Posted on 07/22/2025 10:57:27 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
What if Human Civilisation rose before, in Ancient pre-history? Is it possible? The evidence would suggest yes...
The previous interglacial warming period, known as the 'Eemian' period, was 130 to 115,000 years ago. This period was longer than the current warm period, known as the Holocene, has been so far. Considering modern humans had already been around for at least 175,000 years by the start of the 'Eemian', why couldn't civilisation have flourished then as it has now? The conditions were optimal, it lasted more than enough time, we'd been around for 100s of 1000s of years already and according to the mainstream view, it is a warmer climate that led to civilisation developing.
So is it really so absurd to think it could have happened then, as well as now? What If We're NOT the First Human Civilization? | 8:03
Michael Button | 7.97K subscribers | 256,812 views | April 2, 2025
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
![]() |
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
There was supposedly a big pre-Colombian civilization in what’s now the US.
The Bible says death is the 'last enemy' to be defeated. In the old-earth telling death has been around long before man and is the driver of evolutionary processes. It is painful that people try to mate these two contradictory concepts.
As a monoglacialist I'd point out that evidence for "interglacials" is weak and better interpreted as rapid icefield edge fluctuations in a single ice age. This explains why we don't have significant evidence of animal extinctions in the interglacials, yet we have extensive animal extinctions at the actual close of the ice age. If the interglacials were real those extinctions should have happened at the first interglacial in particular.
Well we know with certainty there were at least six ice ages. And who’s to say the sun didn’t suddenly burn hot or put out a life killing radiation thousands and thousands of years ago. We just don’t know, we have to deal with the civilization we live in now.
Where?
🤦♂️🤦♀️
That guy needed to buy a vowel.
The records are incomplete, it was actually a civilization based on home decor, the Planet of the Drapes.
[crickets]
Okay, so, I should have spent more time on that one.
Do you actually believe that ice ages were total snowball ice ages that should have killed off everything?
You must be a young earther... No, that is not how it worked. Most of the earth was still ice free during the ice ages. And... What are now deserts were green...
The factual history of human fossils dictate that “Man” as they claim as a hominid has actually been through over 30 glacial/inter-glacial cycles...
*
“There was supposedly a big pre-Colombian civilization in what’s now the US.”
The Clovis people. Wiped out with the megafauna during the Younger Dryas ‘event’ 12k years ago.
And there were also pre-Clovis people in the Americas over 100k ago.
I think it’s bunk that ‘modern humans’ have existed unchanged for 250K years as some of the YT anthros posit. The skeletons possibly but not their intelligence, behaviors, etc. which imo evolve independent of the skeleton.
*
Nope, and nothing I said should have led you to believe that.
The factual history of human fossils...
Historical data absent eyewitness documentation is subjective and subject to interpretation. "Water boils at 100C at 1 atmosphere pressure" is a testable scientific statement. "Bob boiled water last Tuesday" is not. It is a historical claim and dragging him into a lab at a later date can only establish possibilities, not prove a historical claim. That you pontificate about "factual history" "proving" a past interpretation is proof you are a religious fanatic (the kind that doesn't believe themselves such because they have been taught to believe it so) trying to claim an aura of "science" to bolster your religious beliefs. Openurmind, indeed.
Sounds like those archeologists who dig really deep
There aren’t so many. The Old Testament refers to The Deluge, which is something similar to a written legend from India.
The Sumerian king list (I think there are two extant known copies) list “kings before the Flood” and after, with the reign lengths starting with tens of thousands of years then declining.
There’s an alluvial layer, a big strata of sand over Ur, no artifacts (Woolley found this), then the locals resumed building on top of the sand. There was a jump to conclusions that the sand layer represented the Flood, but it has never been found in any other Sumerian or Mesopotamian sites, which suggests it was a dam failure a few miles upriver from Ur.
Other flood stories describe tsunamis nearly exclusively. A 2nd M BC event in China resulted in a lot of standing water and the generation or more of effort to drain the puddles as it were was recorded sometime after the fact.
