Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
114 online now:
Dredge, DrJones*, ringo, Tanypteryx, Theodoric, xongsmith (6 members, 108 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,129 Year: 6,241/6,534 Month: 434/650 Week: 204/278 Day: 44/28 Hour: 0/11


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   When Earth’s population was 10,000 persons
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 91 of 194 (604659)
02-13-2011 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Coyote
02-12-2011 10:50 AM


Re: Here is some evidence for you...
Coyote writes:


There are a lot more examples out there, but learn a little about these first.

Thanks Coyote. I read them all. None answered my other question.

quote:
Were there a lot of them and were they found consistently in strata dating progressively down from 100,000 or were there a few isolated specimens?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Coyote, posted 02-12-2011 10:50 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Coyote, posted 02-14-2011 12:04 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 93 by DBlevins, posted 02-14-2011 3:45 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied
 Message 94 by jar, posted 02-14-2011 3:49 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1422 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 92 of 194 (604660)
02-14-2011 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Buzsaw
02-13-2011 11:47 PM


Re: Here is some evidence for you...
Buz, nothing will satisfy you, will it?

I'm not going to do all your homework for you when you simply dismiss everything I provide to you.

Yes, there were a lot of them. Look the details up yourself.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Buzsaw, posted 02-13-2011 11:47 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
DBlevins
Member (Idle past 3092 days)
Posts: 652
From: Puyallup, WA.
Joined: 02-04-2003


Message 93 of 194 (604734)
02-14-2011 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Buzsaw
02-13-2011 11:47 PM


Re: Here is some evidence for you...
Hey Buzz,

None answered my other question.

Frankly, you would be incredibly lucky and skilled, as an Anthropologist, to find 'a lot' of human remains in the same strata. To find 'a lot' of human remains in the same strata all the way down to 200,000 years ago would be nothing short of miraculous. The fact is that fossilization is an iffy business, and even if a bone does become fossilized it can be unburied due to erosion and basically erode away. That and the fact that we have no way to view what fossils remain in the geology underneath our feet over a large area, helps to keep many fossils hidden. That isn't to say that we don't have evidence of human activities that don't include bones. These can and do include such activities as lithics, butchered bones (ex. marrow extraction, cut marks, pot rub, discoloration, etc.), cultural remains (ex. artwork, homes, fire pits, jewelry, artifacts, etc). If you allow for the full range of fossils and human cultural remains then the breadth of evidence showing Homo Sapiens has been around for more than 100k years is overwhelming.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Buzsaw, posted 02-13-2011 11:47 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33957
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 94 of 194 (604735)
02-14-2011 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Buzsaw
02-13-2011 11:47 PM


Re: Here is some evidence for you...
Buzsaw writes:

Coyote writes:


There are a lot more examples out there, but learn a little about these first.

Thanks Coyote. I read them all. None answered my other question.

quote:
Were there a lot of them and were they found consistently in strata dating progressively down from 100,000 or were there a few isolated specimens?

What is "a lot of them" and what does "were they found consistently in strata dating progressively down from 100,000 or were there a few isolated specimens" even mean?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Buzsaw, posted 02-13-2011 11:47 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
goldenlightArchangel
Member (Idle past 468 days)
Posts: 583
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 95 of 194 (605192)
02-17-2011 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Panda
01-28-2011 4:20 PM


Re: Distinction between human prototypes and ancestor
Panda writes:

Have you noticed that the names are listed alphabetically, except:

CD7 writes:

Lists of British people
Lists of Italians
Lists of Swedes

I think these were sub-headings which are now included as part of the 55.

-

A word was missing. It was a List of 55 Dispersions of ethnic groups

-


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Panda, posted 01-28-2011 4:20 PM Panda has not replied

  
goldenlightArchangel
Member (Idle past 468 days)
Posts: 583
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 96 of 194 (605705)
02-21-2011 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Coragyps
02-11-2011 4:02 PM


There never was an answer without you experiencing it
-

Coragyps writes:


Added by edit: Wikipedia says "..has a strong smell and bitter taste.."

-

The above info demonstrates to be a result of double ignorance.

Because just as the new oranges are just momentarily green and temporarily not sweet
even so the fruit from the tree of life, Morinda Citrifolia, becomes white when it is ready to be eaten.
And when it is white then it is not bitter anymore.

-

With regard to the smell, the quoted info demonstrates to be a blind leading the blind,

When the fruit of Morinda Citrifolia is White then it is in the same level of a refined soya oil; it does not have a smell

After the fruit is white,
a person has approximately three days to eat it before the fruit begins to decompose.

-

After the three days then the white fruit of Morinda Citrifolia suddenly begins to decompose;

Therefore the vomit smell is just a consequence of the sudden decomposition.

-

quote:
This might help with the answer to the question,
'If Humans were not reproducing 30000 years ago how is that humans are here today?'

The following is a sample of what can be verified with science; ascertained truth of the facts,
in regards to the original manuscripts of Genesis,

- Authenticity and validity of the first instruction of Genesis
- Evidences of the existence of the tree of life


-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Coragyps, posted 02-11-2011 4:02 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Theodoric, posted 02-21-2011 4:43 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied
 Message 100 by bluescat48, posted 02-24-2011 1:10 AM goldenlightArchangel has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7415
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 97 of 194 (605715)
02-21-2011 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by goldenlightArchangel
02-21-2011 4:17 PM


Re: There never was an answer without you experiencing it
Any references that might back you on this?
Not saying it ain't true but why should I blindly believe you.

