Posted on 07/28/2007 6:00:30 PM PDT by blam
1m-years-old footprints found at Margalla Hills
By Sher Baz Khan
ISLAMABAD, July 27: In what appears to be a major discovery, archaeologists have found two over one million years old human footprints preserved on a sandstone at the Margalla Hills.
The Indusians Research Cell, which is working under the supervision of world renowned archaeologist and historian Dr Ahmad Hassan Dani of Taxila Institute of Asian Civilisations, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, has made the discovery, which is likely to add a new chapter to the archaeological history and heritage of the federal capital and attract visitors.
A footprint of 1 feet is in complete and well preserved form while another is broken from the finger side which is also of the same size in comparative manner. The notable marks of the feet are the clear veins and opposite folded appearance.
“A huge stone on the top of the hill is the secure home of these prints since about over one million years ago,” says A.K. Azad, an archaeologist and head of the project.
Further research may give more clues of the foot marks through anthropological and geophysical methods, he observed.
The recent discovery is the continuity of the Indusian Research Cell’s earlier research about human evolution which previously revealed a fossilised upper jaw from the site of Dhudhumber, foot and hand prints from Attock and Palaeolithic cave from Margalla hills.
Pakistan’s geomorphologic research was conducted to compare with the Alps of Europe during the period of 1930-1939 by a French mission. Since then, lots of other dimensions of the research opened the doors of scientific research in Pakistan as the country provided the glacial sequence, fossilised evidences of Pre-Cambrian to Holocene epochs, earliest evidences of the anthropoid existence, earliest cultural centre at Mehargarh (contemporary of Jericho and Jarmo) and most advanced civilisation of the world (Indus valley).
Indusians Research Cell started the second phase of the project “Post-earthquake Explorations of Human Remains in Margalla Hills” under the supervision of A.K. Azad.
According to Mr Azad the formation of the Margalla Hills goes back to the Miocene epoch. The dominant limestone of the Margalla is also mixed with the sand stone.
“So we can assume that due to availability of the water in ancient times many marks of the zoological as well botanical significance may lead to our objectives,” the young archaeologist hopes.
In 1976, Pakistan opened another chapter of human evolution, which makes case for Asian anthropoid origin from this region.
During the ‘60s and ‘70s, Pilbeam led expeditions to the Siwalik Hills badlands of northern Pakistan, searching for further Ramapithecine remains.
In March 1975 and January 1976 team members made surface recoveries of four bone fragments which fit together to form the most complete mandible recovered yet. The mandible shows that Ramapithecus did not have a parabolic, human like dental arcade, as originally thought, but rather a V-shaped, more apelike arcade. Though the shape of the arcade is not now regarded as one of the more anatomically important characters, Ramapithecus is no longer granted the high status that it once received.
Different scholars have defined the word ‘Potohar’ differently. But, anthropological research marked it, as the grand father of hominid, also known as Punjabicus found from the Potohar region.
So the government of Pakistan had given the name to this specie Potoharmans.
According to Mr Azad, the problem of human evolution is still hanging around that when and where Anthropoid got physical changes from the Apes?
After India, Kenya and China, he says important discovery was from the Potohar region from fossils of the similar species found in 1976 and 1982. The probable dating given to this specie was 20 million years.
“It has provided a missing link, which was spread of 6 million years. So Potoharmans declared as the grand father of hominid, which evolved from the different stages and reached at the Homo sapiens,” he observes.
The stories behind the similar marks are also significant in mythical associations with saints and renowned people i.e. hand prints of the Baba Guru Nanik near Hassanabdal, foot prints of Hazrat Ali in Hyderabad, foot prints of the Guru Padma Sambhava (Second reincarnation of Buddha) in Swat, Adam’s peak of Sri Lanka etc.
“If these are true than we can also claim of the mother Eve’s foot prints from Margalla Hills,” Mr Azad observed.
LOL. IMHO automotive devolution nadired with the AMC Pacer and Matador.
Actually it does happen and has been happening for some time on FR. That is why you find specific posting restrictions, such as the one below, on various Religion Threads and why there is a separate Religion Moderator who patrols the Religion Threads zotting any posts that make the religionists thereon uncomfortable including the posts of co-religionists whose theological views don't accord with the prevailing majority there.
According to your view that must mean that those "folks can’t handle a public discussion about articles and aren’t secure enough in their own beleif to handle counter points and counter opinions,..."
Come to these threads as you are; leave with what you have discovered. Absolutely no flaming! These daily threads are intended to be devotional in nature. If a particular day's offering says nothing to you, please just go on and wait for the next day. Consider these threads a DMZ of sorts, a place where a perpetual truce is in effect and a place where all other arguments and disagreements from other times and places are left behind.
I can attest from personal experience that reading from Chambers daily will almost certainly change - not one's faith - but one's perspective of his/her own faith, and open up new vistas in your spiritual life. If - when - this happens to a reader of these threads, and they choose to share what has happened within them - we are treading on hallowed ground. Be respectful.
- Religion Moderator
Apparently respect is a one-way street and requires a nanny to enforce it.
Can it? You tell me.
Can’t be a million years old. The earth is only 4000 years old.....
and the first humans were from Missouri, right?
Those Young Earth Creationists who say they will not believe Christ if there is not physical proof that the universe is only 6000 years old are like doubting Thomas.
But doubting Thomas was an apostle, too.
“23 posts, and no mention yet of Helen Thomas???”
