Pre-History and the Religious Fundamentalist

A study published in the August 13th. 2009 edition of the journal Science has revealed that early modern humans living around the Southern tip of Africa some 72,000 years ago were using fire to shape their stone tools and weapons

“We show that early modern humans at 72,000 years ago, and perhaps as early as 164,000 years ago in coastal South Africa, were using carefully controlled hearths in a complex process known as heat treatment,” said study lead author Kyle Brown.

Until this point it was the widely held belief that humans began using heat to forge tools 25,000 years ago in Europe, the researchers said.

The study based its conclusions on pieces of silcrete, a type of stone that were found in various states of glossiness, indicating they had been treated with heat.

“Prior to our work, heat treatment was widely regarded as first occurring in Europe at about 25,000 years ago, We push this back at least 45,000 years, and, perhaps, 139,000 years, and place it on the southern tip of Africa at Pinnacle Point,” said study co-author Curtis Marean.

The study was conducted by researchers from universities in Cape Town, Africa, Liverpool, England, Wollogong, Australia, and Bordeaux, France.

Full story found here: http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/08/13/stone-tools.html

or a longer version of story can be found at the link below.

http://www.physorg.com/news169391684.html
A story from October of 2007 at Science Daily describes earlier findings of this primeval human habitation site and relates that “After decades of debate, paleoanthropologists now agree the genetic and fossil evidence suggests that the modern human species — Homo sapiens — evolved in Africa between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago.”

Full story can be found here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071017145252.htm

So the evidence just keeps adding up and the religious right/fundamentalists just stick to their old Bible stories as if nothing is happening.

Think about the ramifications, as regards Biblical history, of just these two discoveries alone…minus the thousands and thousands of other bits of evidence that we already have that totally refutes religion. Some people just never get it.

This iz what happened...  to turn basement cat evils
see more Lolcats and funny pictures

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.

3 Responses to Pre-History and the Religious Fundamentalist

  1. Isaac says:

    Ramifications to Biblical history? None! I hope that you are aware that only a very small minority of Christian religions believe in the Bible’s literal meaning. I would say that less than 3%? So, for you to say what you say is really strange. No Catholic believes that the Bible is historically sound or that it tells the story of how we evolved. No Greek Orthodox believes it either. No Russian Orthodox. No mainline Protestant believes it. The only ones who do are certain evangelical sects in the US and they are a minority.

  2. thewordofme says:

    Hi Isaac, thanks for your reply.

    I’m sorry your reply got lost to me somehow. I hope you still visit occasionally.

    You write:
    “Ramifications to Biblical history? None! I hope that you are aware that only a very small minority of Christian religions believe in the Bible’s literal meaning. I would say that less than 3%? So, for you to say what you say is really strange.”

    The following is from the Religious Tolerance people in Ontario, Canada: Page can be found here: http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran4.htm Look below the fold.

    “Christian laity is far more supportive of the inerrancy position. The Barna Research Group reported in 1996 that among *American* adults generally:

    58% believe that the Bible is “totally accurate in all its teachings”
    45% believe that the Bible is “absolutely accurate and everything in it can be taken literally.”

    Don’t ask me where the extra 3% came from. 

    Support dropped between that poll and another taken in 2001. Barna reported in 2001 that:

    41% of adults strongly agrees that the Bible is totally accurate in all that it teaches.

    They also published beliefs by denomination and metagroup:

    Above average support for inerrancy:

    Pentecostal / Foursquare: 81%
    Assembly of God: 77%
    Christian, non-denominational (mostly Fundamentalist) 70%
    Baptist: 66%
    Seventh-day Adventist: 64%
    Church of Christ: 57%

    Below average:

    Presbyterian: 40%
    Methodist: 38%
    Lutheran: 34%
    Latter-day Saints (Mormon): 29%
    Catholics: 26%
    Episcopal: 22% 5

    Just picking out the Baptist from the list of above average support for inerrancy:
    Baptists number over 110 million worldwide in more than 220,000 congregations and are considered the largest world communion of evangelical Protestants with an estimated 38 million members in North America. Large populations of Baptists also exist in Asia, Africa and Latin America, notably in India (2.4 million), Nigeria (2.5 million), Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) (1.9 million), and Brazil (1.7 million). About one in five Christians in the United States claims to be a Baptist. From Wikipedia: Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist

    You write:
    “No Catholic believes that the Bible is historically sound or that it tells the story of how we evolved. No Greek Orthodox believes it either. No Russian Orthodox. No mainline Protestant believes it. The only ones who do are certain evangelical sects in the US and they are a minority.

    The Catholic Church and the Orthodox have to believe in some inerrancy because if Adam and Eve are disproven there goes “Original Sin” and all that that entails. Archaeology, Palaeology, and associated sciences pretty much disprove any Adam and Eve scenario as related in the Bible.

    Regarding mainline Protestants…see the above info.

  3. I really like your writing style, wonderful info, thank you for posting :D.

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: