Spy Pics Reveal Ancient Settlements (Syria

Years ago when I was still in the chip-making business...we threw away millions of defective chips detected throught the manufacturing process.

I often wondered if someone 10k years from now will look closely enough with a microscope (SEM in some cases) to make out the beautiful images I printed and etched into that silicon? It'll still be 10k years from now in some landfill.

"I think Syria is still inhabited by Neanderthals.

LOL! Keep talking like that and you'll be having a formal lunch to
tell some passive-agressive Neanderthals you didn't mean to really
didn't mean to say today's Syrians are like them!
(the GEICO commercial)"

Yeah, I wouldn't want to insult Neanderthals in such a way.

I think Syria is still inhabited by Neanderthals.

They're not that advanced.

That's a good point.

Aren't Neanderthals a false theoretic link evolutionists try to impose to claim one species (monkey) evolved into man, to try to deny the truth that instead man was created in the image of God?

bttt

exactly. 130,000 years is baloney.

Probably settlements 130,000 year old was an overstatement. The seemed to be referring to finding a few stone age remnants of possible Neanderthal origin.

Uh, I don't think this makes a lot of sense: "... Early Islamic pottery factories and a hilltop complex of megalithic tombs."

Aren't Neanderthals a false theoretic link evolutionists try to impose to claim one species (monkey) evolved into man, to try to deny the truth that instead man was created in the image of God?

1. Neanderthals were a sister species of Homo Sapiens and not on a direct evolutionary line with him.

2. No one tries to "impose" anything. The evidence exists whether you wish to accept it or not.

3. "Monkey" is not a species. "Monkey" is a term for a group of tailed primates.

4. No one tries to "deny" anything. See #2, above.

Making such offhand comments as you made might work among a group of friends or other like-minded individuals. However, when made on a public forum containing people who actually know what they are talking about makes you come across as ignorant at best. Please, for your sake, do a quick Google search before posting something you know will be controversial. You may learn something, find something to support your position, or be dissuaded from posting altogether.

AUSTRALIAN researchers studying declassified spy satellite images have found widespread remains of ancient human settlements dating back 130,000 years in Syria.

How do they know they date back 130,000 years??

Did you ever look at any of the old trails in the area of Red Rock Canyon, OK? That's near Hinton, OK, and about 40 miles west of OKC. It's a narrow little valley that drops sharply about 30-50' and always has fresh water in it. There's a state park at the site now and when we visited it some years ago you can see the old wagon ruts as the wagons entered and left the canyon.

1. Who "decided" that bones they found must be a "sister species" to man? Someone who did not believe in the value of man as created in God's image, or they would not try to devalue man and upgrade the Neanderthal by association.

And it is a feeble attempt to devalue GOD: if Neanderthal are our "sisters", and we are in the image of God, then God is like a Ne_____. No, I can't even write it.

2. There IS no "direct evolutionary line" with man! Man did not evolve! It does NOT exist as you claim.
There is no evidence FOR man evolving from one species to another, from a tiny little amoeba or whatever into into into into into into poof! Man! Nope, NO evidence.

3. The godless liberal worldview would elevate the monkeys as you have, thinking some sap will say "ohhh they're "primates" ohhh so are we, oh I see." Again fallacy by association, and purposed deception.

4. If you think TToE is not "imposed" upon our schools, you are living in the dark ages.

5. "See #2, above," you said.
Another troll ploy, to refer to a post that has nothing to do with the subject, as if giving a reference, hoping the person won't do the research and check. ZOT!

6. Your next troll ploy is typical, telling me to no longer speak here unless I agree with your trying to indoctrinate other readers with lies

7. Perhaps your knowledge would be deeper if you did not think a "quick Google search" is where knowledge lies. Instead, God Himself says, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge".

The godless refuse that rightful reverence, and hack by hack try to demean the value of man who is created in God's image.

Under the guise of scholarship lies continue to get advanced. Satan masquerades as an angel of light, but he spews lies.

I often wondered if someone 10k years from now will look closely enough with a microscope (SEM in some cases) to make out the beautiful images I printed and etched into that silicon?

I wonder if they will say they were objects of deep 'religious significance', as well?

What is the oldest trace of agriculture? 130,000 BC would be hunting/gathering still, wouldn't it?

bttt

1. Who "decided" that bones they found must be a "sister species" to man? Someone who did not believe in the value of man as created in God's image, or they would not try to devalue man and upgrade the Neanderthal by association.

Researchers studying the morphology of Neanderthal remains and recovered Neanderthal DNA. You'd be surprised at the huge amount of evidence available.

And it is a feeble attempt to devalue GOD: if Neanderthal are our "sisters", and we are in the image of God, then God is like a Ne_____. No, I can't even write it.

So, which person looks like God? Does God have boobs? A penis? Is He blonde, brunette, red-headed? Is He an ectomorph or a mesomorph? Is He white, brown, black, red or yellow? Just what does "made in the image of God" mean?

2. There IS no "direct evolutionary line" with man! Man did not evolve! It does NOT exist as you claim.
There is no evidence FOR man evolving from one species to another, from a tiny little amoeba or whatever into into into into into into poof! Man! Nope, NO evidence.

Man did evolve. Your inability to accept this does not nullify this fact. As for evidence, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of remains of at least a dozen Australopithecine and Homo species stretching back more than 3 million years spanning the spectrum from nearly ape-like to modern man.

3. The godless liberal worldview would elevate the monkeys as you have, thinking some sap will say "ohhh they're "primates" ohhh so are we, oh I see." Again fallacy by association, and purposed deception.

Monkeys are monkeys; man is man. Just because we are more or less related does not change this fact. We are (very) distantly related to cows, but that doesn't stop me from eating a hamburger on occasion.

4. If you think TToE is not "imposed" upon our schools, you are living in the dark ages.

The Theory of Evolution is the current state of the art in science. It is the schools' duty to teach science in science classes.

5. "See #2, above," you said.
Another troll ploy, to refer to a post that has nothing to do with the subject, as if giving a reference, hoping the person won't do the research and check. ZOT!

The #2 I referred to was the second point in my post.

6. Your next troll ploy is typical, telling me to no longer speak here unless I agree with your trying to indoctrinate other readers with lies

No. I said educate yourself so that, if you still disagree with evolution at least you wouldn't come across as pig-ignorant when addressing your gripes. There are actually a couple (read: "exactly two") creationists on these threads who've made some effort to educate themselves when it comes to evolution. They're still wrong, but they do have some idea of what they are talking about. You don't.

7. Perhaps your knowledge would be deeper if you did not think a "quick Google search" is where knowledge lies. Instead, God Himself says, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge".

No, study is the beginning of knowledge. Fear of the Lord has a tendency to keep people from actually learning anything for fear of enraging God. A quick Google search wasn't proposed to make you an expert. It was proposed to get you to see what the state of the art is on this subject so that you could phrase your objections from a position of knowledge, rather than ignorance.

The godless refuse that rightful reverence, and hack by hack try to demean the value of man who is created in God's image.

If God is the omnipotent and omniscient being He is said to be, nothing mere mortals could ever do would offend Him.

Under the guise of scholarship lies continue to get advanced. Satan masquerades as an angel of light, but he spews lies.

Nope. And the fact that you think the study and understanding of the universe is some sort of Satanic plot scares the beejabbers out of me. It's basically the same attitude espoused by the fundamentalist Islamofascists in their railings against the West.

1. "recovered Neanderthal DNA... You'd be surprised at the huge amount of evidence available."

I recovered a tiny piece of yesterday's french fries on the floor. Researchers studying its morphology found it has an exterior and interior, has internal molecules, many of which are also core to human existence: oxygen and carbon and nitrogen and trace minerals. So therefore, it must be your "sister species" of human.

No! Because bone findings of "neanderthal" has SOME similar DNA, it must therefore be related to humans? Wrong conclusion from the premeses.

No, there is NO evidence of a supposed transition of supposed other creatures to man.

2. You'd be surprised at the huge amount of evidence available.

And then you list none.

3. which person looks like God? ... Just what does "made in the image of God" mean?

Actually very good questions! So where would we go to find out? If we look in nature, we only can see that God is powerful and exists. But we don't know what He looks like or what the "image of God" is unless He would reveal that to us.

Which He has done. 1)Recorded in 66 books called the Bible; and , 2) By assuming human flesh Himself, when the Son of God chose to become man. Jesus said, "You have seen me, you've seen the Father." The "image of God" is explained in God's teachings.

4.at least a dozen Australopithecine and Homo species

And there are Russet potatoes, Idaho, Baking, Red potatoes, let's see, would Sweet Potatoes count? They all need water to grow, humans need water, so therefore, we are potatos!

Archaeological findings can be interpreted many different ways. It doesn't mean there can't be a correct one, but conclusions reached are often speculations and theories. Guesses, and that's what they have taught you. Their claims have been refuted one by one, but I doubt if even your public library would carry those books.

There still is NO evidence to show that humans somehow evolved from lower animal species to us now. Not ONE evidence showing ah, here's the transition from amoeba to snake, to warthog, to monkey, to gorilla to man!

5. Monkeys are monkeys; man is man. Just because we are more or less related does not change this fact.

Just because you call us related, does not make it true. At least in my family lineage! ;-)

We have a fallen mind, which cannot think rationally and which does not want truth prior to God changing us through Christ. What seems rational to you, simply is not, because God Himself has stated differently: that He created the animals, and then He created man after His own image, something distinct from ALL animals.

6. The Theory of Evolution is the current state of the art in science.

I'm not trying to be mean here, because many of us fell for these same lines, but you are just flat wrong. It's like midievel Christians saying the sun revolved around the earth. When that was disproven, they had to go back and see where they had been misinterpreting things.

TToE was a theory, and the theory has been disproven, but why should that evidence be announced when Professors can actually get money and have a career to teach it? Why should they present all the contrary research, when they would lose their income in doing so?

What evidence you ask? That there IS NO evidence for transitional evolution between species, culminating in man.

There is a built in hatred of God in fallen mankind, because all men know He exists, so they rarely want to do anything which would support Biblical content.

7. "educate yourself so that, if you still disagree with evolution at least you wouldn't come across as pig-ignorant"

Again, typical godless liberal methodology of name calling. You also make the uneducated statement, since you do not know me or my educational levels, to claim that I am not educated on this issue. That is also called, lying and public slander. You have not proven one of my statements false, where the contrary has been done by me to your claims.

Because this is so indoctrinated into our culture, it is a hard concept to reliquish. But imagine, if you can, would the world come to an end if you realized Darwin's theory was wrong? Would your personal worth as a human being have any less value? Actually, it might go up a notch because you'd finally be wanting truth over indoctrination.

Is it truly a conscious choice you want to be making, to stand against what God Himself says?

He doesn't require that you believe in Genesis, but He DOES require that you believe His Son died for your sins, and that you repent and turn to Him. Because we have such excellent evidence for Jesus' resurrection from the dead, proving His claims to being God, why not first look at THAT evidence? Then, because it will validate His claims, you can see what HIS view, as God, is on each issue.

And being God, He should know!

"What is the oldest trace of agriculture? 130,000 BC would be hunting/gathering still, wouldn't it?"

Yup. Farming as we know it.

Did you ever look at any of the old trails in the area of Red Rock Canyon, OK?

The (three degrees by five degrees) area I am mapping now is almost more than a PC (and I) can handle (at the high level of detail at which I'm working) -- and I've had no cause to work that far north and west...yet...

Sounds like a fascinating place, though. In fact, I couldn't resist taking a peek and "ghosting in" a couple of possible candidate traces crossing the canyon. (Too bad the photo was made at midday in the summer (almost no shadows). A winter shot would have made those traces out across the plowed field to the west of the airporrt runway really stand out... (Of course, if I'd been really serious about this, I would have developed a custom "grad" filter to enhance the visibility...)

I highlighted the most likely trail in pale (almost too pale) yellow, and another (toward the botom) in pink. I also tinted in (in purple) an old railroad grade that ran through the canyon... If I were actually mapping the area, I would consider this just clues as to where to look (and walk with the GPS receiver in hand) when I actually got on site...

If you would like to see the unmodified aerial photo, it is on Terraserver. By clicking on the tab at the top of the page, you can also get a topo map -- but I'd suggest zooming out a bit, because the Terraserver topo maps at this high magnification are prettty ragged.

FYI, I located the site (and got the targeted link to Terraserver) using USGNIS (The USGS's Geographic Names Information System) -- and that's also where I got the little inset map (with the "red dot marks the spot") from the Census Bureau's "Tiger" Server.

FWIW, I normally wouldn't have put this much effort into a mere FR response but I was 'exercising' a new rev of Canvas, my "workhorse" graphics/GIS software. And, besides, fellow ex-USAF troops deserve a little special consideration... '-)

(WayneM, I hope this gives you some "starting points", too...)

Neat. Thanks.