Posted on 04/29/2004 1:32:24 PM PDT by me_newswire
WASHINGTON - More than three-quarters of a million years ago, early humans gathered around a campfire near an ancient lake in what is now Israel, making tools and perhaps cooking food, in the earliest evidence yet found of the use of fire in Europe or Asia.
Researchers have found evidence that these early people hunted and processed meat and used fire at a site called Gesher Benot Ya'aqov in the northern Dead Sea valley.
Developing the ability to use fire "surely led to dramatic changes in their behavior connected with diet, defense and social interaction," said lead researcher Naama Goren-Inbar of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
Occupation of the site has been dated at about 790,000 years ago, according to the research team. Their findings are reported in Friday's issue of the journal Science.
The remains of burned wood indicate the possibility of a hearth, the researchers said, and there were tiny flint pieces, probably chipped off in the process of making tools.
There also is evidence of consumption of meat, including bones with cut marks and breakage patterns indicating the extraction of marrow.
The evidence indicates the early humans ate a variety of animals including horses, deer, rhino, hippo and birds, Goren-Inbar said in an interview via e-mail.
Several types of wood were burned at the site, including willow, poplar, ash and wild olive. There also was evidence of oats, wild grapevine, bedstraw, barley and several types of grass.
The find "enlarges the scope of our understanding of the behavioral patterns of the early humans," Goren-Inbar said. "It allows us to understand that these hominins were capable of coping with dangers, food, acquire warmth and later on in the history of mankind enabled some very meaningful technological inventions."
The earliest previous sites in Europe and Asia that show evidence of human use of fire have been dated at about 500,000 years ago.
Thus, the new finding pushes back the earliest evidence for control of fire by residents of Asia or Europe by more than a quarter-million years.
There are earlier sites associating fire with early humans in Africa, though some researchers believe the evidence at those locations is ambiguous and natural fires cannot be ruled out.
Anthropologist Paola Villa of the University of Colorado, who was not part of the research team, called new the report an important find.
"The evidence presented in this paper is very convincing because it is based on a combination of different kinds of data," she said. "Supportive evidence for the presence of fireplaces is also provided. The authors have considered all possible alternative explanations," she said.
"This is an important find that will encourage European archaeologists to take a closer look at their data," Villa added.
The Israeli site is at a crossroads for movement between Africa, Asia and Europe and use of fire could have helped spur the colonization of the colder climate of Europe, which began about 800,000 years ago.
Still unknown is exactly who these early people were. The paper notes that residents of this site have been assumed to be the now extinct Homo erectus or Homo ergaster, but may also have been an archaic version of modern humans, Homo sapiens.
ON THE NET Science: http://www.sciencemag.org
--
See current Middle East News links at Mideast Newswire:
www.mideastnewswire.com
_________________________________________________________
Was bomb making equipment found?
Evidently the rationale they use is based on the 6 days of creation, then Noah, his sons Abraham etc etc etc etc Moses etc etc etc Jesus + 2000 odd years.
The only problem is that, just delving solely into the 6 days of creation alone, that the bible says that a day for God is not the same as that of a human. Who's to say those 'days' are not eons? I don't know ....and I'm certain the 6K age people also do not know for sure.
And if you look at the way Genesis depicts life coming to be it matches what science says to a T. From the fish in the ocean to reptiles etc etc. The only difference is that the Bible says 6 days while science says eons. But later on in the Bible it says a day for God is not what we would see as a day.
Hence, 6 days may mean 6 days ......or it may mean something totally different. But certainly the earth is not 6,000 years old ....there are a couple of civilizations older than that.
How long before the Paleostinians claim to be their direct descendants?
Umm...That's not quite what it says about days and time.
And if you look at the way Genesis depicts life coming to be it matches what science says to a T. From the fish in the ocean to reptiles etc etc. The only difference is that the Bible says 6 days while science says eons. But later on in the Bible it says a day for God is not what we would see as a day.
If you look again you will see that it is definitely not in the same order suggested by evolution.
Hence, 6 days may mean 6 days ......or it may mean something totally different. But certainly the earth is not 6,000 years old ....there are a couple of civilizations older than that.
Sorry, there is nothing older than that.
How can you be certain of that? Were you there when it was created?
There is plenty of good scientific evidence for a very young earth, just as The Lord God tells us in His Holy Bible.
However i would be exceedingly curious as to why YOU believe the world is 6,000 years old. Show me where in the Bible it says the Earth is 6K years old. I am certain you cannot. Why? Because that number was derived by 'biblical scholars' reckoning the age of the earth based on Biblical chronology. Basically guesswork based on certain events recorded in the Bible. Consequently it is not God through man but man through 'applied logic' (and this applied 'logic' has the same efficacy as me saying it took 80 days to write the book 'Around the World in 80 days' since in the novel Phineas Fog travels the globe in that time span.).
Anyways, the most important thing i would like you to 'humor' me with is HOW and WHY the 6,000 year number came up. I'd am truly curious as to that. And most importantly show me where in the Bible it says the world is 6,000 years old.
That is not too much to ask now, is it? Unless of course the 6K date is nothing more than what the early fathers used to do .....for example debating what shape an angel's wings are (actually happened), or coming up with human edicts like indulgences and other stuff that is not to be found in the Bible ....basically such stuff si the pure result of people sitting down and coming up with all sorts of things. More recently, a certain noted (and popular) Biblical scholar said the locusts that can sting in the Book of Revelations are Apache attack Helicopters. Hence my sceptical view of statements about the Bible that do not have a bilical basis.
And if you cannot give me a Biblical reference then maybe i can interest you in some shapes of angel's wings .....
Anyways, where does it say the Earth is 6,000 years old in the Bible? And let me add, I totally believe in the Bible .....however when people say the Earth is 6K yrs old, and they tie it to God's Word, then they better show me where it says so in His Word.
Oh, and by the way, the following article is on some recent developments in the carbon-dating of the Harrapa civilization and Mohenjo-daro. It is not that important here (i do not want to deviate from you telling me the source of the 6,000 year date), but it is interesting nonetheless.
Michael Cremo, Researcher of Ancient Archaeology
"Within the past few months, the engineers began some dredging operations there and they pulled up human fossil bones, fossil wood, stone tools, pieces of pottery and many other things that indicated that it indeed was a human habitation site that they had. And they were able to do more intensive sonar work there and were able to identify more structures. They appeared to have been laid out on the bank of a river that had been flowing from the Indian subcontinent out into that area.
According to the news releases, they have done a radiocarbon testing on a piece of wood from the underwater site that is now yielding an age of 9,500 years which would place it near the end of the last Ice Age.
Yes, those are the indications that are coming. There were actually two radiocarbon dates: one about 7500 years old and another about 9500 years old. The 9500 year old one seems to be the strongest one. That's the one they are going with. This was announced by Minister Joshi (Murli Manohar Joshi is Indian Minister for Ocean Technology) at this meeting I attended in Hyderabad, India. He said there is going to be more work going on. It's difficult because it's very difficult to see down there. There is a very swift current. So, it's going to have to be a pretty massive effort, but he said the government of India is willing to put the resources behind it to do whatever it takes to further confirm these discoveries.
I also spoke in Hyderabad with an independent archaeologist not connected with the Indian government, but who has a deep interest in these discoveries and he says they are still going to have to send divers down there. Up to this point, they have not sent divers down. The information they have is based on the sonar readings and the dredging they have done. Eventually, they are going to have to find a way to get people down there to take a closer look at this. I think this effort is going to go on.
Now, another American archaeologist, Richard Meadows of Harvard University, is proposing there should be an international effort here. On the surface that sounds like a good idea, but it also may be an effort of American archaeologists and others to control the project. I don't think they want to see a civilization being as old as it appears to be according to these new finds at 9500 years ago. So, I would hope the Indian archaeologists and government would be very cautious about letting outsiders in there who might have a different agenda and who might try to control what gets let out about this very important discovery. It could be quite revolutionary.
And let me add, I totally believe in the Bible .....however when people say the Earth is 6K yrs old, and they tie it to God's Word, then they better show me where it says so in His Word.
I have this same debate going on with a fellow Christian, who is very near and dear to me, who cannot provide the answers to these questions.
My point is it's not in the Bible, but to agree with her I must accept a mortal individual's interpretation of something that appears nowhere in the Bible. And I must reject all evidence I see before my eyes (the speed of light, carbon dating, etc.)
In my humble opinion, that is asking too much, especially when I can believe in the actual Word of the Bible without having to dismiss reality by accepting one mortal individual's interpretation of the Bible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.