We have examples of proto-writing going back 10,000 years, and it can be accurately dated using the assumption that the physical universe has behaved consistently. If you drop that assumption, you invite Last Thursdayism and the Trickster God.
Evolution - A serious question.
- Thread starter TroutBum
- Start date
We have examples of proto-writing going back 10,000 years, and it can be accurately dated using the assumption that the physical universe has behaved consistently. If you drop that assumption, you invite Last Thursdayism and the Trickster God.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
You got a link of sorts for that assumption?
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
Here's one for you!
"Various current Chinese characters have been traced back to the late Shang Dynasty about 1200–1050 BC"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Written_Chinese/
"Various current Chinese characters have been traced back to the late Shang Dynasty about 1200–1050 BC"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Written_Chinese/
DutchJazzer
Banned
so you are a "religion vs science" guy.
they cant coexist in your limited brain?
make room in your mind and see the similarities
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
Hey, Dutch! I'm all for "true" science....but not the cockamamie slop thrown at us by pseudo-intellectuals who refuse to accept the fact that there is not one single shred of evidence in support of organic evolution!
Red
Well-Known Member
The problem with your question is that I cannot possibly summarize "the peopling of the Americas" as understood by the past approximately 20 years of American prehistoric archaeology. You have to understand, that, despite your own beliefs, they fly against everything brought to light since the initial realization that Clovis technology and Clovis sites were in the 13,000 year old range. You don't agree with any modern dating method, or you would not be asking that question. Or so I must surmise. But, bottom line, how can I possibly develop the entirety of prehistoric archaeology, just here in the United States, let alone the even earlier dates from South America? It would be foolish of me to even try in this instance. Here is a long article you can peruse, should you wish, that summarizes some of what is presently known.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/when-did-humans-come-to-the-americas-4209273/?all
Another article, including findings from South America:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/...mans-arrival-in-the-americas.html?ref=science
That's about all I can do to address your question. Knowledge of prehistory does come from many sources. But, as you observe, it does not come from writings, the appearance of which denotes the dawn of history. But there are many ways to extract information from prehistoric sites, as well as genetic studies, when possible, of human remains found at such sites....
An interesting study of a Siberian skeleton shown to bear relation to the early arrival of man in the Americas:
https://siberiantimes.com/science/c...boy-from-lake-baikal-is-scientific-sensation/
I expect you to firmly reject all of this. I can only provide you with this side of the equation that you do firmly reject. For which reason, I am reluctant to take this any further. You can take it or leave it. It matters not.
Red
Well-Known Member
This is perhaps the best online resource in one place for understanding the various avenues of scientific inquiry involved with the peopling of the Americas. The "Clovis First" paradigm dominated for decades. Only about 20 years ago did support for it erode enough to permit discussion of Pre-Clovis sites. It's actually a good example of how established "received wisdom " paradigms go out kicking and screaming. And why pioneers often risk their careers until such time as new ideas can begin to hold the day. Provided they really do represent an advancement in knowledge, obviously. And so, today, it is no longer heresy to point to dates of 30,000 years or older at certain South American sites. Still a minority opinion though, in that instance. Most see arrival occurring in the 15,000-20,000 years ago time range. Theories as to the route as well. The majority still favor across the Bering Strait, but arrival by a so-called. "Pacific kelp highway" route, by boat, in other words, is also very possible. All of this is to say this is the most open ended and exciting time in American archaeology as it pertains to the question of when humans first arrived in this hemisphere, and by what route or routes. And was there more then one migration time frame? Again, a big subject that cannot be simply stated. You will have to dig into the literature to understand the dates obtained. We are in different worlds, you and I, and I certainly don't expect we will see eye to eye on this subject.
https://csfa.tamu.edu/who.php
I made an assumption in the post you responded to, but you did not quote it. You quoted a conclusion based on evidence. Do you know the difference?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-writing
I am?
They obviously do coexist, and I would never deny the obviously factual.
I take your advice with all the earnestness your prior posting has earned for you.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...they die off fairly quickly from sexually transmitted diseases? Certainly long before reaching the average age of 74!
DutchJazzer
Banned
thats why i keep saying neill degrasse tyson is a hack and has the iq of a .......
yes i cant say what iq he has, i would not have said monkey. but all other animals i can come up with i realise mods see it as "racist"
there ya go mods. because neill degrasse tyson is black my speech is stifled.
but lets say hypothetically neill was white i would say he has the iq of a field mouse