Neanderthals and the Bible

I’ve been doing some research on the Neanderthal race, or sub species, and following links, I ended up on a page of the answersingenesis website. They have quite a few pages of links to articles on Neanderthals so I chose one at random. The article that I chose was a fairly simple story with descriptions of their bodily form and probable habits, including the fact that they buried their dead, and often with flowers or personal bits of property. So far that pretty much follows the commonly accepted view.

Then I came to the end. What follows is the last paragraph of the story:
” None of this is surprising when we consider that they were not primitive evolutionary ‘links’. They were people, forced to live in harsh conditions, after the dispersal of humanity at Babel, during the great post-Flood Ice Age.

What was that? Did I miss something here? Where was I when that little tidbit of info was being passed around in the newspapers and journals??

So let me get this straight. The Neanderthals, who have different DNA than present day humans, were evolved from Noah or one of his sons? And there was another, post 12,000 BCE, ice age that nobody but the answersingenesis people knew about?

I have never run across any literature that supports, or even mentions the notion that there was a post ‘flood’…during the Bronze Age…ice age. Has anyone out there in the ‘ether’ heard of this? 🙂

That got me to thinking about the Bronze Age, which is a very well researched and documented period in the history of the earth and humanity(also, accurately dated) from about 6,000 BCE to maybe 1,400 BCE. Earths inhabitants were smelting and making use of this metal as tools, art objects, and weapons, and there are LOTS of remnants in the archaeological record. This is a fact that I don’t believe ANY proper scientist rejects, or seriously doubts. By proper scientist I mean one who doesn’t have a Doctorate of Divinity.

I wonder when ‘answersingenesis’ is going to publish this new scientific theory? I would look forward to reading and researching this fascinating, hereto unknown subject. I would also look forward to reading about how the human DNA was changed and which son, or perhaps it was Noah, was the father of the Neanderthal race.

I wonder how they reconcile the fact that all remnants of Neanderthals were found to be in strata that is far below Biblical times? Oh, that’s right, I forgot…they don’t believe in stratigraphy…it’s all the results of the ‘flood.’

You know, I think that just maybe, ‘answersingenesis’ is trying to pull the wool over my eyes, and maybe even yours.

If they believe this little bit of ‘history’ I wonder what else is in their minds?

Add to Technorati Favorites

Advertisements

About the word of me
Interested in family and friends,grandchildren, photography, darkrooms, history, archaeology, scuba diving, computers, software, fast cars, journalism, writing, travel, ecology, news, science, and probably most other subjects you could think of. Did I mention family and friends?? I require iced tea or cold brewed coffee and a internet connection to be fully functional. Sometimes there are just so many words in my head they spill out.

30 Responses to Neanderthals and the Bible

  1. Bryce says:

    “That got me to thinking about the Bronze Age, which is a very well researched and documented period in the history of the earth and humanity(also, accurately dated) from about 6,000 BCE to maybe 1,400 BCE.”

    Your time-line and the fact that you state that it is “accurately dated” relies on the absolute certainty of C-14 dating being correct. The accuracy of carbon dating is doubtful to me for the same reason that if the best Rolex watch is set at the wrong time at the factory, and never corrected, then that Rolex will give out the wrong time for the rest of its existence.

    If you are interested in theory of why C-14 dating is most likely inaccurate, I would be more than happy to expound.

  2. thewordofme says:

    Hi Bryce, thanks for writing.

    You give me your details and I’ll give you mine. 🙂

    I have written a separate blog on this subject of age dating and below you will find some parts of it. I urge you to try the first link as it is a scientific paper from a religious fundamentalist scientist who happens to work in the dating field.

    “Radiometric dating–the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements–has been in widespread use for over half a century. There are over forty such techniques, each using a different radioactive element or a different way of measuring them. It has become increasingly clear that these radiometric dating techniques agree with each other and as a whole, present a coherent picture in which the Earth was created a very long time ago. Further evidence comes from the complete agreement between radiometric dates and other dating methods such as counting tree rings or glacier ice core layers. Many Christians have been led to distrust radiometric dating and are completely unaware of the great number of laboratory measurements that have shown these methods to be consistent. Many are also unaware that Bible-believing Christians are among those actively involved in radiometric dating”

    http://www.asa3.or/ASA/resourcesWiens.html

    Dr. Roger C. Wiens
    941 Estates Drive, Los Alamos, NM 87544
    RCWiens@MSN.Com

    Some more from the paper

    When scientists began systematically dating meteorites they learned a very interesting thing: nearly all of the meteorites had practically identical ages, at 4.56 billion years. These meteorites are chips off the asteroids.

    Virtual Dating—a very helpful educational course on half-lives and radioactive decay was put together by Gary Novak at California State University in Los Angeles. This site has several interactive web “workbooks” to help the reader understand various concepts involved with radiometric dating.
    http://vcourseware5.calstatela.edu/VirtualDating

    Reasons to Believe—a Christian ministry supporting the old-Earth viewpoint. Dr. Hugh Ross, the founder and head of the ministry, holds a PhD in Astronomy. The ministry supports an accurate interpretation of
    the Bible while also supportive of science as a tool to study God’s creation.
    http://www.reasons.org

    American Scientific Affiliation (ASA)—an umbrella organization of Christians in many different areas of the sciences. Most of the members hold an old-Earth view, though membership is open to anyone supporting their positional statement. This website has numerous resources on theology and Bible-science issues.
    http://www.asa3.org

    Affiliation of Christian Geologists (ACG)—an organization of Geologists who are Christians. The ACG is affiliated with the ASA (above).
    http://www.wheaton.edu/acg

    Lord I Believe—a site maintained by Hill Roberts, a self-professed conservative Christian and a Physicist. There is a wealth of information, including presentations on the interpretation of Genesis chapters 1-3, a resource list of apologetics ministries, etc.
    http://LordIBelieve.org

    Faith and Reason Ministries. The ministry webpage of John D. Calahan, a former Jet Propulsion Laboratory scientist.
    http://www.faithreason.org

    A review of Phillip Henry Gosse’s Omphalos: An Attempt to Untie the Geological Knot, in which fiat creation with the appearance of age is suggested. Reviewed by Rev. John W. Burgeson.
    http://www.burgy.50megs.com/omphalos.htm

    Origins—this site is devoted mainly to evidences for intelligent design in nature.
    http://www.origins.com

    Talk Origins—an archive dedicated to creation-evolution issues. Originally created by Chris Stassen, this site is supported by the National Center For Science Education.
    http://www.talkorigins.org

    A Radiometric Dating Resource List—a very comprehensive resource list for radiometric dating, maintained by Tim Thompson of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. It includes separate resource sections on the reliability of radiometric dating, introductory articles, advanced articles, radiocarbon
    dating, etc.
    http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/8851/radiometric.html

    C-14 Dating—The radiocarbon laboratories at Oxford (England) and Waikato (New Zealand) Universities jointly operate this website which gives very comprehensive information on radiocarbon dating. Portions of it were written specifically for use by K-12 students, so it is easy to understand. The site contains explanations on measurements, applications, calibration, publications, and other areas.
    http://www.c14dating.com

    Cornell University Geology 656 Lecture Notes—A large number of pdf files of geology lecture notes are available on the web. These are university-level lecture notes describing radiometric dating and related topics.
    http://www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/classes/Geo656/656notes98.html
    http://www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/classes/Geo656/656notes00.html

    Books
    Radiometric dating textbooks: The following books are popular college-level Geology texts that deal in depth with various dating techniques. Geologic Time is very easy to read and has been around for quite some time. The text by Dalrymple is meant to be relatively easy to read, but is also very comprehensive.
    The Faure and Dickin texts are regular textbooks for Geology, including more mathematics and more details.
    Dickin, Alan P. (1995) Radiogenic Isotope Geology. Cambridge University Press, 490 pp.

