Posted on 05/02/2012 10:12:27 PM PDT by Theoria
For decades, scientists thought that the Clovis hunters were the first to cross the Arctic to America. They were wrong — and now they need a better theory
The mastodon was old, its teeth worn to nubs. It was perfect prey for a band of hunters, wielding spears tipped with needle-sharp points made from bone. Sensing an easy target, they closed in for the kill.
Almost 14,000 years later, there is no way to tell how many hits it took to bring the beast to the ground near the coast of present-day Washington state. But at least one struck home, plunging through hide, fat and flesh to lodge in the mastodon's rib. The hunter who thrust the spear on that long-ago day didn't just bring down the mastodon; he also helped to kill off the reigning theory of how people got to the Americas.
For most of the past 50 years, archaeologists thought they knew how humans arrived in the New World. The story starts around the end of the last ice age, when sea levels were lower and big-game hunters living in eastern Siberia followed their prey across the Bering land bridge and into Alaska. As the ice caps in Canada receded and opened up a path southward, the colonists swept across the vast unpopulated continent. Archaeologists called these presumed pioneers the Clovis culture, after distinctive stone tools that were found at sites near Clovis, New Mexico, in the 1920s and 1930s.
As caches of Clovis tools were uncovered across North America over subsequent decades, nearly all archaeologists signed on to the idea that the Clovis people were the first Americans. Any evidence of humans in the New World before the Clovis time was dismissed, sometimes harshly.
(Excerpt) Read more at nature.com ...
Watch this great video presentation.
Watch the videos in chronological order / numbered.
Sorry my Stunt Mormon friend, Noah’s Ark was not a submarine...
That Jerusalem exists doesn’t give me faith in the Resurrected Lord. Facts don’t establish faith.
Have you ever sung the words to Lead Kindly Light the hymn by John Newman? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead,_Kindly_Light#Notable_occasions_relating_to_hymn
When I do I imagine myself in a dark cave. Have you ever been in a cave when the lights go out and you can see nothing, not even your hand. The littlest light means all.
“I do not ask to see The distant scene; one step enough for me... I loved to choose and see my path; but now Lead Thou me on!”
I love that hymn. Your post and those of your fellows always remind me of that hymn.
Did you ever have one of those Noah’s Arks? As a kid I did, actually two. One was wooden and the other plastic. They were used, but still had many animal pairs. They both looked so similar - the typical double bowed boat with a central house. Not at all like the ship God designed for Noah.
The real Ark is all black, tight like a drum and with a glowing stone for light. That would be a really awesome toy. Do you know if anyone has ever built a true replica of the Biblical Ark to the specifications God laid down?
Faith that is contrary to facts is only blind faith, God doesn’t call us to blind faith.
There is ZERO evidence for the Book of Mormon and literally TONS for the Bible.
Faith contrary to facts is faith and the more blind the better. You’re letting your humanness get the better of you.
Think of Daniel in the lion’s den or Shadrach Meshach and Abed-nego. The facts in both cases were that lions and fire consume, yet they acted on blind faith. I wish I had faith like theirs. Or like Noah’s who built an Ark on faith (could you imagine 120 years of waiting/building?) or the verse from the NT: “For we walk by faith, not by sight.” 2Cor5:7 or “Ask in faith for wisdom, nothing doubting.” James 1:5-7. Clearly James is saying stay faithful despite the “facts” around you.
I like to be willing to just have enough faith to take the next step for the Lord. The only people I hear always talking about facts over faith, other than you anti-Mormons, are atheists. It’s why I found your sources so ironic. I mean they’re both committed atheists.
I can and so can you. Anyone can if they’re willing to look.
I like biblos.com
Take a detailed and specific look at God’s specification for the Ark. It’s fascinating.
I have, that’s why I know comparing the Ark to the fictional Jerdite ships is amusing at best...
Now if you have something specific to point out instead of the usual Mormon wild goose chase...
What are God’s specs for the Ark?
