Rediscovery of Technology

Thucydides wrote:Now I believe you actually are on to something about the human genetic bottleneck, since scientists have, using DNA evidence, backtracked the human genome to a very small number of individuals. There is supporting theoretical evidence as well; a megavolcano erupted at about the same time period, which caused enough climactic change to seriously disrupt ecosystems, which would have greatly affected our Neolithic ancestor's ability to survive.

Do note this entry under "Common Misconceptions" in the wiki article on the "Mitochondrial Eve". Just because you can trace everyone back to a bottleneck like that does not mean that those people were, at one point, the only humans alive; Rather, it means that the offspring of those people, through some long and involved string of occurrences, ended up being the prevalent strain of humanity.

A population based around 6 females and an (unknown, but presumed small) number of males simply isn't viable. I would also like to add that I haven't been able to find any articles about them being the only identified ancestors.

What I did find, however, is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven ... ers_of_Eve

Basically, it was possible to identify common ancestors for the population of Europe; but these people were not the ancestors for all of modern humanity. In addition, this page puts the number of ancestors at around 10 to 12; and again, let us keep in mind that the presence of these women does not indicate an absence of any other women, only that the offspring these women produced was able to out-populate others.

EDIT: Oh, and there's also this article, which should be read.

Thucydides wrote:If you claim that in 3500BC there is evidence for some event, then anyone who goes and makes a dig at the site should be able to find evidence.

Ah no. Archaeology doesn´t work that nice and predictably. The amount of bickering between historians would be reduced to a tiny fraction if it was that simple.

The problem is that the "evidence" gets ruined over time. And people "back then" weren´t stupid either, they didn´t throw stuff away for us to find. If something broke or was no longer useful, the material was reused if possible.

Meaning that most of what we DO find, are things LOST, to such an extent that the original owner couldn´t find it, and remained so well hidden that noone else found it either.

This is exactly why Pompeii was considered such a valuable find. And why there, despite being smothered by lava, vastly more finds have been found than can be expected in any normal "dig".

Thucydides wrote:If a global flood was a real event, then the evidence would be rather unambiguous. Everywhere on Earth there would be a layer of sediment, mud or clay corresponding to the year of the global flood.

Well, sort of?

There was a flooding around 12k years ago that affected areas around the whole world, but obviously the flooding didn´t actually COVER anything near all the landmasses over the world.

Traces of this HAS been found on all contintents, so personally i expect it´s the most likely culprit of origin for the tales of the "big flood", but of course, in places like the bible, it gets turned into something very different.

Though the traces are not nearly as pronounced or clear as you want.

just to fill you people in on some recent credible archeological finds here is some that has the archeological world abuzz. http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evo ... k.facebook

If (big if there) i understand this article correctly there was modern humans in britian approximately 800k years ago. That does several things at once. 1 blows the out of africa 50k years ago theory to shreds and b. proves without a doubt that modern humans originated well past 400,000 years ago as is currently theorized. Mind you these are just my thoughts on this article but i think it provides some room for thought

viciokie wrote:If (big if there) i understand this article correctly there was modern humans in britian approximately 800k years ago. That does several things at once. 1 blows the out of africa 50k years ago theory to shreds and b. proves without a doubt that modern humans originated well past 400,000 years ago as is currently theorized. Mind you these are just my thoughts on this article but i think it provides some room for thought

I'm gonna say that that's quite a bit premature. All that was found were shapes thought to be foot imprints, conforming to the general size and shapes of human footprints.

That, in and of itself, means nothing. There are far too many variables to account for here to call this definitive proof of anything. Hell, if you go digging, the current thinking seems to revolve around these things having been left by proto-humans, hominids that may or may not have gone extinct in the meantime. Similar prints have been found in Spain, for example.

