See other History Articles
Title: Humans Inhabited Earth for Millions of Years - Masons Try to Suppress Evidence
Source:
Save The Males
URL Source: http://www.henrymakow.com/forbidden_archeology.html
Published: Mar 11, 2010
Author: Henry Makow
Post Date: 2010-03-11 16:34:31 by Original_Intent
Keywords: Forbidden, Archaeology, Darwin, Fraud
Views: 1642
Comments: 98
Humans Inhabited Earth for Millions of Years Masons Try to Suppress Evidence "Anatomically modern humans have been present on the Earth not just for 100,000 years or less (the orthodox version), but for millions of years, and that metal objects of advanced design have been in use at equally early periods." by Cornelius B (for henrymakow.com) The model of human prehistory built-up by scholars over the past two centuries is sadly and completely wrong, and a deliberate tool of disinformation and mind control. This is the thesis of the essay, "Forbidden Archaeology" by Michael Cremo and Richard L. Thompson (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_forbiddenarcheology.htm) The authors begin with the assumption that archeologists are fundamentally of good faith. Nevertheless, little by little, they demonstrate a systematic destruction of proofs that show another reality than that the official story. Falsifications and even destruction of such proofs has been common for more than two hundred years. In their first essay "The Hidden History of the Human Race", Cremo and Thompson push back our horizons not just thousand years, but millions of years into the past, and show that almost everything we have been taught to believe about the origins and evolution of our species rests on a highly selective sampling of research. The two authors then set the record straight by showing all the other research results that have been edited out, not because there was anything wrong about them, but simply because "they did not fit with prevailing academic opinion." Anomalous and out-of-place discoveries reported by Cremo and Thompson in "The Hidden History of the Human Race" include convincing evidence that anatomically modern humans have been present on the Earth not just for 100,000 years or less (the orthodox version), but for millions of years, and that metal objects of advanced design have been in use at equally early periods. SCIENTIFIC CENSORSHIP The authors describe an ongoing social process of knowledge filtration that at first sight appears quite innocuous, but has a substantial cumulative effect. Certain categories of evidence simply disappear from view. This pattern of data suppression has been going on for a long time. For instance, in 1880, J. D. Whitney, the state geologist of California, published a lengthy review of advanced stone tools found in California gold mines. The implements, including spear points and stone mortars and pestles, were found deep in mine shafts, underneath thick, undisturbed layers of lava, in formations ranging from 9 million to over 55 million years old. W. H. Holmes of the Smithsonian Institution, one of the most vocal critics of these California finds, wrote: "Perhaps if Professor Whitney had fully appreciated the story of human evolution as it is understood today, he would have hesitated to announce the conclusions formulated (that humans existed in very ancient times in North America), notwithstanding the imposing array of testimony with which he was confronted." In other words, if the facts do not agree with the favored theory, then such facts, even an imposing array of them, must be discarded. I shall give here some examples of these discarded paleo-archaeological elements: In a report delivered to the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1881, H. Slopes, F.G.S. (Fellow of the Geological Society), described a shell, the surface of which bore a carving of a crude but unmistakably human face. The carved shell was found in the stratified deposits of the Red Crag, which is between 2.0 and 2.5 million years old. One should keep in mind that in terms of conventional paleontological opinion, one does not encounter such works of art until the time of fully modern Cro-Magnon man in the Late Pleistocene, about 30,000 years ago. On August 2, 1890, J. H. Neale signed the following statement about discoveries made by him: "In 1877 Mr. J. H. Neale was superintendent of the Montezuma Tunnel Company, and ran the Montezuma tunnel into the gravel underlying the lava of Table Mountain, Tuolumne County. . . . At a distance of between 1400 and 1500 feet from the mouth of the tunnel, or of between 200 and 300 feet beyond the edge of the solid lava, Mr. Neale saw several spear-heads, of some dark rock and nearly one foot in length. On exploring further, he himself found a small mortar three or four inches in diameter and of irregular shape. This was discovered within a foot or two of the spear-heads. He then found a large well formed pestle, now the property of Dr. R. I. Bromley, and near by a large and very regular mortar, also at present the property of Dr. Bromley." Neale's affidavit continued: "All of these relics were found. . . . close to the bed-rock, perhaps within a foot of it. Mr. Neale declares that it is utterly impossible that these relics can have reached the position in which they were found excepting at the time the gravel was deposited, and before the lava cap formed. There was not the slightest trace of any disturbance of the mass or of any natural fissure into it by which access could have been obtained either there or in