Skip to comments.How smart was ancient man? (28 min video)
Posted on 01/16/2014 10:37:41 AM PST by fishtank
DESCRIPTION A consequence of evolutionary thinking is that ancient people were intellectually inferior to moderns. On the other hand, the bible records that people began with high intelligence and had great capabilities. This week we look at evidence for the biblical record.
The Creation Magazine LIVE! TV program is a ministry of Creation Ministries International. With offices in seven countries and more PhD scientists than any Christian organization this program features cutting edge science that supports the Bible delivered in a non-technical, visually-rich, discussion-based format.
antikythera mechanism (from about a 2000 year old shipwreck)
I once read that some archaeologist had calculated that the average IQ among ancient Greeks of the Golden Age was around 120.
Considering all the brilliant men produced by a city of never more than 100,000, that makes sense to me.
Why, thank you.
US population in 1770s = 2,500,000. Leaders include Franklin, Jefferson, Madison.
US population in 2010s = 316,000,000. Leaders include Obama, Biden, Kerry.
Proof that natural selection does not favor intelligence?
A proof that crap floats to the top of the talent pool in party politics.
“A consequence of evolutionary thinking is that ancient people were intellectually inferior to moderns.”
The evolutionary scientists have painted themselves into a corner on this one. According to their dating, we have had modern humans, anatomically indistinguishable from ourselves, for at least 100,000 years. Yet, by their same dating, they must insist that we were using the same rudimentary stone tools, with little technological innovation, for nearly that entire time period.
Now, it’s true that modern men can subsist with stone age tools alone, even to this day. However, we only see that happening with isolated pockets, who don’t have to compete with other humans, and who live in a stable, unchanging environment. We can’t posit the same conditions for man, worldwide, for 100,000 years.
Nah, that’s more like proof that artificial selection is less efficient than natural selection. If we were still mainly under the driving forces of nature, clowns like our modern politicians wouldn’t have survived to adulthood. They’re the curse we bear because we have been so successful at conquering nature.
Well, we’ve been killing off the best and brightest with wars for thousands of years. So, I wouldn’t be surprised if we have lost some IQ points, on average.
At which time the democrat party was formed....and we all no what happened then!!!
I think that ancient man was, on average, smarter. People then had to use their wits to survive - there was no welfare, etc. to cushion the impact of sheer stupidity. I believe that the movie, “Idiocracy” is prophetic, with large reductions in average intelligence already evident throughout the population.
we might have more “highly intelligent” people now but on average today people are stoooooooooooppppiidddd
not in a society with a safety net and welfare.
As we have now abandoned that concept for over 100-150 years we are now reaping the consequences of intermarrying the intelligent with the less intelligent.
If they were all that smart, they’d have waited until after the internet was invented to be born, wouldn’t they?
Life without the internet?!? Why bother?
So question in the future how will we be able to distinguish created life from naturally evolved life?
Because in the far future the only test I can think for created versus evolved is to look back at the fossil record for a pattern of emergence of new species. Oddly in that test i would expect created species should come in burst vs evolves species should come at a steady pace
Watch the movie Idiocracy.
The future awaits...