Feel free to reprint and to edit collections of my essays! (link to conditions)
"La vérité et l'érudition, en effet, ne sauraient être hérétiques, au point de redouter d'utiliser ce que des érudits, même hérétiques, ont écrit et exposé avec justesse". (Dom Guarin)
Pages
- Accueil
- Blogs by same author
- Un blog a été donné à vos étudiants.
- Where You Looking For Something Else?
- Apologetics Section
- Can we get this straight? I never said I was atheist up to becoming Catholic
- Weakness of CMI : Church History
- A Catholic who will go unnamed
- Reading this on iPad?
- Dixit Aquinas
- Are All Responses to CMI Here?
- What is a Miracle? What Does it Take?
- Link to Haydock Comment
- My Carreer Shouldn't Depend on Merriam Webster Spelling
lundi 17 juillet 2017
Is Graham Hancock Right on Göbekli Tepe? Part 2
Is Graham Hancock Right on Göbekli Tepe? · Is Graham Hancock Right on Göbekli Tepe? Part 2 · Is Graham Hancock Right on Göbekli Tepe? Part 3 · Is Graham Hancock Right on Göbekli Tepe? Part 4 · Excursus on Previous
From same video as previous:
"At exactly the moment when Göbekli Tepe is created, we get the sudden spread of agriculture in the same region, a region which had not known agriculture before, where people were hunters and gatherers : suddenly they know how to do agriculture."
With conventional carbon dates reaching back to 40 000 BP for arrival of Homo Sapiens (often considered as distinct from Neanderthal in species) North of Mediterranean, and other methods adding millions, also without agriculture, we get the kind of mystery Graham Hancock reacts to.
Hunting and gathering could have been a very good livelyhood with no incentive at all to invent sth better.
Or man could have been incapable of inventing it in his own, having lived most of its time without it. Giving us conclusions like what I think Hancock's are, from title of video : Atlanteans or extraterrestrials arrived.
Or man was simply after some centuries of experimentation recovering agriculture after the Flood. But this is only possible if carbon content was rising so steeply in atmosphere, that a few centuries look like tens of thousands of years in carbon dates.
Maybe even before this, since the scarce centuries could involve the chance of wheat growing but not getting preserved to us before Babel / Göbekli Tepe project.
I read of a wheat ear found dated 20 000 BP in Holy Land. That would be a century or two or three earlier in Biblical chronology, which is the true one. CMI mentioned starch found on clubs of cave men - meaning they did have wheat.* And someone who believes evolution thinks millet comes from a Chinese wild grass cultivated way earlier.**
So, Hancock is wrong on start of agriculture and how long man was without it before that. So is every evolutionist.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Alexius of Rome
17.VII.2017
PS "they must have been a specially inspired group of hunter gatherers" ... GH resuming archaeologists of similar evolutionist persuasions. Obviously, if the real beginning was before the Flood, and the tens of thousands of years were just some post-Flood centuries, the matter is in another light./HGL
Notes:
* ‘Stone Age’ flour demolishes another evolutionary preconception
by David Catchpoole, Published: 4 November 2010 (GMT+10)
http://creation.com/stone-age-flour
** Could not find reference, found this instead:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3309722/
This is however only about the time of Göbekli Tepe or just after, I had read another one, in which this was earlier, if I recall correctly.
Update: found reference:
New Scientist : Farming has deep roots in Chinese ice age
By Colin Barras, 18 March 2013
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23290-farming-has-deep-roots-in-chinese-ice-age/
Inscription à :
Publier les commentaires (Atom)
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire