Well, I was going to offer an opinion but I don't see why I should bother.
Seems like you know everything already.
(You realize of course that posts like yours are why most scientists have left this website in disgust. Here is a brief essay another poster did which is pertinent.)
no, the scientists who worship at the altar of darwinism have left...those who worship God in their hearts...are still here,
truth has a funny way of sticking around despite your best efforts.
(and you didnt deny what i said, you will make anything and everything fit into evolutionism...why? BECAUSE IT HAS TO..)
In the meantime, there has been far less of a stink than some have predicted, over Palin's Christianity and "support for" (not "requirement TO") teach creationism in the schools.
Matt Damon seems to have sneered at it, as did the Saturday Night Live sketch (indirectly), but it seems to be much less of a deal-breaker than feared.
There. Now *EVERYONE* can get into a flame war. :-)
Cheers!
Hey, Coyoteman, it's not just the scientists who have left. Not a scientist and I rarely come around anymore, one of the chief reasons being cited by you.
Moving along...My non-scientific POV, FWIW, could never accept that the first asparagus plant got transplanted closer to the hut only 10,000 years ago so I rather enjoy seeing the research beginning to confirm that agriculture is a lot older than what a lot of (probably non-gardening) experts thought. I suspect that the roots of ag are to be found in the foods that people found really tasty and the bland stuff like cultivated grains were a bit later. Although I know the barley aficionados will vehemently disagree...
I’m another who likes to read your opinions. Notwithstanding the ugly posts on this thread .
Just a thought - I notice this opinion is based on a mathematical model. I doubt any real insight can be gleaned from these. How can they account for the myriad of variables that must been present at the outset of agriculture? Gathering food and agriculture are two very different events.
Seeing this post makes sense if you think that Firestone et al. have it right that the Younger Dryas was caused by a giant boloid event around 13,000 kya. I have long thought that humanity has been more developed than generally recognized at various times and then thrown back in development by some sort of catastrophe. The great Toba volcanic event about 74,000 comes to mind, and the discovery of well developed tools in southern Africa back at or before that time. I remember the surprise that certain Spanish/French ? cave paintings which were thought to be about 24,000 years old were in fact 32,000 years old.
Since Neanertals disappeared from the fossil record back around the time these agricultural remains were deposited, I wonder if exploitation of plant resources by modern humans may have given us the competitive edge for survival.
PS: I miss blam, and hope Coyoteman does not give up here in despair. I would love to read some of what balm is posting at his new site, but simply don’t have the time to jump around on the internet.
“most scientists have left this website in disgust”
Even here, although this is one of the best discussion sites extant, a certain thickness of skin is required. You have to be able to just shrug your shoulders and not care.
Although libtards are not allowed here, there are those who act like liberals in other contexts. There are protestants who hate Catholics, for instance.
If one is a hothouse flower, one can only survive in the hothouse. This is a hardier environment.