    Dalrymple, G. Brent (1991) The Age of the Earth. Stanford University Press, 474 pp.

    Faure, Gunter (1991) Principles and Applications of Inorganic Geochemistry: A Comprehensive Textbook for Geology Students. MacMillan Pub. Co., New York, 626 pp.

    Faure, Gunter (1986) Principles of Isotope Geology, 2nd edition. Wiley, New York, 464 pp.
    Eicher, Don L. (1976) Geologic Time, 2nd edition. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 150 pp.

    Other books on dating:
    Jespersen, James, and Jane Fitz-Randolph (1996) Mummies, Dinosaurs, Moon Rocks: How We Know How Old Things Are. Atheneum Books, New York, 92 pp. This is a book designed for easy reading on the general subject of dating. This short book covers topics from archeology to tree ring dating to radiocarbon dating of the dead sea scrolls, to dating of
    meteorites and moon rocks. The book is out of print, but slightly used copies can be obtained from online dealers like Amazon.

    Wagner, Günther A. (1998) Age Determination of Young Rocks and Artifacts. Springer-Verlag, New York, 466 pp. [Translated from the original Altersbestimmung von jungen Gesteinen und Artefakten,
    Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, 1995]
    This book is a quite comprehensive reference on all methods for determining dates less than about a million years old. It includes a large amount of information on archeological dating, and describes more methods than are discussed here, including TL, ESR, racemization, fluorine/uranium/nitrogen uptake, cosmic-ray exposure-age, fission track, radiocarbon, and others.

    For ice core studies, the Journal of Geophysical Research, volume 102, (1997) starting with page 26,315,has 47 papers on two deep ice cores drilled in central Greenland.

    Books on scripture, theology, and science:
    Snoke, David (1998) A Biblical Case for an Old Earth. Interdisciplinary Biblical Research Institute (IBRI), Hatfield, PA, 76 pp.
    Dr. Snoke, an elder in the Presbyterian Church (PCA) and a Physics professor, presents a strong
    case for a geologically old Earth. He addresses typical objections brought up by young-Earth
    adherents, including the death of animals before Adam and Eve’s sin, entropy (or decay) before the fall, the six days of creation, and the flood.

    Sailhamer, John (1996) Genesis Unbound. Multnomah Books, Sisters, OR, 257 pp.
    This is a very readable theological book about Genesis. Dr. Sailhamer has served on the translation committees for two versions of the book of Genesis. He has taught at Bethel Seminary, Philadelphia College of the Bible, Trinitiy Evangelical Divinity School, Northwestern College, and Western Seminary.

    Ross, Hugh (1994) Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy. NavPress, Colorado Springs, CO.

    Hugh Ross has a PhD in Astronomy. In this book Dr. Ross defends modern science and an old age for the universe, and refutes common young-Earth arguments. He firmly believes in the inerrancy of the Bible.

    Stoner, Don (1992) A New Look at an Old Earth. Schroeder, Paramount, CA, 191 pp.
    A persuasive book written for the Christian layman. Stoner uses arguments both from the theological and the scientific side. He talks somewhat philosophically about whether God deceives us with the Genesis account if the Earth is really old. Stoner also tries to discuss the meaning of the Genesis 1 text.

    Van Till Howard J., Young Davis A., and Menninga Clarence (1988) Science Held Hostage. InterVarsity, Downers Grove, IL, 189 pp. This book talks about the misuse of science by both hard-line atheists and by young-Earth creationists. A good deal of the book is devoted to refuting young-Earth arguments, including a substantial section on the Grand Canyon geology. Its authors are well-known Christians in Geology and Physics.

    Wiester, John (1983) The Genesis Connection. Interdisciplinary Biblical Research Institute, Hatfield, PA, 254 pp. John Wiester has taught Geology at Westmont and Biola University, and is active in the American Scientific Affiliation, an organization of scientists who are Christians. This book discusses many scientific discoveries relating to the age of the Earth and how these fit into the context of Genesis 1.

    Young, Davis A. (1982) Christianity and the Age of the Earth. Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI (now
    available through Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA).

    Davis Young has a PhD in Geology and teaches at Calvin College. He argues for an old Earth and
    refutes many of the common young-Earth claims (including their objections to radiometric dating).

    The science behind radiocarbon dating and the other 40 or so methods is settled in the science community, there are no doubts that it works. The only people disputing the methods are “Young Earth Creationists” and they apparently don’t have the brainpower to understand what is going on. The town I live in has one of the premier age dating labs in the country and the no.1 tree ring research facility in the world…I know people in both, and I understand and accept the science and the very accomplished scientists who practice it in these labs.

    I repeat…the science is real…and it is correct.

    • Jeff in NC says:

      Dr. Robert Lee. In 1981, he wrote an article for the Anthropological Journal of Canada, in which stated:

      “The troubles of the radiocarbon dating method are undeniably deep and serious. Despite 35 years of technological refinement and better understanding, the underlying assumptions have been strongly challenged, and warnings are out that radiocarbon may soon find itself in a crisis situation. Continuing use of the method depends on a fix-it-as-we-go approach, allowing for contamination here, fractionation there, and calibration whenever possible. It should be no surprise then, that fully half of the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half has come to be accepted…. No matter how useful it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually the selected dates.”

      • thewordofme says:

        So let me guess….you are saying that all the dates are wrong and the earth and mankind is 6000 years old…right? 🙂

  3. rudy says:

    4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

  4. rudy says:

    study the nephilims in the bible and go reserch the neandratalls.

  5. thewordofme says:

    Hi rudy, thanks for writing.

    You write:
    “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.”
    And:
    “study the nephilims in the bible and go reserch (sic) the neandratalls (sic).”

    The Neanderthals or Neandertals (either spelling is acceptable) were of short stature, they averaged about 5’2″ to about 5’5″ in height. So these peoples were not the giants that the Bible talks about. Their DNA has been recovered and it doesn’t match ours…so there was no interbreeding.

    Edit: Update…new data has come in that about 2 to 4 percent of modern Europeans and Asians have some Neanderthal DNA. Apparently there was some small amount of gene interchange.

    The Neanderthals lived on the earth from about 300,000 years ago to about 25,000 years ago. Modern man (Homo -sapiens) has lived on this earth for about 200,000 years and our paths have crossed with Neanderthals in both the Levant and in Europe.

    Modern man entered Europe about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago, and Neanderthal was there at the same time. They died out…we didn’t. Evolution for you.

    I suggest you study the Neanderthals and also you might touch on the history of man in the pre-historic world. You will learn the real history of humankind…not that sheep-herder mythical crap you find in the Bible.

    • Kara says:

      Hasn’t the latest research now shown that they did interbreed… And you sounded so certain.

    • A NEW CREATURE says:

      If you really believe that is all the Bible is it saddens me, like a lost sheep headed to the slaughter. The bible says you must be a fool to become wise, and todays society we think we are to wise with all our scientific facts. But there are many scientist who belive in the bible and the bible is recognized as a historical book with historical facts. But that dosent matter because all the book smarts in the world will never make you wise. In fact I sounded just as foolish when I think back at the things I use to say, I am ashamed. It was pretty similar to what you are saying. I do pray that God givies you true wisdom and he opens your eyes, your ears and your heart to understand what He is trying to say. I pray you open up the bible and read with a new understanding a spiritual one (Spiritual things are foolish to the world). In Jesus name Amen. (I once was blind but now I see)

      • the word of me says:

        Hi Creature, thanks for writing.

        You write”
        “The bible says you must be a fool to become wise”

        Do you really believe all that Bronze Ages sheep herder crud? In any society, in any age, do you really think it is wise to stay stupid…to be unaware of your world of reality?

