Modern humans have existed for 300,000 years but Abrahamic religions are only 3500 years old

[Bonk]

Yea I know you believe the ancients were just chucking spears at each other and dancing around a fire till rain came. I get it. It still doesn’t answer how for 299,600 years there was absolutely no tech then in the last 400 we have this technological boom that puts iPhones in our hands and let’s travel at a hundred miles per hr. That’s not how progress works. Either something happened in the last 400 years to cause this boom in intelligence and technology or they’re lying about the past. And going by the structures they built (castles, cathedrals, Great Wall of china, pyramids etc…) it’s the latter

I agree with you in the sense of “who knows” how long it’s been. But I was questioning more so the logic of humans being around for hundreds of thousands of years and seeing no technology until the last 400 years.

When the first settlers arrived in America in the 1800/ they arrived using horse and buggy. 100 years later they have cars. 100 years later they have lamb is. Is that a logical progression of hundreds of thousands of years of walking on foot/animal to within 200 years having a car that can get you 100 miles away ina hr?

And I bring this up to show how people will question the logic of the Bible but not the logic of their own beliefs

I agree with your post apart from the technology bit. Technology didn’t start 400 years ago. It has existed for thousands of years. Iron smelting, construction, glass making, bronze casting, etc., are technology & it’s basically the same formula/equations used for modern technology albeit expanded.

But I’d say, the biggest problem is that Europeans are the ones narrating history & most of their narratives were based on a lie to keep them at the top of the totem pole as the master race. And they have to keep telling lies to coverup the initial lie they told. Hence we’re in this quagmire.

To add to your post: the oldest fossil found in West Africa is 13,000years old (according to carbon testing). But somehow no civilisation was built in the same region until 3000years ago. And all the civilisations built in the region never had external influences. So, what were the people doing for 10,000years before they suddenly woke up 3000years ago & decided to start building something? It just doesn’t add up.

They’re hiding a lot of things cos almost everything was built on a lie.

 

[MMS]

The scientific community isn't some MAGA shxt where people just say BS and hope people go along with it, a person wouldn't be indoctrinated because you would have evidence to back up your beliefs, which has happened countless times in science, where something that was thought to be true was disproven and a new idea taken place.

Jebel Irhoud wasn't dated using carbon dating so I don't even know why you are still even bringing it up

actually you couldnt be more wrong

in the academic community its a real truth that replication studies are frowned upon and looked at as a waste of money so only new studies are funded with grants instead



which means that a great deal of the "knowledge" that you are consuming are one-and-done experiments where only a handful of people attacked and defended the idea. Furthermore because there are very few replication studies the power and accuracy of the studies findings are increasingly weak as time elapses.

So yes academia is very much an indoctrination place as most undergrad curriculums are not challenging you to discover new ideas just to regurgitate already formulated ones. Its only in doctoral studies that you even get into the idea of true defense.

 

[inndaskKy]

Sub-atomic particles have existed for billions of years but humans have believed in them only for a little over a 100 years.

What were the sub-atomic particles doing before then?

 

[BaldingSoHard]

ok, how can you falsify a claim about the universe that was NEVER proven in the first place?

saying whether you believe its proven or disproven is silly as there are no experiments that can be made to PROVE it in the first place

Dont assume im attacking you, just the ideas in this thread

thats another thing, people take the things they learned in HS/College and put their person on it without realizing they are not the sum of their knowledge

if you really believe in science you would be joyful in this statement as science has been changing for years every year for as long as people have began studying. As I said before treating knowledge/science as a religion is a sickness

Something doesn't need to be already proven in order to be falsifiable, it only needs to be a claim, right? Also remember that scientists generally speaking aren't really out to prove anything (in most cases it's not personal, other cases such as the Wright Bros was very much a proof of concept) as much as they're trying to add context and understanding to their observations through experimentation. In fact, most scientists find through the process of experimentation that their initial hypothesis was incorrect. Wrong more than they're right, so to speak.

So with the big bang, it wasn't like...

Scientist: I've noticed that other galaxies seem to be accelerating away from ours. I think the universe existed as a single point and blew up one day. I'm going to test this hypothesis and boy I hope I'm right.

It was more like:

Scientist: I've noticed that other galaxies seem to be accelerating away from ours. I think the universe existed as a single point and blew up one day. I'm going to test this hypothesis and publish my findings, whether I'm right or wrong and we'll go from there.

And that might seem like subtle nuance, and it kinda is, but the difference is exactly what it is that makes the scientific method work.

So scientists aren't trying to prove their hypotheses, they're trying to prove or disprove their hypothesis, because either way they've learned something.

@ the bolded, yes that's what the Scientific Method is.

 

[Won Won]

i think you are the appropriate person on this message board

I don't claim to "understand halflives" but there are a lot of professionals that do. And if you have evidence that their methods are faulty, then you owe it to yourself and society to correct them

 

[MMS]

Something doesn't need to be already proven in order to be falsifiable, it only needs to be a claim, right? Also remember that scientists generally speaking aren't really out to prove anything (in most cases it's not personal, other cases such as the Wright Bros was very much a proof of concept) as much as they're trying to add context and understanding to their observations through experimentation. In fact, most scientists find through the process of experimentation that their initial hypothesis was incorrect. Wrong more than they're right, so to speak.

So with the big bang, it wasn't like...

Scientist: I've noticed that other galaxies seem to be accelerating away from ours. I think the universe existed as a single point and blew up one day. I'm going to test this hypothesis and boy I hope I'm right.

It was more like:

Scientist: I've noticed that other galaxies seem to be accelerating away from ours. I think the universe existed as a single point and blew up one day. I'm going to test this hypothesis and publish my findings, whether I'm right or wrong and we'll go from there.

And that might seem like subtle nuance, and it kinda is, but the difference is exactly what it is that makes the scientific method work.

So scientists aren't trying to prove their hypotheses, they're trying to prove or disprove their hypothesis, because either way they've learned something.

@ the bolded, yes that's what the Scientific Method is.

yeah but in this specific case

the test involves extrapolating electromagnetic readings from stationary attennas on earth to distances that force you to believe they existed in the past

now I have argued against dating but I am also against concepts like redshift. To me astronomers are running into a wall because for all they know they are just measuring the errors in their own lenses!

IE the hubble deep field appears to have enumerous galaxies but is it really enumerous or just the effect of the light interacting with itself in a vacuum? You can only assume whats happening but the astronomers will tell you their measurements are set in stone.

 

[MMS]

I don't claim to "understand halflives" but there are a lot of professionals that do. And if you have evidence that their methods are faulty, then you owe it to yourself and society to correct them

there are plenty of people doing these things now

the problem is that for people like you you are being force fed these things in HS and being penalized for not accepting them. So it is indoctrination... rather then looking at the knowledge as something external to yourself you take it as apart of your person

which is precisely why you are resorting to the foolishness instead of just realizing the limitations of your claims.

 

[BlackBall]

There were thousands of “gods” before religion was weaponised

 

[Maximus Rex]

actually you couldnt be more wrong

in the academic community its a real truth that replication studies are frowned upon and looked at as a waste of money so only new studies are funded with grants instead



which means that a great deal of the "knowledge" that you are consuming are one-and-done experiments where only a handful of people attacked and defended the idea. Furthermore because there are very few replication studies the power and accuracy of the studies findings are increasingly weak as time elapses.

So yes academia is very much an indoctrination place as most undergrad curriculums are not challenging you to discover new ideas just to regurgitate already formulated ones. Its only in doctoral studies that you even get into the idea of true defense.

Actually I couldn't be more right because something as deeply embedded in the archaeologist community as dating, a foundation of archaeology, would have been overturned quickly had it been wrong

Keep trying though

 

[MMS]

Universe expanding from a central point (explosion)

Cosmic Microwave Background

telescopes than can look millions of years into the past (James Webb being 250 million years)

FAQ Lite Webb Telescope/NASA.

Now tell me what evidence does that 2000 year old book have for the creation of the universe?

my claim is that they are not looking into the past, but rather viewing light interactions in a vacuum

the limitation of the telescope is the limitation of the measurements. So in essence the universe as they know it is confined to what a lense has revealed to them. Not what the actual universe truly is comprised of.

 

[BaldingSoHard]

yeah but in this specific case

the test involves extrapolating electromagnetic readings from stationary attennas on earth to distances that force you to believe they existed in the past

now I have argued against dating but I am also against concepts like redshift. To me astronomers are running into a wall because for all they know they are just measuring the errors in their own lenses!

IE the hubble deep field appears to have enumerous galaxies but is it really enumerous or just the effect of the light interacting with itself in a vacuum? You can only assume whats happening but the astronomers will tell you their measurements are set in stone.

What's not to understand about redshift? We observe this effect on Earth whenever a car drives by. Doppler effect is universal to waves. It would be weird if light didn't redshift, imo.

 

[ISO]

There were other negligent sky daddies before the cult leaders Yeshua and Muhammad were born

 

[MMS]

Actually I couldn't be more right because something as deeply embedded in the archaeologist community as dating, a foundation of archaeology, would have been overturned quickly had it been wrong

Keep trying though

you underestimate these fields are like cliques

assuming you are black, you would understand hopefully that cliques let in who they let in and work together to destroy ideas that attack theirs.

In fact this is why increasingly many scientific communities are being distrusted because more work is done to attack new ideas than actually consider them on their merits.

 

[MMS]

What's not to understand about redshift? We observe this effect on Earth whenever a car drives by. Doppler effect is universal to waves. It would be weird if light didn't redshift, imo.

Its a phenomena that is predicted but not necessarily proven. Remember we are talking parsecs and lightyears not millimeters and kilometers which can be physically proven.

 

[Everythingg]

There's two issues here. The first issue is how you're defining "technology".

Technology doesn't only mean "things with computer chips in them". In ancient times, Animal Husbandry was a technology. The plow was technology. Stone tools and a bow & arrow was technology. So humans have had "technology" since we first noticed that certain rocks when placed in the fire turned into shiny smooth "rocks" after the fire had died out (because they're made of ore and have metallic deposits). This lead to knowledge and exploitation of metallurgy, and everything that followed, etc....

The second issue is that the rate of technological growth is exponential. Meaning it moves very very slowly for a very long time, and then seemingly, explodes.

Yes by technology I’m referring to tech like phones, cars, batteries, electricity that make life way more easier..

But people won’t question exactly what caused that “boom” in tech that wasn’t there for 299,900 years (even more than that according to some) but will comb thru a Bible they say is fairytales for things they deem “illogical”

A lot of theories and evidence to support that the earth has had many resets from disasters.

Lord of evidence of it.

We get to a certain point and something happens that sends us back to the Stone Age unfortunately. And the people who survive are usually the people in remote villages who was already living off the grid with no tech.

Absolutely. But do you think these “science has all the answers” guys would buy that? Because I dont


Just going by the structures they built, shows they had some type of technology or understanding that is being kept from us.

It would be hard to build this with the tech we have today let alone the time they say it was built when it was hammer, chisel, horse and buggy.