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.
Now trying to determine if footprints were made by Robert Byrd or Harry Reid.
You completely missed my point. But I'll answer your question anyway: No.
The whole idea that there is a natural world that is knowable by reason because it is an ordered, rational, law-biding whole is fundamentally a religious idea. What has become modern science got its start in the monasteries of the late Middle Ages, because religious men believed in this idea, and moreoever believed that to study and understand the creation was pleasing in the sight of God.
You are looking in the wrong direction. The effort was not spent attempting to falsify the Bible, but to demonstrate its literal truth.
Geology was founded for the purpose of demonstrating the global flood of Noah. A century or so went into the effort until, about 1830, the effort was pretty much given up. The reason was simple. The evidence was overwhelmingly against it.
And all the evidence has come to light??? We are sure of that? The future holds no surprises along these lines?
What do you expect to find? And based on what theory or what belief about the past?
hmmm- funny- becasue I see all kinds of counter arguments in those threads where the antichristiaN posters say some pretty heavy negative stuff- Your accusation leaves out hte fact that those that do get zotted were nothing more than personal attacks such as Doc does here- trying to shut down any opposing views. So I’ll state htis again:
Thisi s a public forum- if 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, then perhaps a public forum isn’t the place to be posting articles of interest. Folks like Doc might like to be able to go unchallenged on a forum that is obviously counter to what they themselves might beelive, but soryy- aint gonna happen.
noone’s ‘given up on it’. There is constant new eivdences comingto light and has been for quite soem time- You may dissagree with what the information suggests, and that’s fine- but to state that they ‘gave up on it essentially’ is misleading.
there are at least two posters on these threads that argue the universe revolves around the earth -- or at least that there is no difference between a Newtonian universe and a geocentric universe.
So I am not surprised that people still argue for a global flood. When I implied that geologists gave up on it, I merely intended to say that those capable of understanding the evidence had given up.
Apparently you are immune to direct contradictory evidence of your claims.
[[Posts such as Ichneumon’s and mine deal with the science of things, ... by distorting,]]
Mmmm. like distorting hte fact that there is no evidnece to show macroevolution? Distortions like placing fragments of skulls next to others and claiming- without any strong corroborating evidnece to do os, that trhe two are related, distorting the fact that biologically, macroevolution is impossible- htose kinds of distortions?
[[ignoring,]]
Ignoring htings like the biological impossiblities? Ignoring htings like the difference between micro aND macro, and tryign to assert the two are equal? Ignoring hte mathematical impossiblities? Ignoring the counter-evidences which show hte problems with macroevolution? Ignoring hte evidences of a possible world wide flood?
[[or otherwise abusing science.]]
Abusing science like blinding others to counterevidences? Suppressing those evidneces in schools?
[[and point out the errors made by folks seeking to reinforce their religious beliefs]]
Gee wiz- ya got us there.
[[When I implied that geologists gave up on it, I merely intended to say that those capable of understanding the evidence had given up.]]
Ah- and here I thought you were insinuating that only dolts continued to discover evidences for global flood-
Btw- the evidences have been for cenmturies conveniently waved away- ‘understanding the evidences’ you say?
I’m sorry— you presented contradictory evidnece showing that posts get deleted for simple dissagreements and not outright flamewar inducing rhettoric? I musta missed that part in your post
I wouldn't use the word dolt. Refusal to look at evidence is not diagnostic of stupidity.
What I said, and what I mean, is that those capable of looking at the evidence abandoned the global flood scenario around 1830. In the same manner that people gave up on a geocentric universe.
Not so fast! You evidently think that everything that can possibly be known about this subject is already known. Nothing new can ever come to light. That seems a rather unseemly statement, coming from a scientist. There is no possible way you can know this for a fact, unless you claim to be some kind of seer.... But then you would not be speaking as a scientist.
I have no theory here. My belief about the past is the same one I have of the present, and of the future: The universe was created in a divine act, and is structured according to divine laws that are not completely deterministic, but leave room for change, development, and not least, human creativity and above all human freedom.
God is Truth, and so cannot lie. And His Truth is what sets us free, as persons and as creative agents. There is nothing in His creation that contradicts any of the other revelations He gave us (i.e., the Incarnation, the Presence of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Scriptures). The revelations are given, so that we may further explore them, thus to better know our Creator and His purpose in creating.
If your thinking is at all consistent with science, you will have a theory, or at least a conjecture.
Do you consider the vast array of geological observations to be unrelated pebbles, having no causal connection to each other or to history?
Furthermore I posted the specific guidelines that prohibit such disagreement and debate and that is not an anecdote of mine that is what is actually posted on that thread daily. Ignoring that I posted that doesn't make it go away it just makes you dishonest. I can assure you that simple disagreements that go nowhere near "flame-rhetoric" are not tolerated on that thread. That's fine with me. The point is that you were absolutely wrong when you said "Folks like Doc might like to be able to go unchallenged on a forum that is obviously counter to what they themselves might beelive, but soryy- aint gonna happen." It does happen. Those folks ask for respect and they get it. That is a fact and it contradicts your statement. Your denial of it is, again, dishonest.
Apparently posters on science threads cannot ask for respect and expect to get it without the heavy hand of a Science Moderator.
Sounds like science has outgrown the parent. It's not falsifying any document, merely putting into context. If you see it as faith shattering, that is your problem. And scientists commonly cite similar, if not the same original source material. No one is making arguemnts for anyone else. They are just using the same facts. And science isn't a cultural feature, as much as you'd like to put it in that context. Another example of creationist deceit.
What relations they have one to another are pretty much the ones we impute to them.
You've got that all wrong, doc30: I see science as faith-affirming, not faith shattering. It is arrogant (and foolish) of you to impute motives to me.
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.