As an aside.
Sorry Catholic Scientist if asking for a reference insults your sensibilities.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-21-2011 4:17 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-23-2011 4:03 PM Theodoric has replied

  
goldenlightArchangel
Member (Idle past 468 days)
Posts: 583
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 98 of 194 (606059)
02-23-2011 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Theodoric
02-21-2011 4:43 PM


There never was an answer without you experiencing it
Being the only tree that gives her fruits 12 months a year it is evident that when the green fruit becomes white it does not give one much time for it to be eaten;

The complete white fruits from the tree of life in real time, Morinda Citrifolia, do only last as fruits for no longer than three days; In a decomposed state it can't be called an actual fruit anymore.

When those three days are complete then the white fruit does desintegrate in less than 35 minutes;
the white flesh within the thin skin becomes a liquid with a vomit smell.

-

Theodoric writes:


Any references that might back you on this?

-

Real references are given to anyone who will make some calls and speak to people who live in the cultivation areas;
as it is said, there never was an answer without you experiencing it.

One won't have the real references when speaking to those who do commercialize the so called 'juice' of the fruit.
because they believe that the fruits were made to be consummed in their decomposed and liquid form; which equates to the state of a rotten orange; They even try to reduce the vomit smell by mixing it with juice of grapes or other fruit.

-


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Theodoric, posted 02-21-2011 4:43 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Theodoric, posted 02-23-2011 5:13 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7415
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 99 of 194 (606069)
02-23-2011 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by goldenlightArchangel
02-23-2011 4:03 PM


So ya got nothing
Just as I suspected. You might want to try using references and sources. People will be more likely to believe you.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-23-2011 4:03 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-24-2011 3:38 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 3506 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 100 of 194 (606161)
02-24-2011 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by goldenlightArchangel
02-21-2011 4:17 PM


Re: There never was an answer without you experiencing it
This might help with the answer to the question,
'If Humans were not reproducing 30000 years ago how is that humans are here today?'
The following is a sample of what can be verified with science; ascertained truth of the facts,
in regards to the original manuscripts of Genesis,

- Authenticity and validity of the first instruction of Genesis
- Evidences of the existence of the tree of life

Just calling a plant the "Tree of Life" doesn't make it so any more than Queen Anne's Lace has anything to do with either Queen Anne or Lace. The person who named wild lettuce Queen Anne's lace did so because it resembled Lace from the Queen Anne period. Common names of living things are just that common names.

So the question remains unanswered.

Edited by bluescat48, : added line.


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-21-2011 4:17 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-25-2011 3:15 PM bluescat48 has replied

  
goldenlightArchangel
Member (Idle past 468 days)
Posts: 583
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 101 of 194 (606292)
02-24-2011 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Theodoric
02-23-2011 5:13 PM


Why many have a need to believe rather than check the info
Theodoric writes:

..People will be more likely to believe you..

-

Anything that follows a corrupted version of writings that tell many lies to the people saying that they were made by a god, elohiym; -- a generic term for deities in the Middle east--.

never made nor does it intend to make any valid point. Even when you ask a believer 'Is the word god/elohiym a Sacred--Set Apart name?' he is not able to say a yes or no answer, because even their translators of bibles were taught to tell lies.

The corrupted bibles won't help anyone to prove anything important unless a person recognizes that there's a distinction to be made between the versions and the first instruction of Genesis as originally written.

The above distinction is important because the previous posts talk about what can be verified with science,

- Authenticity and validity of the first instruction of Genesis
- Evidences of the existence of the tree of life

However, any of these two Items won't help nor be a fine thing in case you are a believer.
Which of you is able truly to say that the above two Items can not be ascertained with science?

And since I say what is true, why you still have a need to believe me rather than check the info by yourselves?

Because I tell you the truth and the truth can not be retained through believing.

-

quote:
Which one of you convicts me of not telling the truth?

And since I am telling you the truth, why do you not believe Me?

because whoever is of the Truth hears the words of truth;

for this reason you do not retain any words of truth,

because you are believers like your *father.

[*Legion; Ravãb; to be many].


Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Theodoric, posted 02-23-2011 5:13 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
goldenlightArchangel
Member (Idle past 468 days)
Posts: 583
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 102 of 194 (606474)
02-25-2011 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by bluescat48
02-24-2011 1:10 AM


This tree of life is the only exception
-

bluescat48 writes:

Just calling a plant the "Tree of Life" doesn't make it so

-

Of course it doesn't.
It's too easy to dismiss whether or not the tree of life is just a metaphor or really and still exists
Let's verify first the factors why this is not about a common tree

-

Is there any other tree whose root is totally golden and that has the same amount of calcium and proteins?

Is there any actual tree out there giving fruits 12 times a year?

Is there any reason why this tree of life would not be the only exception?

-


This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by bluescat48, posted 02-24-2011 1:10 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Theodoric, posted 02-25-2011 4:18 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied
 Message 104 by Coyote, posted 02-25-2011 7:44 PM goldenlightArchangel has not replied
 Message 105 by bluescat48, posted 02-25-2011 8:36 PM goldenlightArchangel has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7415
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 103 of 194 (606482)
02-25-2011 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by goldenlightArchangel
02-25-2011 3:15 PM


Re: This tree of life is the only exception
Amazingly nowhere on the internet is there any support for your assertions.

You must be a great prophet.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-25-2011 3:15 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-28-2011 2:38 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1422 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 104 of 194 (606505)
02-25-2011 7:44 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by goldenlightArchangel
02-25-2011 3:15 PM


Re: This tree of life is the only exception
You have the tree of life totally wrong. But that's a common mistake.

This is the correct one:


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-25-2011 3:15 PM goldenlightArchangel has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 3506 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 105 of 194 (606510)
02-25-2011 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by goldenlightArchangel
02-25-2011 3:15 PM


Re: This tree of life is the only exception
What does whether it is a common tree or not have to do with anything?


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 02-25-2011 3:15 PM goldenlightArchangel has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022