In conclusion, this isn't as revolutionary as you may think. It certainly sounds sensational, and on some level it is, but it is not the groundbreaking "rewrite all the history books!" find you seem to think it is.

viciokie wrote:just to fill you people in on some recent credible archeological finds here is some that has the archeological world abuzz. http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evo ... k.facebook

If (big if there) i understand this article correctly there was modern humans in britian approximately 800k years ago. That does several things at once. 1 blows the out of africa 50k years ago theory to shreds and b. proves without a doubt that modern humans originated well past 400,000 years ago as is currently theorized. Mind you these are just my thoughts on this article but i think it provides some room for thought

IF they´re footprints, they are already stated in the article as thought to be prints from PRE-modern humans, which means both your conclusions defaults to wrong either way.
It´s already known that there seems to have been several migrations by pre-modern humans.

There´s also another issue with killing the out of Africa theory, due to how much genetic tracing that has been done already, something very specific and exceptional would be needed for that to actually be disproven ( rather than modified to some degree ).

Shifted in likely timeline, i really expect that to happen, but it looks like a very strong theory overall.

Tenshinai wrote:

viciokie wrote:just to fill you people in on some recent credible archeological finds here is some that has the archeological world abuzz. http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evo ... k.facebook

If (big if there) i understand this article correctly there was modern humans in britian approximately 800k years ago. That does several things at once. 1 blows the out of africa 50k years ago theory to shreds and b. proves without a doubt that modern humans originated well past 400,000 years ago as is currently theorized. Mind you these are just my thoughts on this article but i think it provides some room for thought

IF they´re footprints, they are already stated in the article as thought to be prints from PRE-modern humans, which means both your conclusions defaults to wrong either way.
It´s already known that there seems to have been several migrations by pre-modern humans.

There´s also another issue with killing the out of Africa theory, due to how much genetic tracing that has been done already, something very specific and exceptional would be needed for that to actually be disproven ( rather than modified to some degree ).

Shifted in likely timeline, i really expect that to happen, but it looks like a very strong theory overall.

For now, but with the way archaeology is finally advancing that may only be a short time. However assuming something like that does happen then my posits will be proven correct in that instance. This article does prove that doggerland did exist because there was likely no way for pre humans to have gotten to there without making a float or walking which is more likely.

viciokie wrote:

For now, but with the way archaeology is finally advancing that may only be a short time. However assuming something like that does happen then my posits will be proven correct in that instance. This article does prove that doggerland did exist because there was likely no way for pre humans to have gotten to there without making a float or walking which is more likely.

Hmm? I think you misunderstood. Your statements are not in any way AFFECTED at all by that find.

Earlier migrations of hominids, pre-modern humans or pre-humans is nothing new, the surprise was where they were found ( or may have been found ).

The evidence that exists is also quite heavily weighted towards a fairly recent "out of Africa" explanation, but there are some indications, as yet uncertain, that may suggest anything up to about 150k years ago, more likely around 100k.

400k years ago would mean something is very weird with the DNA tracking that has been done, even there, there are possible solutions, but there should be tracks found in modern population which isn´t being found, for those to be realistic.

Of course, there´s also the potential for there to be additional pre-modern humans that have mated into the general population before dying out, like the Neanderthal(which just about everyone except Africans have some traces from) and Denisovans(the traces of which are mostly found on New Guinea and a few other places in small amounts).

Tenshinai wrote:
Of course, there´s also the potential for there to be additional pre-modern humans that have mated into the general population before dying out, like the Neanderthal(which just about everyone except Africans have some traces from) and Denisovans(the traces of which are mostly found on New Guinea and a few other places in small amounts).

There is also another race of humans that was uncovered with DNA analysis of a denosivan bone. Traces which showed up there that was neither homa sapien, nor neandethal. At this time it is simply unknown. While curious and i do follow the info there most of my attention is on the city being excavated by archaeologist in Chile in the Atacama desert. There is also other oddities being found in South America that bear full investigation too not to mention a couple new cities found in central america that needs exploration.

To The E, here's a link to how old humans are! They discovered a 300,000 year old hearth in Israel. Also, they have placed human habitation at least 250,000 years ago to maybe even considerably longer in the Americas specifically Mexico. It was a site in Mexico and the government has banned all digs from this site and sold the land to a rich Mexican citizen.