        “…and todays society we think we are to wise with all our scientific facts. But there are many scientist who belive in the bible and the bible is recognized as a historical book with historical facts.”

        We are wise compared to the sheep herders who wrote the Bible and invented “God.” We now know that many of the old stories in the Old Testament are myths, i.e. not true. Yes, there are some people and places in the Bible that are real, but just as many are mythical. Adam and Eve are mythical…the flood of Noah is mythical…the Tower of Babel is mythical…Jesus is mythical…other famous stories are just that…stories.

        You write:
        “But that dosent matter because all the book smarts in the world will never make you wise. In fact I sounded just as foolish when I think back at the things I use to say, I am ashamed. It was pretty similar to what you are saying.”

        Funny thing, in order to become smart and wise in this world we actually think “book smarts” is helpful. If you were spouting actual facts back when you were an atheist why would you sound foolish? Do actual truths and real knowledge make religious people dumb?

        You write:
        “I do pray that God givies you true wisdom and he opens your eyes, your ears and your heart to understand what He is trying to say. I pray you open up the bible and read with a new understanding a spiritual one (Spiritual things are foolish to the world). In Jesus name Amen. (I once was blind but now I see)

        The message of “God” was a creation of humans and this “wisdom”, such as it was, was aimed at the Bronze and Iron Age peoples of the times. There have been wise humans since that time who have proposed just as valid a philosophy of living as anything from the Bible.

        Peace

  6. thewordofme says:

    Hi Kara, thank you for writing.

    There had been a small controversy about the Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon living at the same times and several studies of their and our DNA with some saying we mixed and some saying we didn’t.

    Most of them said we did not and that seemed to be the end of it.

    However one of the good things about science is that it is self correcting. Someone doesn’t believe the status quo they keep investigating.

    This is merely the refining of our knowledge of a human life-form that lived for probably 300,000 years on this planet. It will be very interesting to follow and see what Christian fundamentalist make of it.

    I follow the stories with fascination.

  7. B says:

    I have been learning/studying more about this subject too friend (thewordpress),

    I can only say these simple things that I have come to consider this far:

    1) There could have been a group of being created such as the cave men, but they were not made in God’s image, only Adam and Eve were (hence the DNA differences)…such group (i.e. Neardanthals and others) looked a lot like us, but were not us.

    However if the the interbreeding did happen, there is a chance than many of us came from it all.

    Yet, the things Rudy mentioned are a whole different subject (I am familiar with the theories behind the Nephelim), which could have been another situation that is a bit more complex to ponder upon and discuss here, but for the sake of keeping the subject at hand, yes I think it could have been possible (I cannot verify, but just plant it as a possibility) that there were caveman that existed during the time Adam and Eve were created….who knows, only God does. For me, that wouldn’t change or affect my faith since even science confirms that the DNA was different, Adam and Eve were the first ones to be made in God’s image and likeness.

    Hope this makes some sense and helps a little. I believe there is a link between science and theology and that this knowledge will increase, however, over time it will be a matter of choices two big truths, both very much in agreement but pointing at different sources.

    B

    • thewordofme says:

      Hello B, thank you for the reply.

      You write:
      “1) There could have been a group of being created such as the cave men, but they were not made in God’s image, only Adam and Eve were (hence the DNA differences)…such group (i.e. Neardanthals and others) looked a lot like us, but were not us.”
      And:
      “However if the the interbreeding did happen, there is a chance than many of us came from it all.”

      The latest DNA evidence is that in Europe and Asia the Neanderthals and Homo-sapiens did mate and produce live offspring, and as much as 4% of people on those continents are carriers of Neanderthal genes. Since the pure Neanderthal line died out about 25,000 years ago that would mean the mating occurred before that time. This fits quite nicely with the scientific thought that we Homo-sapiens-sapien (modern day humans) are descended from a long line that includes Homo-erectus, Homo-habilis, Homo-ergaster, Homo-neanderthalis, etc. that stretches back a few million years or so. Homo-sapiens is placed at about 200,000 years ago and there is data that backs up these years.

