (and, to a lesser extent, on the flakes themselves). This patter, present at even the earliest sites in the archaeological record, is normally not found in nonhuman contexts. Where stones have been fractured by geological forces, cores tend to have only a few bold flake scars, often struck from the same direction.” ~ Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones Speak, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p.96
Once you have a flake, the cutting edge is extremely acute angle and it has a sharp edge. but even it can be sharpened by using pressure flaking. This technique uses a bone or antler to chip away at the sharp edge, the cutting edge and you can see the flaking scars all along the arrow heads cutting surface from such a process
Korvexius, look, I hate doing this to you day after day, starting with your claim that fire wasn’t developed before a million years ago. Please stop throwing out poorly researched ideas. I spent 50 years looking at all aspects of this problem. All I have to do is know that acute angles are human artifacts and I can find the info instantly in my database. I have tried to chase down every question anyone ever asked me as well as chasing down questions I could think of . Because of this I spent a couple of years studying stone tool making, in part because of claims that chimps used stone tools. They do, they just don’t modify them, other than if they are shown smashing a stone on the floor will produce flacks the will mimic that. But smashing stones on the floor is not how humans made stone tools.
Maybe we can call a truce and you go believe your 2.2 foot deep flood and I will believe what I think works and we will both be happy. OK?
In other words, they don’t modify the stone in an intentional way.
Notwithstanding the story I cited where a monkey sharpened a rock to break out of its enclosure, hominids are obviously intellectually superior to monkeys. But notwithstanding that, I find it amazing how you dismiss the earthquake of a gap between humans and prior hominids (especially hominids from 5.3mya) because, forget about the quantum difference, they can modify stones in intentional ways. Remember, hominids back then still had retained their adaptations for living in trees (like A. afarensis).
Korvexius, look, I hate doing this to you day after day, starting with your claim that fire wasn’t developed before a million years ago.
The problem you seem to have in your arguments is that you provide minor corrections to my points (it was 1.5mya, not 1mya) but your point, overall, remains wrong. Fire 1 or 1.5mya, there were no burnt offerings 5.3mya, and the gas seeps is just an extraordinarily different level of speculation to get away from that point. You seem to be happy if an exchange happens between us where you slice off ten minor mistakes I make but still lose hold of the overall point.
I spent 50 years looking at all aspects of this problem.
And you still can’t tell me what species Noah was. Sure, you can have your truce.
No, I don’t ignore it. Surely you will agree that an 8 person species is quite a rare species. When a species is rare, the chances of it leaving any evidence of itself in the fossil record is exceedingly small. INdeed, only 3 percent of today’s living fossilizable species are actually found as fossils. Further I know that the fossil record is resplendant with large gaps of time between two specimens of the same group–these gaps can be millions and tens of millions of years where the animal obviously lived on earth but left no record of itself.
People who don’t know paleontology don’t understand how statistical it is. Everyone acts as if the fossil record is a perfect record of what is on this planet. IT is a terrible record keeper.
" Logic dictates, too, that the oldest known fossils cannot possibly be the oldest representatives of their kind. Fossilization is a rare event, after all; and when animals first appear, they are rare. The earliest fossil bones are therefore likely to date from a time when their erstwhile owners were already common. Logic similarly dictates that if an animal is particularly unlikely to form fossils–as primates seem to be–then paleontologists are particularly unlikely to find the very earliest types. In fact, this logic can be translated into a mathematical formula (see Robert D. Martin, ““Primate Origins: Plugging the Gaps,”” Nature, May 20, 1993, pp 223-234). The fewer fossils there are (relative to the calculated number of extinct species), the older the group is liable to be, relative to the number of fossils found. " Colin Tudge, The Time Before History, (New York: Scribner, 1996), p. 172
So, how rare is the fossilization of a species ? To answer that, we must ask look at how many species alive today are found as fossils. Consider what Foote et al,
" The number of living species that have been described is about 1.5 million…If we focus on the paleontologically important groups, present-day diversity is about 180,000 species. …Suppose we assume that the present-day level of diversity was attained immediately at the beginning of the Cambrian Period and has been maintained since then. Then 25 percent of 180,000 species, or 45,000 species became extinct and were replaced by new species every million years. In rough terms, the Phanerozoic is 550 million years log. this leads to an estimate that there have been 180,000+(45,000 X 550) or about 25 million species. Comparing this with the 300,000 described fossil species implies that between 1 percent and 2 percent of species are known as fossils. " Michael Foote et al, Principles of Paleontology, (New York, W. H. Freeman and Co., 2007), p 23
So,98-99% of species were never fosilized. Given that our species started out Biblcally after the flood with 8 beings, there would be some period of time before they became common enough to be caught in some catastrophe and fossillized. Only when they are wide spread do we even have a chance of finding them. So, all I am saying is that it took about 2 myr before mankind became widespread enough to be found as fossils with regularity.