I just clicked on this link for the same exact reason. lol
Your arguement is essentially anti-science. In order to 'reinterpret' evidence ans you put it to fit a Biblical model means that a fallible, written document supercedes direct observation (who are you going to beleive, written word or your leying eyes). In fact, the entire evidence interpretation is a lame excuse developed by creationists, who in my mind left Christianity for Bible worship a long time ago, because the physical evidence against them can't be refuted. Secondly it is faulty because you assume that you require a direct, immediate observer for an observation to be valid. Well, pretty much all of science has abandoned 'direct observers' a long time ago. Everything is done through some form of proxy like an instrument or through the effect something has had on its surroundings. In other words, you believe that it is insufficent to say that what happens today has a meaningful likely hood of happening differently if there are no direct immediate observers. That is a load of BS and you know it.
So let me get htis straight- As long as the threads that are posted by evos are kept strictly favorable toward the a priori beleif of evolution, they are civil threads, but, should anyone jump in and give counter points and evidences, why then it becomes uncivil?
Any thread should be like that, not just those posted by one party or another. Trying to tie everything into the first chapter of Genesis is annoying to those who wish to discuss the subject at hand and leads to out of control threads. This isn't church. Creationists, when discussing science, don't know what they are talking about. And the pathetic attempts to refute evolution clearly show this. After repeated attempts at educating these ignorant people, one can only assume either they are completely insane or they must rely on lies and deception in order to make their points. Scripture clearly shows disdain for this type of activity. I am sure the Lord does not want CHristians resorting to lies and deceit. To me, Creationism posing as science is aligned with Satan.
Exodus 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Exodus 23:1 Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.
Deuteronomy 5:20 Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Deuteronomy 19:16 If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; 17 Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; 18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; 19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you. 20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. 21 And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
Proverbs 6:16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: 17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, 19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
Proverbs 12:17 He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.
Proverbs 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.
Proverbs 14:25 A true witness delivereth souls: but a deceitful witness speaketh lies.
Proverbs 19:5 A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall not escape.
Proverbs 19:9 A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish.
Proverbs 19:28 An ungodly witness scorneth judgment: and the mouth of the wicked devoureth iniquity.
Proverbs 21:28 A false witness shall perish: but the man that heareth speaketh constantly.
Proverbs 24:28 Be not a witness against thy neighbour without cause; and deceive not with thy lips.
Proverbs 25:18 A man that beareth false witness against his neighbour is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow.
Matthew 15:18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.
Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. 19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
Luke 18:18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God. 20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Physical proofs certainly have their limitations. It depends upon what one is trying to prove. It also depends upon one's perception of the proof.
It seems to me that Thomas was seeking to know rather than believe. IMO his error was in seeking knowledge from without rather than from within. Though he may have attained that inner knowing from that experience it should not be ignored where his change of view took place. I don't think it happened in his fingers. ; )
But doubting Thomas was an apostle, too.
Yes he was and it's too bad that the Gospel of Thomas is held in such disregard. It holds some very knowing statements.
Actually, I welcome debate and counterr points. I do have strong disdain for propaganda, lies, deceit and outright slander, particularly when done in the name of any religion.
The question is whether you are consistent. Forensic questions can be answered with varying degrees of certainty, unless you are arguing that absolutely nothing can be known about the past.
Amen! Truth doesn’t need protection from examination or challenge. When propaganda, lies, deceit and slander come around you can be certain that truth is being buried not revealed. The same can be said when moral accusations, condemnations and judgments are used to support one’s position. Those are all defenses of the great Me.
Swine.
...unless you are arguing that absolutely nothing can be known about the past.
FWIW perhaps you could tell me what it is you know about perception. You percieved my post to have been a challenge to the science of forensic examination when in fact it didn't address that subject in any way shape or form.
I will grant that a belief cannot be debunked.
However, if a belief includes an assertion about physical history, the statement of physical history is subject to forensic investigation.
The question that a geologist or archaeologist would address is not whether a global flood really, really happened, but whether physical evidence supports such an event.
Beliefs that ignore physical evidence are beyond investigation. Arguments that distort evidence or claim physical evidence that does not exist are lies.
And anyway, you should be making your own arguments.
What I find really impressive is the time and energy expended by people like you and he and his long list of authors, for the purpose of falsifying a document which is the main foundation and support of the entire Western cultural tradition and all its developed cultural features, including science. It seems to me if it were patently false, you guys wouldn't be wasting your time on it.
That is a cogent answer to my original question. It shows that you gave the question thought and examination with reason. That is as far as my question went or was intended to go.
The rest of your observations may be relevant to other posters but there was no unspoken implication in my post to tie them to me. As they relate to other statements on this thread I completely agree them though.
Non-sequitur. If there was evidence for a global flood about 4350 years ago science would have found it by now.
You complain that scientists expend such an effort falsifying the "main foundation and support of the entire Western cultural tradition."
The effort of science is to learn what happens in the natural world. If a particular religious belief is contradicted, so be it. Scientists should not be expected to falsify their results, or to censor them, just to accord with someone's religious beliefs, should they?
Posts such as Ichneumon's and mine deal with the science of things, and point out the errors made by folks seeking to reinforce their religious beliefs by distorting, ignoring, or otherwise abusing science.
In other words, believe what you want. But when you make a claim that can be verified or refuted by science, don't take umbrage when some scientists examine that claim.
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.