Genesis Chapter 6
12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.
15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.
No magic rocks mentioned...
No mind you I respond against my better judgment, in hopes of an actual answer in the same fashion, with actual citations instead your typical Mormon wild goose chase...
So your turn give me something beyond “I say so” or “if you really look for it...”
You can see that it is pitched inside and out so it doesn’t look at all like the commonly seen “Noah’s Ark”. It would be all around black. There’s no central house above the gunwale. That part is only a cubit higher than the gunwale. http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/attachments/fiberglass-composite-boat-building/46367-need-help-replacing-gunwale-finish-al_boat_repair.jpg
Keep in mind that Ark in the story is essentially a barge: “basket” or “box”: http://concordances.org/hebrew/8392.htm
It might have looked like a barge with most of the “cargo” below the waterline: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/P%C3%A9nicheRecyclageFerrailles2008De%C3%BBle2.jpg/220px-P%C3%A9nicheRecyclageFerrailles2008De%C3%BBle2.jpg
It would look more like the Monitor, but without the central turret. It might also look like the Merrimac, but only 18-20” above the gunwale. http://americancivilwar.com/pictures/ironclads_battle_2.jpg
Both of which have a certain submarine look.
For certain it doesn’t look like this: http://www.barcelonareporter.com/img_uploads/Noahs_Ark_found_in_Turkey.jpg
or this: http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-AP467_Noah2_G_20090413175410.jpg
or this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Noahs_Ark.jpg/200px-Noahs_Ark.jpg
It was black and designed with a roof only 18” above the gunwale.
Check out the Hebrew. Gopher wood? Rooms? Pitch? Window (this is the lighted stone)? We don’t know accurately what Gopher wood is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopher_wood It is quite literally a unique word. There isn’t another like it in the Bible or in Hebrew. It might very well have been a unique item made especially for Noah by God, similar to the big fish that ate Jonah.
Here’s the word for “rooms” (nests): http://concordances.org/hebrew/7064.htm
“pitch”: http://concordances.org/hebrew/3724.htm
“cubit” - this is usually interpreted as the length of the king’s arm, but who does Noah go to to measure this? Is it the length of Jehovah’s arm? http://concordances.org/hebrew/520.htm
Remember it is described as 30 cubits high from bottom to top. Does that include the cubit above the gunwale? Where’s the water line? It’s open to interpretation. Remember this is a craft designed and graced by God.
Here’s the miracle stone: tsohar: http://concordances.org/hebrew/6672.htm It glows like the noonday sun.
So given the above the Ark of Noah very much could look like this: https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7FU2vO3LDiHfZ5eMa42nlqwTwqize0Dd7Rb9o0gGJo2DCs8LYQw
As an aside, don’t disparage the things of God. His miracles are distinct from magic. Magic is false and you’re being intentionally derogatory. If we’re to have a conversation I expect, if not Christian, than American common courtesy.
Um kay...
As far as derogatory, nice redirect but when it comes to things of Mormonism and its fictional stories it might as well be magic, since it is not from God...
And what it says and the way it treats my Savior is far more derogatory then anything I could dream up...
Try again, FRiend:
http://concordances.org/hebrew/6672.htm
http://www.indyfan.com/ark/tsohar.html
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=1466
http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/4275/noah-finding-light-in-shadow-of-darkness/
http://www.studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06672
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/tsohar.html
Light is most certainly what it must mean. The OT has words for window. Once again ignorant, bumpkin Joseph Smith, Jr. hits it out of the park. His theology is more sophisticated and accurate, Biblically accurate, than any Christian theology of his time.
He gets it right again and again on fundamental Christian doctrine like theosis, priesthood authority, baptism as a fundamental step in salvation and... a lighted stone in a Jaredite ship. These ships look very much the same in design and have the tsohar as a miraculous source of light. It’s incredible and eventually you’ll admit it.
As for Jesus Christ, he’s the central prospect of the Book of Mormon. He’s as described in the NT and the OT.
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.