the neighborhood." The position of the artifacts in gravel close to the bedrock at Tuolumne Table Mountain indicates they were 33-55 million years old. In 1844, Sir David Brewster reported that a nail had been discovered firmly embedded in a block of sandstone from the Kingoodie (Mylnfield) Quarry in Scotland. Dr. A. W. Medd of the British Geological Survey wrote to the authors in 1985 that this sandstone is of "Lower Old Red Sandstone age" (Devonian, between 360 and 408 million years old). Brewster was a famous Scottish physicist. He was a founder of the British Association for the Advancement of Science and made important discoveries in the field of optics. In his report to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Brewster stated: "The stone in Kingoodie quarry consists of alternate layers of hard stone and a soft clayey substance called 'till'; the courses of stone vary from six inches to upwards of six feet in thickness. The particular block in which the nail was found, was nine inches thick, and in proceeding to clear the rough block for dressing, the point of the nail was found projecting about half an inch (quite eaten with rust) into the 'till,' the rest of the nail lying along the surface of the stone to within an inch of the head, which went right down into the body of the stone." The fact that the head of the nail was buried in the sandstone block would seem to rule out the possibility the nail had been pounded into the block after it was quarried. On June 22, 1844, this curious report appeared in the London Times: "A few days ago, as some workmen were employed in quarrying a rock close to the Tweed about a quarter of a mile below Rutherford-mill, a gold thread was discovered embedded in the stone at a depth of eight feet." Dr. A. W. Medd of the British Geological Survey wrote to the authors in 1985 that this stone is of Early Carboniferous age (between 320 and 360 million years old). (Ed. Note: Cornelius B cites many more examples which I excised in the interest of brevity.) DISINFORMATION AND MIND CONTROL "Forbidden Archeology" was first released in 1993 and quickly became an underground classic. Today it is a bestseller, with foreign editions in over a dozen languages, presenting both accepted and anomalous scientific evidence defying the traditional view of human evolution. This is a fascinating intellectual excavation of a vast store of hidden knowledge. I'll let you judge their proofs sustaining the human evolution. What is the purpose behind this disinformation if not mind control, and therefore social engineering? Science is a method that anyone can learn and apply. In a free and open society, science has to be a democratic process. Instead, we observe a behavior similar to the totalitarian attitude of the ancient priesthood clique in Egypt. To better illustrate this affirmation, I present the case of a science journalist, Richard Milton, initially an ardent believer in Darwinian doctrine until his investigative instincts kicked in one day. After 20 years of studying and writing about evolution, he suddenly realized that there were many disconcerting elements in the theory. He decided to put every main classic proof of Darwinism to the test. The results were hard to believe -- he found that the theory could not even stand up to the rigors of routine investigative journalism. Next, he published a book titled "The Facts of Life: Shattering the Myths of Darwinism". Milton says: "I experienced the witch-hunting activity of the Darwinist police at first hand - it was deeply disappointing to find myself being described by a prominent Oxford zoologist, Richard Dawkins, as "loony", "stupid" and "in need of psychiatric help" in response to purely scientific reporting." Does this sound like stories that came out of the Soviet Union 25 years ago when dissident scientists there started speaking out? Without a doubt Dawkins is part of the "secret societies brotherhood" invested with high power. Richard Dawkins has been appointed to the position of Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. This advocate of aetheism is a classic "Brain Police" storm-trooper, patrolling the neurological front lines. According to Milton, the process came to a head when the London Times Higher Education Supplement commissioned him to write a critique of Darwinism. The publication foreshadowed his coming piece: "Next Week: Darwinism - Richard Milton goes on the attack". Dawkins caught wind of this and wasted no time in nipping this heresy in the bud. He contacted the editor, Auriol Stevens, and accused Milton of being a "creationist", and prevailed upon Stevens to pull the plug on the article. Milton learned of this behind-the-scenes backstabbing and wrote a letter of appeal to Stevens. In the end, she caved in to Dawkins and scratched the piece. DARWINISM AS MIND CONTROL The Western scientific establishment and mass media pride themselves on being open public forums devoid of prejudice or censorship. However, no television program examining the flaws and weaknesses of Darwinism has ever been aired in Darwin's home country or in America. A scientist who opposes the theory cannot get a paper published. Darwin's theory of evolution is the only theory routinely taught in our public school system that has never been subjected to rigorous scrutiny; nor have any of the criticisms been allowed into the curriculum. This is an interesting fact, because a recent poll showed that "71% of the American public say biology teachers should teach both Darwinism and scientific evidence against Darwinian theory." Nevertheless, there are no plans to implement this balanced approach. Then there is the high-profile case of Dr Virginia Steen-McIntyre, a geologist working for the US Geological Survey (USGS), who was dispatched to an archaeological site in Mexico to date a group of artifacts in the 1970s. This travesty also illustrates how far the « brothers scientists" will go to guard orthodox tenets. McIntyre used state-of-the-art equipment and backed up her results by using four different methods, but her results were off the chart. The lead archaeologist expected a date of 25,000 years or less, and the geologist's finding was 250,000 years or more. The figure of 25,000 years or less was critical to the Bering Strait "crossing" theory, and it was the motivation behind the head archaeologist's tossing Steen-McIntyre's results in the circular file and asking for a new series of dating tests. This sort of reaction does not occur when dates match the expected chronological model that supports accepted theories. Steen-McIntyre was given a chance to retract her conclusions, but because this woman was intellectually honest, she refused. She found it hard thereafter to get her papers published and she lost a teaching job at an American university. CONCLUSION Thus, as we may conclude from the information provided here, Darwinism, the theory of the survival of the fittest and its twin sister, the theory of human evolution, together with the official version of the Paleontology and Archaeology such as they are practiced, are pseudo-sciences. In fact, they are tools for mind control of the masses. Their main purpose is to cut off the roots of the true history of humanity, and promote a naturalistic and mechanistic view of life as "survival of the fittest." They promote atheism as a means of destroying Christian civilization. We find the same hate of God and of Christianity in Marxism and Freudianism. A very interesting read is the book of Richard Wurmbrand "Marx & Satan" where we discover that Marx was a Satanist priest with a deep hate of God and desire for the ruin and annihilation of the human society. How can we explain this deep hated nourished in the hearts of these men? Was it satanic possession? I will close with this fact -- at the funerals of Karl Marx, in his speech Frederich Engels compared Marx to Darwin as titans of the human mind, and this suggests the high probability that Darwin was Karl Marx's "Luciferian brother".
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-37) not displayed.
.
.
.
#38. To: buckeroo (#37)
purposefully. Yes. I answered your question. So now answer one for me. Is abortion evil?
No, it's only a day older than you. It was all put here just so that you can experience life AKA Stone. It's all an illusion. That story makes about as much sense as yours.
Recorded history goes back 6000 years, so you can't have an Earth that's only 2000 years old. Hell, that's not even old enough to include the events in the New Testament, or the Greek and Roman empires..
It worked in your case
WWGPD? - (What Would General Pinochet Do?)
ehehe
lol. Where did I say 2000 years old. You deceive.
The earliest event in the Bible that can be dated with reasonable certainty is the beginning of Saul's reign as the first king of Israel. It is generally believed to have occurred about 1020 BCE, at a time when Egypt and Assyria were weakened and the Israelites were able to assert domination over their own territory. I'd like to see some documentary corroboration of the existence of Saul independent of Scripture. We have literally tons of it in the case of Egypt and Assyria. If we relied on the Hebrew/Christian/Muslim versions of the human chronology there would only be some dude named "Pharaoh" and the dynastic history of Egypt would just be so much dust. Most young earth creationists believe that "yom" means a day of 24 hours. This puts the date of creation of the universe according to a literal interpretation of the Bible at 4000 to 8000 BCE. However, old earth creationists suggest that each of the six "days" of creation might have taken many hundreds of millions of years. Further, there might have been one or more long intervals of time between some of the "days." Yes, the day might have been anything. It might have been as long as you please. Whatever fits the desired hypothesis is fair game. The world might have been created ten minutes ago along with all the posters here complete with all their memories and battle scars. Anything can be anything if you let imagination run riot. On the original topic of this thread though, while I'm not averse to considering theories of human origins or of cosmology or anything else for that matter that require us to radically rethink our assumptions, I'd like to see a little evidence and a smattering of sound reasoning to back up these controversial claims. For instance, if we assume that modern humans have been around for millions of years and in numbers that would allow the development of a metal working culture, there should be a store of bones around for us to discover and examine. Given what we know about physics and chemistry, the bones of these folk should be in evidence in a state of fossilized preservation. Give us some evidence. Throw us a bone. (No ossuaries please.)
damned your stupid. A day is a day. Now who is the one that is trying to have it as they please or whatever fits your desired hypothesis. double lol on that one.