      We humans are the only surviving members of the Homo genus.

      Since Adam and Eve is placed by most Abrahamic religions at about 6,000 to 8,000 years ago they don’t even enter into the equation and almost all scientists whose work is somehow related to Biblical myth don’t think Adam and Eve are real…in the biblical sense. Way too much scientific evidence against the story. It’s a nice story, but it’s not true…it’s myth.

      What I find interesting is that Bart Ehrman, a teacher of religion at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill writes in some of his books that theological seminaries are teaching these students that most of the Old Testament is myth and that ministers preaching in the churches know this.

      The Catholic Church of course accepts evolution and tells it’s parishioners that the story of Noah’s flood is not to be interpreted as real.

      So much of Abrahamic religion falls apart when the Genesis stories are disproven…and they are in fact disproven.

      You write:
      “…but for the sake of keeping the subject at hand, yes I think it could have been possible (I cannot verify, but just plant it as a possibility) that there were caveman that existed during the time Adam and Eve were created….”

      We know for a fact that real humans (perhaps as many as 20,000,000) were living all over the earth 6,000 to 8,000 years ago. We know for a fact that Neanderthals were living all over Europe and much of Asia some 25,000 to 250,000 years ago. There is no doubt of this in scientific circles…only in religion.

      You write:
      “…since even science confirms that the DNA was different, Adam and Eve were the first ones to be made in God’s image and likeness.”

      DNA evidence tells us that the human race did NOT evolve from 2 humans living 6,000 to 8,000 years ago. We can trace ALL blood types back to Africa some 50,000 to 200,000 years ago and the population was never down to 2 in that time frame.

      A class in evolutionary biology will give you a good grounding in our earth’s past, and allow you to be able to separate fact from biblical myth.

      Peace,

      twom

      • John Novak says:

        Turns out Europeans and Asians have Neanderthal genetics (1-4%). Neanderthals showed signs of primitive religion. They also relied heavily on a meat diet. They were also tribal and did not appear to share technology outside of their own groups, viewing outsiders a threat. That sounds like patriarchal “Jehovah” (angry, jealous god who requires mostly sacrifices of meat by his “chosen” race or people).

        If you have two stable lines of humans breeding together, you would end up with an F1 Hybrid. Those offspring would have superior traits and pass along some of those to their children.

        That could explain: “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.”

        Of course, this would mean the dating we attribute to the first few stories of the bible are older than we currently accept. Maybe that’s why the priests would not let anyone into the most holy room…they didn’t want their people seeing a neanderthal king gorging himself on the best of the best food offerings.

        If all these different forms of humanity did share the planet together, you know that each species was probably very tied to advancing their own race, keeping their bloodlines “pure”. They had the skills to breed domestic animals and plants, there’s no reason to think that “animal husbandry” of human races wasn’t at least discussed in some circles.

  8. Tony says:

    hahaha they have diffrent DNA than us? has somebody actually got blood sample from them?hahaha no so dont ho around saying we have diffrent dna than them,

  9. the word of me says:

    Hi Tony,

    You don’t need blood samples to retrieve DNA data. Our DNA is different than Neanderthals, but it apparently is close enough to produce viable offspring with them.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Wow! Turns out, that the earth really isn’t flat AND the sun doesn’t revolve around us… Who da thunk it? I cannot dispel or confirm either belief and I am certainly no Bible thumper but you defend your stance with anger and blindness. Truly, you are the enlightened one. But show me where anything ever evolved into anything else. My personal beliefs aside, your points are largely empty. “The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop.” -Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University

  11. the word of me says:

    Hello Anonymous, thanks for writing.

    You write:
    “Wow! Turns out, that the earth really isn’t flat AND the sun doesn’t revolve around us… Who da thunk it? I cannot dispel or confirm either belief and I am certainly no Bible thumper but you defend your stance with anger and blindness.”

