Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anomalous human skulls in South America
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 1 of 2 (240185)
09-03-2005 3:22 AM


These skulls don't seem to fit with any evo-models. I can't post the pics but they really tell the whole story.
Anthropoligists however have admitted that the shapes of the Peruvian skulls is unlike the deformity caused by binding.
The skulls shouldn't exist
The skulls are a real problem for the anthropoligist. The frontal part of the skull seems to belong to an individual of the pre-Neanderthal family. But the lower jaw, though more robust than modern human type, has a modern shape and characteristics.
The shape of the cranium is completely different from Homo Erectus, Neanderthal types, and the modern human type. Some minor Neanderthal characteristics are present, as with the occipital ridge on the bottom back of the skull and the flattened bottom of the cranium, but other characteristics point more towards Homo Erectus.
Click and drag photo to resize. Script from The Java Script Source
What a representative of a premodern human type is doing on the South American continent? According to the orthodox anthropology, this skull simply does not exist, because it cannot be. Textbooks' oldest date of appearance of humans in North America is about 35000 BCE and much later for South America, based on the diffusion theory assumptions.
Neanderthals did not exist in South America. The only accepted human types entering the continent are of the modern anatomy.
http://www.s8int.com/giants3.html
Before someone bashes the source, please look at the pics because they exist apparently irregardless of the source, and do seem somewhat unexplainable.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminJar, posted 09-03-2005 2:04 PM randman has not replied

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 2 (240267)
09-03-2005 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
09-03-2005 3:22 AM


Tentatively Rejected
There is nothing in your link to really discuss. The photos have no information that can be independantly verified and no information is given that can be used for confirmation. In addition, the site contains example after example of refuted assertions such as the Pawley Tracks and the Anasazi drawings.
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-03-2005 01:56 PM

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
Message 1
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 09-03-2005 3:22 AM randman has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024