So it cancels itself out. A day with the lord. It isn't an earth day. Think about it with a little common sense. God creates the grass and the plants. Then what a dark cycle for millions of years. lol You are a great example of quoting out of context.
'A day is like a thousand years' and 'A thousand years is like a day' means the exact same thing. 1000 years = 1 day or conversely; 1 day = 1000 years. Simple logic.
If someone like yourself is deemed to be heaven bound, why would any normal person want to share space with you? Furthermore,who in their right mind would want to meet the decision maker who sees both you, Hagee, and the Tribe members as being on the right side of the human condition?
I'm not saying it ain't, my fine jug-eared friend. I'm just saying that if you try to stretch a "day" to fit some particular cosmology to some particular scripture, you can let your fancy run riot. The length of the "day" you choose will be entirely arbitrary and in the end your effort adds no heft to either your chosen cosmology or your favorite scripture. And I may be "damned your stupid," but at least I can spell most of the time and I recognize when an argument is directed a me or at some other poster. If I had your defective powers of discernment, sir, I would take a long holiday by the sea and drown myself.
Ask your brother there, slim. Mebbe he can read a mite.
1000 years = 1 day or conversely; 1 day = 1000 years. Simple logic. Here let me clue you in. as isn't =. It is simply saying that God is outside of time. Timeless. It has no bearing on the days of creation and the time that the creator created. Sincerely hope that helps.
Makes sense.
Hang on a second.... did you come up with that shit on your own?
Just a second. You agreed with me. You never agree with me. I'm going to have to reevaluate you. :)
I'm not sure. It has been in my thought process for a couple of decates.
Lmao! I can see this is gonna be a weird day...
I learned a new word today. hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia
Reading these posts is quite nearly as amusing as watching Muslim apologists bending themselves into pretzels trying to demonstrate that the Koran has something noteworthy to say about biology or cosmology.
.
That is amusing. So tell us what was "bent".
It's all over the net, dude. Muhammad had it straight from the Man. Have fun. " And they have turned away and said, 'One taught (by others), and a madman (44:14)." ). The Koran can be Hypothesis (1) i.e. the product of a liar, or Hypothesis (2) i.e. the product of a deceived mind, or it can be what it claims to be, i.e. God's revelation; but it can never be both Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 at the same time. Hypothesis 1 and its implications: If the Koran is the product of a man's mind who is a "liar", who got his information from the outside and then presented it to the world as a revelation then: 1. We have to explain the confidence portrayed by the various statements in the Koran. A confidence that shows that whosoever is presenting this is convinced that he indeed has the truth. As examples: a) The Koran challenges people to find a mistake in the book by its claim that if God was not the author many mistakes would be found in it (Koran4:82) Now only a person who is convinced about what he has can make such a claim. Do you know of any book that makes a claim that it doesn't contain any errors and that if it had a human origin it would contain many. The Bible never makes such a claim. b) Another example would be the invitation given to Christians who dispute with Muslims about the nature of Jesus as presented in the Koran. The verse says: "Come let us call our sons and your sons...our families and your families and let us ask God to curse the ones who are lying (about the true information on Jesus) (Koran 3:61)." This shows that whoever is presenting this is confident and sure that he has the truth on which the challenge is based. c) Another example of this confidence that a liar is incapable of portraying, is the account of when the Meccans who wanted to kill Muhammad came unto the mouth of the cave in which he and his friend Abu-Bakr were hiding. Abu-Bakr was afraid, Muhammed told him to "relax", "God will save us," he told him. Now if the man is a liar, one who lies to convince people that he is a prophet, you might expect him to say, "Go and look for a back way out," or "lie low and be quiet." But what he actually said shows that he had no doubt that he was a prophet and that God would save them.Hypothesis 1 cannot explain these in the Koran. 2. If the Koran is a lie, the product of a man's lying mind, how do you account for the following: The Koran claims that it contains information that was "new" to the people it was being read to. Now the Meccans hated Muhammad, if this statement in the Koran was not true and the information was not "new" they would have loved to point out the source. Yet they never answered this challenge to produce similar "knowledge" as the Koran (chapter 46: verse 4) As proof of the above, I'll give two examples: 1. The Koran mentions the wall of "Zulqarnain," the two-horned one. It gives a complete description of this wall and how it was built to protect a people from outside invaders (Koran 18:96-98). The Arabs had never heard of it, or what it looked like, neither had the Arab Jews or the Arab Christians. Now, after the death of the prophet, they were curious about this wall mentioned in the Koran. Omar the Khalif sent out travelers to verify the existence of this wall. It is in Durbent in the former Soviet Union. It is referred to as Alexander's wall however modern historians dispute on whether Alexander had anything to do with it. Compare what the Koran said over fourteen centuries back, before any Arab had set foot on Derbent to what the Columbia Encyclopaedia says: "Derbent was founded (A.D 438) by the Persians as a strategic fortress at the Iron Gates. There are remains of the Caucasian Wall (also called Alexander's Wall), built by the Persians in the 6th century. as a bulwark against northern invaders. (6th Edition, 2000)." If Muhammed was a liar, who told him about this wall thousands of miles to the east, about which no one in his area knew anything? 2. The Koran mentions a city by the name of Iram where a prosperous people the AAD lived. It was a city of "tall pillars": "Have you seen how your sustainer (God) dealt with the Aad people? Iram, of the lofty pillars (Koran 89:8-8)" Until very recently no historic or non-historic record existed about Iram. However in 1973, the ancient city of Ebla was excavated in Syria. While going through the tablet library of Ebla archaeologists came across a list of cities that Ebla traded with and on that list was a city named Iram. When reporting it in the National Geographic of December 1978, the only reference to Iram they could cite other than the tablets was the Koran, chapter 89. In 1992 using SIR-C imaging [Synthetic Aperture Radar] using the Space Shuttle, GPR [Ground Penetrating Radar] and GMT [Geophysical Diffraction Tomography], scientists discovered Iram [also called Ubar] in southern Oman, buried under 12 meters of sand. The city contained evidence of "tall pillars" exactly as mentioned in the Koran chapter 89. The Koran described this fact, over fourteen centuries back at a time when no one in the world could have had access to this city. Now, if Muhammad was a liar where did he get this information? Hypothesis 2 and its implications: Hypothesis 2 suggests that the Koran is the product of a man's deluded mind. If the Koran is a product of a man's hallucinations then what comes out as a result are things that are in his mind. What do you think went on in Muhammed's mind? He didn't have an easy life. He was an orphan to start with, then his grandfather who looked after him died, then his uncle who adopted him died as well. After that, his life companion, his wife of 24 years Khatija died. All his children except for one daughter died in his lifetime. Does the Koran reflect any of this? It doesn't even mention these things at all. Yet these were the things that surely bothered him and caused him pain through his whole life, but they never show up in a book, which is said to be the product of his deluded mind! In fact, the information contained in the Koran is such that no man living anywhere in the 7th century could have known it. I'll give some examples, which should make the point clear: 1. THE ORIGIN OF LIFE The Koran mentions that all life originated from water (Koran 21:30) and that man himself is "created" of water and so are all the animals on earth (Koran 25:54, and 24:45). Now these statements to an Arab would have sounded atrocious in that day and age. Even today such statements in the Koran might cause you to wonder if scientific facts about them are unknown. The fact that all life originated in water is well established by the scientific community today. They have evidence to support the fact that the first living beings were algae, and they existed in water. The fact that human beings and animals are created of water is also well established since cytoplasm the basic component of "life" in any animal cell is over 80% water. 2. MATURITY The Koran mentions that a human being reaches full maturity at age forty (Koran 46:15). This is a very unusual statement. Even today most people accept that full maturity is reached at puberty and laws usually put it between 18 to 21. However, the Koran is scientifically correct where even modern laws are inaccurate. If we analyze the statement based on psychological tests conducted by scientisits, what we find is that the "overall quantity of stored knowledge in the mind of an individual reaches a peak at age thirty-nine and after that it gradually declines." Arthur C. Guyton, in his standard textbook on physiology, Physiology of the Human Body( 6th ed, pg.207), states this. Guyton's book is used as a standard text in at many pre-medical schools around the world. 3. THE FEMALE BEE The Koran mentions the bee, which leaves its home in search for food, in the verses that discusses honey (Koran 16:68,69). It uses the female verb in describing the bee, in Arabic faslukee. This, to the Arab, suggests that the bee, which leaves its home in search for food, is female. Does anyone except an expert know how to differentiate between a male and a female bee? Even today, let alone Muhammad's time, 1400 plus years back, we need a specialist to differentiate between a male and a female bee. The Koran is accurate when it mentions that the female bee leaves its home in search for food; the males never leave their homes for food, it is the females who have to feed them. 4. EMBRYO SEX DETERMINATION The Koran says that the "ejaculated drop" determines the sex of a human baby (Koran 53:45). It is common knowledge that semen is the fluid that is ejaculated by males during sexual acts. Females do not possess such "ejaculated semen." The sex of the baby, whether it be male or female, will indeed be determined by the 'ejaculated drop', i.e. the father's sperm, as mentioned by the Koran. It has been scientifically established only recently that the female ovum contains only X-chromosomes. If the ejaculated drop, the father's sperm bears the Y chromosome, the offspring will be male, and otherwise the offspring will be female. No one living at the time of Muhammed or even Darwin for that matter had any knowledge of such genetics foretold centuries earlier in the Koran. 5. THE INVISIBLE BARRIER The Koran states that there are two seas that meet but don't intermingle because of a barrier between them (Koran 55:19-20). It is a necessity that seas intermingle through straits between them. The Koran however is aware of a very unusual phenomenon, which scientists discovered only recently. The Mediterranean and Atlantic oceans differ in their chemical and biological constitution. The French scientist Jacques Yves Cousteau conducted various undersea investigations at the Strait of Gibraltar and explaining these phenomena concluded: "Unexpected fresh water springs issue from the southern and northern coasts of Gibraltar. These mammoth springs gush towards each other at angles of 45 degrees forming a reciprocal dam. Due to this fact the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Oceans cannot intermingle (as quoted by Nurbaki)." Did Muhammed do research on the chemical and biological components of seawater to discover this unusual phenomena? 6. THE GASEOUS ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE The Koran mentions that the universe originated, at a stage, from a "gaseous material." (Koran 41:11). It uses the Arabic word Dukhan, which stands for smoke. A perfect analogy for gas and particles in suspension and the gasses being hot. Scientists have only very recently confirmed that the universe did indeed originate from a gaseous mass composed of hydrogen and helium, a big mass of hot gasses, a mass over 300,000 times that of the earth. That mass then fragmented to form galaxies. Muhammad, who had no schooling of any kind and was illiterate before the revelation of the Koran, could not have possibly known this. 7. THE BIG BANG The Koran gives an accurate visual description of the Big Bang theory of the creation of the universe. In the 21st chapter, verse 30 (21:30), the Koran states: "Do not the rejecters see that the heavens and earth were a unit joined together then we split them apart (21:30)." This is exactly how the 'rejecter' scientists envision the creation of the universe, from one singularity, which then exploded, termed the 'big bang'. Thus the Koran told us about the "common origin" of everything in the universe much before scientists described it in the 20th century. How do we explain this information in the Koran if it is not what it claims to be, the words of an all-knowing ? Professor Alfred Kroner, chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenburg University, Mainz, Germany stated about this verse in the Koran: "Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics 1400 years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind for instance that the earth and the heavens had the same origin, or many others of the questions that we have discussed here.(Rehaili 1995)" 8. THE EXPANDING UNIVERSE The Koran talks about a universe that is continually "expanding" (Koran 51:47). The concept of an expanding universe is very popular with scientists today, however no one knew of it until recently. Do you know that the universe is expanding? Can you feel or see it expanding? No, the verification of this requires specialized knowledge and instruments, which no one at the time of Muhammad had access to. The Koran states: "And the sky we built it with might and We cause the 'expansion' of it (Koran 51:47)." 9. THE DEATH OF STARS The Koran mentions the 'death of stars' (Koran 77:7-8). Astronomers including Dr. Patterson of Southwest Missouri State are surprised at finding this information in the Koran. They know that at the time of Muhammad, people believed that once a thing was formed, it was permanent. The Koran is very accurate when it mentions dying stars. Our own sun is a dying star. 10. PHASES OF THE MOON The Koran talks about the phases of the moon (Koran 36:38-39). There is no book, to my knowledge, that predates the Koran that mentions the modern term "phase" in connection with the moon. Dr. Patterson confirms this. The Arabic word used for "phase" in the Koran is Manazil. 11. MOVEMENT OF THE SUN . The sun's movement is not something that is evident to our eyes or experience but requires specialized equipment. The Koran states in chapter 36, verse 39: "And the sun constantly journeys towards a homing place for it and for the moon, We have determined phases (36:39)." Modern science has found out that the sun rotates around its axis every 26 days . The Koran mentions the movement of the sun, with its own motion, signified by the verb Yasbahoon in Arabic. Thus according to the Koran the sun is not just flying through space but moving on its own, i.e. rotating. The sun is also continually on a journey in space towards its homing place, the solar apex, just like mentioned in the Koran (36:39). How could Muhammed have known these facts if the Koran is the product of his mind? 12. ISOSTACY AND MOUNTAIN ROOTS The Koran states that mountains are like "tent-pegs", i.e. they have a root extending down into the earth like "anchors" and this gives stability and balance to the earth. "Have we not expanded the earth and made the mountains as tent pegs" (Koran 78:6-7) " We have cast into the earth anchors lest it shake with you" (Koran 31:10 etc.) This fact was discovered less than 150 years ago by scientists and now accepted as a fundamental law in geology, the concept of isostacy. M. J Selby in a standard-text on the subject entitled "Earth's Changing Surface (Clarendon Press, Oxford 1985) states: "G.B Airy in 1855 suggested that the crust of the earth could be likened to rafts of timber floating on water. Thick pieces of timber float higher above the water surface than thin pieces and similarly thick sections of the earth's crust will float on a liquid or plastic substratum of greater density. Airy was suggesting that mountains have a deep root of lower density rock, which the plains lack. Four years after Airy published his work, J.H Pratt offered an alternative hypothesis...By this hypothesis, rock columns below mountains must have a lower density, because of their greater length, than shorter rock columns beneath plains. Both Airy and Pratt's hypothesis imply that surface irregularities are balanced by differences in density of rocks below the major features (mountains and plains) of the crust. This state of BALANCE is described as the concept of ISOSTACY (Selby1985:32) ." 13. HUMAN EMBRYOLOGY The Koran is known to be the first book to give microscopic details of human embryology(Koran 23:13-14 etc.), hundreds of years before the discovery of the microscope! The Koran contains information on embryology, which was not discovered till about 30 years back and certain details were new even to modern scientists but were immediately confirmed as being accurate. The Koran mentions that at a certain stage, the developing human is like "allaqa", a leech-like clot. If you take a microscopic picture of a human embryo of days 7-12 and place it next to a picture of a leech, they both look identical. Not only do they look the same but they function in the same way too. Just like a leech derives nourishment from its host's blood, the embryo derives nourishment from the decidua or the pregnant endometrium. These facts about the Koran are well documented and listed by Keith L. Moore in his standard textbooks on embryology, books used in such prestigious institutions as the Yale Medical School. 14.RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD "Nay! I swear by the day of resurrection. Nay! I swear by the reproachful self (Super Ego?). Does man think that We shall not gather his bones? Yea! We are able to make complete his very fingertips. ..What, does humankind think that they will be left to roam at will? Was he not a drop ejaculated? Then he was a leech-like structure. And He (God) created and formed. And made of him a pair, the male and the female . What, is He (God) then not able to quicken the dead?" Koran 75:1-40 The above verse of the Koran questions those who reject the notion of the resurrection of the dead. What is the more difficult task: That you were created from an insignificant drop, which was so small that it couldn't be seen except through a microscope, or that one day you will be formed from your remnants?
Thou Shalt Not Spam
I didn't ask for cut and paste spam. I asked how on this thread anyone bent something to fit their agenda. Try again please.
I'll do what I damned well please. If it doesn't suit you, take it up with Christine.
What is bent? In a word, your tiny, tiny mind.
In a word, your tiny, tiny mind. You made a charge. I asked you to back it up. It is obvious you were talking shit as you cannot address the issue at hand.
Sorry if I offended you randge, I was totally kidding. :-)
I was going to make a comparison between Christian and Muslim apologia. (One reason that I made the long cut and paste above.) But to be honest, after years of thinking about this stuff, I have just about exhausted my enthusiasm for jousting on these topics. So, go in peace, and sorry if I was hard or offensive. Just had a bellyful of religious discussion with friends, relatives and the odd stranger.
Yeah, I was off base. AKA rubbed me the wrong way & I was just seeing red. I fergot you are. Think I'll stick to discussing 911. It's easier on the nerves.
You pose a question that has obvious inferences and bias. It seems too absolutist to me. In some cases the concept of "evil" may be applicable. In other cases the concept of "good" may be applicable. So, to answer your question requires further refinement of your own question in order to have a plausible answer. I want to point out that our contemporary world wherein about 7BILLION and climbing human beings are involved, your question seems irreverent for and about a personal decision to terminate a pregnancy.
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." -- Ronald Reagan, circa 1977
Anyone who truly believes that is too fucking stupid to live. Including you. Fix that.
LOL! :)
Right. They are assuming that Carbon dating is accurate, it isn't. The further you go back in time the less accurate it is.
God is always good!
Anyone who truly believes that is too fucking stupid to live. Including you. Fix that. Can't stand opinions contrary to yours can you? Your answer to something that you don't understand is to say die a-hole. Yeah, you are real bright. NOT!
God is always good!
I wish this were true. Many people realize the Bible is God's word and still don't live for him. They realize with their minds the truth, but deny it with their hearts. Yet they think they are the rational ones.
God is always good!
Comments (79 - 98) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestAre you saying that the "taking of innocent human life" is evil? Is that the starting point you want to discuss?
#39. To: A K A Stone (#11)
The earth is a few thousand years old.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#40. To: A K A Stone (#34)
What is preposterous about it. All the evidence lines up with that model.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#41. To: A K A Stone (#34)
spontaneous combustion of mud creates life.
#42. To: Original_Intent (#7)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#43. To: FormerLurker (#40)
#44. To: Original_Intent (#22)
#45. To: randge (#44)
Yes, the day might have been anything. It might have been as long as you please. Whatever fits the desired hypothesis is fair game.
#46. To: A K A Stone, randge, Original_Intent, FormerLurker, all (#45)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#47. To: AKA Stone, randge, Original_Intent, FormerLurker, All (#46)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#48. To: wudidiz (#46)
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
#49. To: A K A Stone (#48)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#50. To: A K A Stone (#48)
A day with the lord. It isn't an earth day.
#51. To: A K A Stone (#45)
A day is a day.
#52. To: randge (#51)
"Wtf's he talkin' about?"
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#53. To: wudidiz (#52)
#54. To: wudidiz (#49)
'A day is like a thousand years' and 'A thousand years is like a day' means the exact same thing.
#55. To: A K A Stone (#54)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#56. To: A K A Stone (#54)
It is simply saying that God is outside of time. Timeless. It has no bearing on the days of creation and the time that the creator created.
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#57. To: wudidiz (#55)
Makes sense.
#58. To: wudidiz (#56)
Hang on a second.... did you come up with that shit on your own?
#59. To: A K A Stone (#57)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#60. To: A K A Stone (#58)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#61. To: Original_Intent, All (#0)
#62. To: randge (#61)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#63. To: randge (#61)
Reading these posts is quite nearly as amusing as watching Muslim apologists bending themselves into pretzels trying to demonstrate that the Koran has something noteworthy to say about biology or cosmology.
#64. To: A K A Stone (#63)
So tell us what was "bent".
It may again surprise you but the Koran is also aware of this illogical stand that people take by terming Muhammad both a liar and self deluded. The Koran states:
#65. To: randge (#64)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#66. To: randge (#64)
#67. To: wudidiz (#65)
#68. To: A K A Stone (#66)
#69. To: randge (#68)
What is bent?
#70. To: randge (#67)
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#71. To: A K A Stone (#69)
#72. To: wudidiz (#70)
#73. To: A K A Stone (#38)
Is abortion evil?
#74. To: A K A Stone (#11)
Here is how it is. The earth is a few thousand years old. And yes dinosaurs and man were together but not millions of years ago.
#75. To: randge (#72)
Think I'll stick to discussing 911. It's easier on the nerves.
"It has been said, 'time heals all wounds'. I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone." ~ Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy
#76. To: A K A Stone (#11)
They are using an assumption that the way things dated are accurate.
#77. To: Samuel Gray (#74)
(Edited)
Here is how it is. The earth is a few thousand years old. And yes dinosaurs and man were together but not millions of years ago.
#78. To: A K A Stone (#27)
When they realize that Gods word is true they will start to have different priorities and to live differently.
.
.
.