Link to the historical hearth:

http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-his ... ael-001280

The You-tube video will take me awhile because I can not access you-tube at work. (I am talking about evidence showing human civilization was here in North American much earlier than thought according to human evolution.)

I started this whole argument that people both the evolutionists and creationists need to remove their blinders when looking at history. This is a born again Christian saying this and happen to believe in Science. The reason I stressed reading Dead Man Secrets is that the book just points out over 30 different items (the battery, a spark plug, etc...) that don't belong in the historical record. So either the dating system is wrong, our ancestors had more technology than thought, or the known history is wrong. Or the theories have to be changed to reflect new knowledge or older rediscovered information/knowledge.

Yes, I still believe that Earth has a different history than the official historical record. The victors write the history. Their is temple in I think it was Thailand that has what appears to stone replica's of rocket engines and capsules. You want proof...please research it. Don't take my word for it or the word of another individual regardless of academic credentials. The fun thing is discover what is being hidden in plain sight. The next question is why are they not promoting what is in plain sight? I am little old school. I think it's better to go and discover this than be told or look at a link. This is what motivates me in this fallen world!

Here's the a link to moving objects with sound:

http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-sci ... lity-00684

So, it possible to move a 200,000 ton stone!

smr wrote:To The E, here's a link to how old humans are! They discovered a 300,000 year old hearth in Israel. Also, they have placed human habitation at least 250,000 years ago to maybe even considerably longer in the Americas specifically Mexico. It was a site in Mexico and the government has banned all digs from this site and sold the land to a rich Mexican citizen.

And? This says nothing at all about the existence of what we would term high technology. Hell, it's even mentioned in the article that hominids started using fire approximately a million years ago!
But you do not get to point at that, then point at the myths of Atlantis, or the bullshit in that book you keep trying to sell, and say "Well, all of that must be true then!". You're making a leap here, and you have scant evidence to support it.

I started this whole argument that people both the evolutionists and creationists need to remove their blinders when looking at history. This is a born again Christian saying this and happen to believe in Science. The reason I stressed reading Dead Man Secrets is that the book just points out over 30 different items (the battery, a spark plug, etc...) that don't belong in the historical record.

From my perspective, your blinders are just as strong. You are blinded by the idea that what you were taught in school wasn't the whole truth, and that there is someone out there suppressing the actual truth.

So either the dating system is wrong, our ancestors had more technology than thought, or the known history is wrong. Or the theories have to be changed to reflect new knowledge or older rediscovered information/knowledge.

Yes, and that happens all the time. Notably though, it doesn't change in ways that would confirm this wild hypothesis of ancient high tech that has been lost over time.

Yes, I still believe that Earth has a different history than the official historical record. The victors write the history. Their is temple in I think it was Thailand that has what appears to stone replica's of rocket engines and capsules.

Hi, Erich von Däniken. If you are looking for astronauts, you will find astronauts in any number of ancient carvings. But, crucially, you will not find any evidence to support that hypothesis. You claim that the victors write history, which is true to a degree, but why would those same victors leave out crucial details about how badass they were by taking down the mighty people with their spaceships by only using rocks and torches?

You want proof...please research it.

Same to you. You're taking stuff people tell you for granted, purely based on your distrust for the official record. The idea that the official record might be true, or even mostly true, never crosses your mind, does it? Not when there are amazing tales of neolithic humanity cruising around the stars, no sir.

Don't take my word for it or the word of another individual regardless of academic credentials.

No. Academic credentials tell me that that person has spent more time than me researching that subject. As such, his or her opinions will be backed by more facts than what, an amateur, can find on my own.

The fun thing is discover what is being hidden in plain sight. The next question is why are they not promoting what is in plain sight?

Assuming, of course, that something is being hidden. Which you have so far not shown any evidence or reason for.

I am little old school. I think it's better to go and discover this than be told or look at a link. This is what motivates me in this fallen world!

And discovery is great! But what you're doing is seeing random dots, connecting them, and getting "ancient astronauts". You do not have the expertise to evaluate what you are seeing accurately.

So, it possible to move a 200,000 ton stone!

Great, now show where that supposed stone is! You haven't done so yet, I remind you.