Now this is going to make you say I am making up evidence. Maybe, but it is in accord with the nature of the fossil record. Until January of this year, the earliest evidence of Mahogony trees was around 55 myr ago plus or minus. But in January we learned that Mahogony trees lived 72-79 myr ago in the Cretaceous. But this means that Mahogony trees lived on earth for 15 million years and didn’t leave a trace of themselves. Amazing! That is longer without a trace than I am asking for for fossil man.
Below, as you look at the former oldest specimen of these various groups and the new oldest, notice how long the gaps are where the creatures lived on earth for millions of years without us yet finding a single trace of them. Because this is the nature of the fossil record, for all I know, Adam was an H. erectus who left no traces of himself for 3 million years. The data below says we can’t rule that out.
But you think absences of evidence is evidence of absence. That is not true. What it means is that I can’t say it was an H. erectus so I simply went with who I know was there, the small brained folk. It would not surprise me someday for an anthropoligits to find an extremely old member of our genus, but if we started at 8 people 5.3 myr ago, that isn’t going to be likely.
This has the oldest specimen, the previous oldest specimen and the gap in millions of years.between them where the group left no evidence of itself. All I am asking for is 2.5 millyion years. which is not out of bounds for the fossil record.
.
first
2nd
Gap
animal
occurrence
occurrence
time
ref.
.
Myr
Myr
Myr
Tetrapods
365
355
10
16
Marine turtles
110
100
10
46
Forest fire charcoal
360
350
10
20
Dinosaurs
240
228
12
24
Grasses
55
37
18
45
Thrips
239
210
20
35
Moths
230
210
20
35
Diptera (butterflies)
250
230
20
35
Coleoptera
250
230
20
35
Tyrannosaurus
1125
195
20
36
Lorises
40
20
20
21
tribosphenic mammals
167
143
25
53
Australian songbirds
55
30
25
28
Tarsiers
55
25
30
25
Sponges
580
549
31
44
Myriapods
410
375
35
49
Thelodont fish
455
430
35
32
Pollen eaters
150
110
40
43
Ants
92
52
40
19
Ticks
90
40
50
18
Chordate
530
480
50
55
Vascular plants
470
420
50
33
Birds on Madagascar
65
10
55
37
Spiders
295
240
55
34
Mycorrhizal fungi
460
400
60
17
therizinosaur
200
140
60
50
African turtles
205
145
60
26
Gilled mushrooms
94
30
54
30
Crawfish
280
215
65
48
mammalian flight
125
51
74
59
spider silk
120
40
60
22
Land-Plant interactions
412
322
90
29
Caecilians
180
80
100
57
Snails
300
140
160
40
Tardigrades
510
310
200
15
Let’s not change history. In post 30 you said:
As I said to your disbelief in one post, there is unlikely to be evidence of a fire on the surface of the mountains of ararat because it would erode away quickly. Thus we can’t prove fire was there. When you didnt like that answer and insisted that you know what small brain people are incapable of, I suggested an alternative, the known gas seeps that are strewn around Turkey. Of course you don’t like that either. And when I showed you the stone tools made by H. Floresiensis which had a brain size of around 350 cc, smaller than australopithecus’s brain, and equivalent to Ardipethicus’s brain, you threw out that baboons use stones. Of course the baboons and chimps do not use stones the way that humans do. Here again are the stone tools made by a 350 cc cranial capacity hominid which you seem to say is irrelevant to the capabilities of earlier hominids.
These are hunting tools Nobody writes this about chimp tools:
“Pleistocene deposits in Sector VII contain relatively few stone artefacts; only 32 were found in the same level as the hominin skeleton. In Sector IV, however, dense concentrations of stone artefacts occur in the same level as H. floresiensis=up to 5,500 artefacts per cubic metre. Simple flakes predominate, struck bifacially from small radial cores and mainly on volcanics and chert, but there is also a more formal component found only with evidence of Stegodon, including points, perforators, blades and microblades that were probably hafted as barbs (Fig. 5). In all excavated Sectors, this “big game” stone artefact technology continues from the oldest cultural deposits, dated from about 95 to 74 kyr, until the disappearance of Stegodon about 12 kyr, immediately below the “white” tuffaceous silts derived from volcanic eruptions that coincide with the extinction of this species. The juxtaposition of these distinctive stone tools with Stegodon remains suggests that hominins at the site in the Late Pleistocene were selectively hunting juvenile Stegodon.” M. J. Morwood, et al, “Archaeology and age of a new hominin from Flores in eastern Indonesia,” Nature,431(2004):1089
Your comparison to monkey stones is so weak and so well, desperate as to really be kind of sad. Data is data. One should accept it and then interpret it. One shouldn’t have his own private set of facts.
I wrote:
Yep it sure does, a 2.2 foot deep flood.
Korvexius replied:
There are only 3 areas, and let me be generous then and triple the amount of water in this great flood. It would be 6.6 feet deep. Wow. what a flood. Again, it doesn’t match the Biblical description and if you just take what you cant explain and ignore it or call it myth, then as I said in my original reply to you, you can make anything match anything–and this is exactly the procedure YECs follow.
Good luck Korvexius with that 6.6 ft deep flood and with a deceptive film that exaggerates what would have happened.
So all that discussion on the lack of surviving fossils leads to this:
Because this is the nature of the fossil record, for all I know, Adam was an H. erectus who left no traces of himself for 3 million years. The data below says we can’t rule that out.
But plenty of hominid fossils from 5-2mya have been found, and none of them are H. erectus. If H. erectus was around 5.3mya, what on Earth did it evolve from? It would have been far more advanced than any comparable hominid from that time. Did God create H. erectus? This is a monstrous form of speculation and is, of course, fine for you, but I can’t give a specific number for the flood volume and that is deeply problematic.
Let me ask this simple question: why do you think H. erectus was around 5.3mya? As it happens, I can also answer this question. Because you need it to make your theory work. There’s no other reason.
As I said to your disbelief in one post, there is unlikely to be evidence of a fire on the surface of the mountains of ararat because it would erode away quickly. Thus we can’t prove fire was there. When you didnt like that answer
Didn’t like that answer? I’m not sure I even remember reading that answer. As far as I’m concerned, I remembered being told that fire began 1mya. That turned out to be wrong, it was 1.5mya, but that correction itself changed nothing. So you suggested gas seeps. I simply pointed out that this is an almost brutal level of speculation. Where does Genesis say Noah found a gas seep to burn his sacrifice? Are those just lying around or something? Is there any documented instance of people using gas seeps instead of making fires? And yes, H. floresiensis could make stone tools but is, of course, vastly intellectually inferior to humans. 350cm^3 of an H. floresiensis brain isn’t equal to 350cm^3 of a human brain.
Your comparison to monkey stones is so weak and so well, desperate as to really be kind of sad.
Err, not really. I simply didn’t notice the distinction between what I showed and the use of them as hunting materials. There’s a difference between being desperate and just having to have not read some of those papers. But we find ourselves back in a scenario where you make a correction to one of my points but the overall point hasn’t been changed at all (per my previous paragraph). Humans are still a quantum leap beyond any other hominid we know of in terms of intelligence.
Good luck Korvexius with that 6.6 ft deep flood and with a deceptive film that exaggerates what would have happened.
I’m pretty sure we already settled that you misread the paper (i.e. that the picture in Bastawesy’s paper was an image of the deluge, not where the water would have ended up due to geological elevations) rather than IP deceived anyone.
The extent of the deluge shown in a diagram of Bastawesy’s paper on pg. 2584 implies there was vastly more water than is needed to go up 6.6 feet. After all, if the deluge could fill up those areas shown on fig. 7, it would also have been quite substantial in the area in the lower elevation. So, while I can’t put a number on the volume, it’s clear it was a flood, in the same way that if I saw a flood running through my city, I would be able to tell you it’s a flood without knowing the volume of water that happens to be flooding my city.
By the way, your 6.6 feet figure doesn’t work, for I’ve neither verified that there were “three areas” (we’ve already seen IP demonstrate the numerous ways you misread the paper) nor that all the areas that existed had roughly the same amount of water.
The Harris Papyrus actually DOES offer some help on this! It seems there is an obscure section that treats a lawless time in Egypt - - just BEFORE the Sea People arrive. It is during the general time of Rameses III!
It seems that a Canaanite chief, who had been managing the Canaanite taxing for Egypt suddenly recruited a large force of Canaanite retainers/warriors to enter Egypt proper - - and they systematically started looting Egyptian temples!
There is some mention of nomadic semites being pressed into slave labor prior to that … and they were recruited by the Canaanite warlord to join in with the looting!
At last an adequate Egyptian military response was assembled and pursued the Semite armed force; the Semites abandoned most of their loot and fled into Canaan, or perhaps Midian.
I personally think they took refuge in a walled city … or at Petra!