The fact is, there isn’t anything like the Noah story, yet these other stories are brought up as if they support it, but none of them (including the Sumerian flood story) isn’t really anything like it. So, trying to support the idea with other sources always results in a repudiation of conflicting details.
https://www.livius.org/sources/content/anet/266-the-sumerian-king-list/
https://www.worldhistory.org/Eridu_Genesis/
The Egyptian story sounds like it provided the basis for Plato’s Timaeus:
https://www.worldhistory.org/Book_of_the_Heavenly_Cow/
https://www.arcus-atlantis.org.uk/atlantis/timaeus-critias.html#22c
Respectfully, I don't see where the Bible explicitly says that the earth was created in six calendar days, or that creation occurred roughly 4,000 years before Christ. Us Christians don't have to win the argument over the age of the earth for us to be literal Bible believers.
The Hebrew word yôm is what's translated to "day" in Genesis 1. It has multiple literal meanings, including a 24-hour period and and an undefined era (definition # 5 in the link). Similarly for "evening" (Hebrew ʿereḇ), which in Psalm 30:5:
For His anger is but for a moment,
His favor is for a lifetime.
Weeping may endure for a night,
But a shout of joy comes in the morning.
Obviously the "night" is not a brief portion of a 24-hour day, but a period of time. The same for "morning" (Hebrew bōqer) being used sometimes as the start of daytime, but in Zephaniah 3:5 used as the start of an era of God's judgement. These are just some examples of how the Hebrew words in Genesis 1 for day, evening, and morning are sometimes used elsewhere in the OT to not refer to 24-hour period time constructs. Thus, we should be open to the possibility that the Genesis 1 creation account is talking about 6 long eras. (Note I said "possibility", I can't definitively say it is talking about long eras and not 24-hour days. Those same words are sometimes used to denote 24-hour days.)
The same for the lineage argument and how the Hebrew people wrote lineage with obvious gaps. The gaps aren't evidence of lies, the Hebrew culture simply allowed it be correct to say that my great grandpa "begat" my son if the one writing it deemed that both I and my father weren't worth mentioning. As an example, compare Jesus' lineage in each of the Gospels. The differences between Matthew's and Luke's lineages for Jesus is partly royal vs birthly lineage, and partly a difference of which ancestors were worth mentioning and which not worth mentioning. (42 generations in Matthew vs 77 generations in Luke). With that in mind, who knows how many of Jesus' ancestors both of them ignored? The same for the ancestors from Adam to Noah, and Noah to Abraham. From a purely exegetical interpretation (meaning no modern or personal bias), we simply don't know how long those eras were. Adam could have lived a thousand years ago, hundreds of thousands of years ago, or even millions of years ago (looking just from the Bible).
So if you and I want to win the argument against people pushing the evolution/natural selection narrative, don't get sucked into an age of the earth debate. It's simply not explicitly indicated in the Bible IMHO, thus not an argument we have to win to promote believing in the Bible's creation account. Focus on the definite interaction God had with creation. Focus on things like natural selection being thrown a curve ball by the Cambrian Explosion. Focus on all the things in nature and the cosmos that demand fine tuning for things to work for advanced life to exist. If you do those things, you point out that it requires a lot of religion to believe we got here through a bunch of freak accidents. Then point out the sequence of events in the creation story. Archaeologists agree that life came into existence in that sequence -- that can't be coincidence. Point out that Genesis 2 says that God made Adam from the dust of the earth --- written centuries before the ancient Greeks said that man was made from the dirt "element" and before we say with our periodic table that we are carbon based organisms -- that can't be coincidence. Nor can it be a coincidence the Garden of Eden's Tigris and Euphrates rivers is the location of the Fertile Crescent.
PEOMPPHO
Paleocene
Eocene
Oligocene
Miocene
Pliocene
Pleistocene
Holocene
O = The current period in who too many reside........ Obscene
Graham Hancock has a good documentary on ancient advanced civilizations.
https://www.netflix.com/title/81211003
I highly recommend it.
Maybe first human civilization did what this civilization is doing reverse evolution?.
I think I went to school with the Hybor kids...
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.