    Sure, you can confirm the the roundness of the earth and the fact that the earth revolves around the sun…anybody can, all it takes is a little bit of your time and research.

    I defend my stance with facts and the ability to see through junk information…such as Answers in Genesis purveys. There was a cold period after the real ice age that the earth experienced over 12,000 years ago,but it was not a real ice age…just a cooling period and it was in a different time. I am not angry about any of this, in fact I enjoy it.

    Remember that AiG believes in a literal Bible and they place Adam and Eve at about 4,000 BC and the Noachian flood around 2,300 BC and we know that the Neanderthal line died out around 25 to 30 thousands years ago.

    You write:
    “Truly, you are the enlightened one. But show me where anything ever evolved into anything else. My personal beliefs aside, your points are largely empty.”

    I believe the whale line is pretty well attested with missing links and all, you might want to check it out. What makes my points empty? I think they are important. I think the falsification of Christianity is getting closer and closer.

    You write:
    ” “The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop.” -Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University

    Yes, and the chance of winning the lottery is about 50 or 60 million to one every week, but it gets won almost every week. It doesn’t matter what the odds are if its already happened.

    Peace

  12. the word of me says:

    Hello John, thanks for writing.

    You write:

    Turns out Europeans and Asians have Neanderthal genetics (1-4%). Neanderthals showed signs of primitive religion. They also relied heavily on a meat diet. They were also tribal and did not appear to share technology outside of their own groups, viewing outsiders a threat. That sounds like patriarchal “Jehovah” (angry, jealous god who requires mostly sacrifices of meat by his “chosen” race or people).

    Now we know that people all over the earth (except Africa) carry Neanderthal genes. I’ve not seen evidence that Neanderthals showed any signs of a primitive religion and as to the other ‘traits’ you mention, that sounds like too many assumptions happening.

    The whole history of Homo-sapiens does not match the Bible and the old stories of the Nephilim and the ‘men of old’ doesn’t seem to match the archaeological or DNA evidence we have now. The Neanderthals were on average 6 inches shorter than us, very muscular, and lived from around 300,000 years ago till about 25,000 years ago.

    Modern humans (Homo-sapiens) were roaming Africa around 200,000 years ago and this pretty much puts the lie to Adam and Eve and any ‘Garden of Eden’

    You write:
    “If all these different forms of humanity did share the planet together, you know that each species was probably very tied to advancing their own race, keeping their bloodlines “pure”. They had the skills to breed domestic animals and plants, there’s no reason to think that “animal husbandry” of human races wasn’t at least discussed in some circles.

    No, we do not know, and we have no reason to assume that the different species had any clue about ‘keeping bloodlines pure’…and what do you think would be a ‘pure’ bloodline back then?

    • John Novak says:

      My comments on religion (which included “bloodline”) were mostly meant as satire.

      Homo sapiens and Neanderthals would have recognized the differences in appearances, don’t you think?

      Humans have a habit of trying to differentiate themselves from others. Do you think Neanderthal was capable of superstitious beliefs? I’m sure that trait has been around longer than recorded history. Religion was born out of superstition. It’s a group effort! 😉

      Is there any evidence you are aware of that the two ever communicated with language?

  13. the word of me says:

    Hi John, thanks for the reply.

    We know now that the Neanderthals had the FOXP2 gene and a Hyoid bone and those two things seem to be a necessity for speech as we know it.

    The following is from Wikipedia:
    “The discovery of a modern-looking hyoid bone of a Neanderthal man in the Kebara Cave in Israel led its discoverers to argue that the Neanderthals had a descended larynx, and thus human-like speech capabilities. However, other researchers have claimed that the morphology of the hyoid is not indicative of the larynx’s position. It is necessary to take into consideration the skull base, the mandible and the cervical vertebrae and a cranial reference plane.”

    So, I take the above to mean that Neanderthals may or may not have had speech. One thing we understand of Neanderthal history is that their tool-kit did not vary very much over their long history whereas the new humanoids they were meeting had superior tools and new more efficient design.

    I have always felt that good language skills would be a tremendous asset to the early humans as they could pass on learning and skills easily and out in the field hunting, or defending turf, the ability to communicate accurately and quickly would give them tremendous advantage in survival and everyday living.

    I haven’t heard anything on evidence of cross communication, but then I don’t know what kind of evidence could come out of a time when there was no writing (beautiful art work though).

    I find the study of these times (prehistoric) and all the sciences behind that fascinating and I have made my wife a computer widow I’m afraid.

    Peace

  14. Chuck says:

    Although the initial debate regarding Neanderthals is interesting, I will forget that for a moment and concentrate on the authors statement that Jesus is “mythical.” You seem like an intelligent person, I will give you that, but any scientist and/or archaeologist worth their salt have at least had to admit, if nothing else, that Jesus (yes, the one who called himself the Son of God) indeed walked upon the face of this earth long ago.

    Say what you want about all this other hooey, but get your facts straight regarding the existence of Jesus. Outside of this, you seem to be full of answers…all based on “old earth” vs “young earth.” If this is enough evidence for you to dismiss the Bible as fallacy, well, I cant help you on that one. Hang your hat where you’d like. Still, I find that evolution leaves far too many gaps, as does other such “atheistic” centered beliefs.

    • the word of me says:

      Hello Chuck, thanks for writing.

      I have been thinking about this (Jesus) for years and years and I still find myself unable to fully and finally decide. Right now I am very very slightly leaning to his being a mortal rabbi that got caught up in Paul’s mechanization’s.

      Of course this doesn’t affect you at all.

      As regards the YEC vs OEC, the Old Earth people are right in believing Old Earth, but not the rest.

      The YEC’s are totally wrong on just about all they believe and they are in for some real upsets in the near future…of course they will ignore the evidence, but it will give them something to seriously think about.

      No Adam and Eve has repercussion all over the Christian dogma…of course all the other fairly recent finding are big, but the loss of the first couple is really bug…

  15. Chuck says:

    I will just say this (for now): If you are right, assuming that you are a staunch atheist, all science aside for a moment, concepts such as morality, dignity, right vs wrong, good vs evil, are nothing more than fairy dust concepts as well. After all, the way I see it, such ideas have nothing to do with evolution, intellect or even “man made” progressive thought. In essence, life is a sham…a cosmic accident and no amount of science, human achievement or wishful thinking can stop the inevitable…a world destined to extinction and decay. A bleak outlook, I know. Of course, if the Atheists are wrong, well…thank God for that!

    Personally, I have nothing against science, “facts” or other beliefs; these are all a part of the world in which we live. However, when others slam Christianity for claiming to be the defining word, all while purporting that their own ideas are “truth,” well, that makes me think of one word: hypocrisy. Perhaps none of us can truly know all the answers until the day we pass. Or perhaps we should all just become Agnostics…but that would be too easy.

    Anyway, I appreciate your comments and I apologize for my “off-topic” response. Take care sir!

    • the word of me says:

      Hi again Chuck, thanks for your reply.

      I appreciate all responses whether its agreement or otherwise. Thanks for writing.

  16. Lord Griggs says:

    Reblogged this on Skeptic Griggsy on Scams and commented:
    What a scam!

  17. Excellent items from you, man. I’ve understand your stuff previous to and you’re just too fantastic.
    I really like what you have received right here, really like what you are stating and the way by which you assert it.
    You’re making it entertaining and you continue to take care of to stay it smart. I can’t wait to learn far more from you.

    This is actually a terrific website.

  18. Whats up this is kind of of off topic but I was wondering if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have
    to manually code with HTML. I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding skills so I wanted to get guidance from someone with experience. Any help would be enormously appreciated!

  19. I’m not sure why but this web site is loading incredibly slow for me.
    Is anyone else having this issue or is it a problem on my end?

    I’ll check back later and see if the problem still exists.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: