Darwin's Illusion

[Subduction Zone]

@Dan From Smithville and @Subduction Zone Here's another you might enjoy about "evidence..." Now this is interesting -- "The skeletal remains of a "wild" female horse found buried in a big ancient lake in Utah and thought to date back 16,000 years to the last ice age are actually no older than 340 years old, a new study finds. The bones, unearthed by landscapers in a Lehi, Utah backyard in 2018, were initially dated to a period that ended roughly 11,700 years ago." From 16,000 to 340 years old.

'Ice age' horse skeleton found in Utah backyard isn't what we thought | Live Science

No, That was merely a misidentified find. The insanely varied possible dates show that it was just amateurs that made the earliest guesses, and that was what they did.

This is a problem. When one is scientifically illiterate one can be misled by clickbait.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you? Furthermore it must have been a pretty big flood for it to be in so many accounts/myths. Disney wasn't around then.

What are you talking about? It only inspired three local myths, and the newer ones copied older ones.

 

[Subduction Zone]

At least these scientists had the integrity to admit they mistook the dates of a horse. 'Ice age' horse skeleton found in Utah backyard isn't what we thought | Live Science

How do you even know that it was "scientists" that made the original estimates? They clearly were not experts in the field at all.

 

[YoursTrue]

What are you talking about? It only inspired three local myths, and the newer ones copied older ones.

You sure about that, eh?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You sure about that, eh?

Yes. Why do you think that it inspired more?

 

[YoursTrue]

How do you even know that it was "scientists" that made the original estimates? They clearly were not experts in the field at all.

You sure?
'Ice age' horse skeleton found in Utah backyard isn't what we thought | Live Science
"The mix-up happened because Indigenous people buried the horse in a pit surrounded by lake sediments dating to 14,000 to 16,000 years ago."
There we go back to dating soil (lake sediments)

 

[Dan From Smithville]

@Dan From Smithville and @Subduction Zone Here's another you might enjoy about "evidence..." Now this is interesting -- "The skeletal remains of a "wild" female horse found buried in a big ancient lake in Utah and thought to date back 16,000 years to the last ice age are actually no older than 340 years old, a new study finds. The bones, unearthed by landscapers in a Lehi, Utah backyard in 2018, were initially dated to a period that ended roughly 11,700 years ago." From 16,000 to 340 years old.

'Ice age' horse skeleton found in Utah backyard isn't what we thought | Live Science

There was no formal analysis of the skeleton and it was ostensibly and initially dated based on the strata it was found in and the occurrence of previous finds dating to the aforementioned period. Further, much, much more formal analysis revealed it to be of more recent age.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/serv...horse-cultures-of-the-north-american-west.pdf

In any event, scientists reviewed the claim. Found errors. Reexamined the remains and reported the results and conclusions. Not something you see ever happen with creationists. They are shown evidence. Don't bother to examine or understand it. Deny it and repeat what they previously claimed without regard to to any evidence. New or old.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Do you? Furthermore it must have been a pretty big flood for it to be in so many accounts/myths. Disney wasn't around then.

Not all the flood myths are derived from the Middle East and not all of them are about a global flood. Some cultures don't even have flood myths. Cultural contamination contributed to the wider dissemination of this particular flood myth as well. Ancient people did move around, war and trade with each other. Swapped stories to. No Disney.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You sure?
'Ice age' horse skeleton found in Utah backyard isn't what we thought | Live Science
"The mix-up happened because Indigenous people buried the horse in a pit surrounded by lake sediments dating to 14,000 to 16,000 years ago."
There we go back to dating soil (lake sediments)

Yes. It was discovered by scientists with new information that couldn't be explained by concluding it was a Pleistocene horse. That's what science does. Trying to wipe out dating from this one incident that was found out through dating techniques isn't going to cause the science of dating to collapse and your particular desire to win out by default.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, That was merely a misidentified find. The insanely varied possible dates show that it was just amateurs that made the earliest guesses, and that was what they did.

This is a problem. When one is scientifically illiterate one can be misled by clickbait.

oo oo oo -- "Our identification of the Lehi horse as an early domestic rather than an Ice Age horse suggests that prior misclassifications may have influenced museum collection practices and the interpretation of archaeological and paleontological assemblages, leading to gaps in the faunal record of Native horsemanship." Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Lehi Horse: Implications for Early Historic Horse Cultures of the North American West | American Antiquity | Cambridge Core

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You sure?
'Ice age' horse skeleton found in Utah backyard isn't what we thought | Live Science
"The mix-up happened because Indigenous people buried the horse in a pit surrounded by lake sediments dating to 14,000 to 16,000 years ago."
There we go back to dating soil (lake sediments)

Unless there is evidence that everything that creationist dispute regarding dating the substrate that remains are found it was the result of intentional burial (logically impossible in most instances) then this is an anomaly that was found out through...you guessed it...through science.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

oo oo oo -- "Our identification of the Lehi horse as an early domestic rather than an Ice Age horse suggests that prior misclassifications may have influenced museum collection practices and the interpretation of archaeological and paleontological assemblages, leading to gaps in the faunal record of Native horsemanship." Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Lehi Horse: Implications for Early Historic Horse Cultures of the North American West | American Antiquity | Cambridge Core

Shakespeare was a man ahead of his time and said it best. Much ado about nothing.

 

[YoursTrue]

Not all the flood myths are derived from the Middle East and not all of them are about a global flood. Some cultures don't even have flood myths. Cultural contamination contributed to the wider dissemination of this particular flood myth as well. Ancient people did move around, war and trade with each other. Swapped stories to. No Disney.

Like I say, Disney movies weren't around then. But various cultures had stories about a great deluge. True they did not agree with the biblical account, nevertheless, accounts of big destructive floods were in various cultures. So somethin' somewhere spoke about it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Unless there is evidence that everything that creationist dispute regarding dating the substrate that remains are found it was the result of intentional burial (logically impossible in most instances) then this is an anomaly that was found out through...you guessed it...through science.

my my my talk about staunch whatever you are -- relentless -- but you know that's ok because yes, it's teaching me something. (Thanks.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

You sure?
'Ice age' horse skeleton found in Utah backyard isn't what we thought | Live Science
"The mix-up happened because Indigenous people buried the horse in a pit surrounded by lake sediments dating to 14,000 to 16,000 years ago."
There we go back to dating soil (lake sediments)

There was no formal analysis of the skeleton and it was ostensibly and initially dated based on the strata it was found in and the occurrence of previous finds dating to the aforementioned period. Further, much, much more formal analysis revealed it to be of more recent age.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/serv...horse-cultures-of-the-north-american-west.pdf

In any event, scientists reviewed the claim. Found errors. Reexamined the remains and reported the results and conclusions. Not something you see ever happen with creationists. They are shown evidence. Don't bother to examine or understand it. Deny it and repeat what they previously claimed without regard to to any evidence. New or old.

The line that showed me that the writers of the article did not have a clue was this one:

"The initial age of the horse remains suggested this mare was wild; such horses lived in North America from about 50 million to 10,000 years ago"

Horses did evolve in North America, but the modern horse is only 3.5 million years old:

Evolution of the horse - Wikipedia

Now the horse was estimated to be of certain age by where it was buried. But do you know what scientists do? They double check their dates. By the date given it sounds like they finally used carbon dating on it. Recent life can be carbon dated. The original estimate was 14,000 to 16,000 years ago. But guess what? 365 yeas is long enough to carbon date too. It was well within the bracket of when one can carbon date such a relic. And they found that was recent. It was not the find that they hoped for.

Though that date was possible since horses still probably existed in North America at that time:

American Horses ~ Horses in North America: A Comeback Story | Blog | Nature | PBS

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Like I say, Disney movies weren't around then. But various cultures had stories about a great deluge. True they did not agree with the biblical account, nevertheless, accounts of big destructive floods were in various cultures. So somethin' somewhere spoke about it.

Not all about the same flood or about it being global in extent. Again, some cultures had no flood mythology.

If your culture was centered around water as many were, flooding was a reality. That it would be part of a mythology is not surprising, but neither does that corroborate the flood described in Genesis.

That the Black Sea flooding of 7500 years ago is the source for several related myths or that later mythology was built on the original mythology, I accept. It makes sense. There is evidence for it. What we don't have is evidence for a global flood that occurred about 2,500 years ago or any of the related claims.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Like I say, Disney movies weren't around then. But various cultures had stories about a great deluge. True they did not agree with the biblical account, nevertheless, accounts of big destructive floods were in various cultures. So somethin' somewhere spoke about it.

So what/ Why make the mistake of assuming that it referred to that deluge? Floods occur, a lot. People need water to live so they often live on waterways that flood at times. As a result many cultures have flood myths. Ironically Egypt does not have that sort of flood myth since they rely on annual floods. For them floods are life givers. And Japan, which is for the most part a country that is very well drained and is not subject to very many floods also tends to be lacking in flood myths.


Different cultures, different flood myths, inspired by different floods.

A worldwide flood would have left a mark, and there is no such mark.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

my my my talk about staunch whatever you are -- relentless -- but you know that's ok because yes, it's teaching me something. (Thanks.)

I bow to your expertise and appreciate your praise at being staunch. I am but a novice compared to thee. I too am learning much, but unfortunately, it is a lesson so oft repeated new information is becoming more difficult to tease out.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So what/ Why make the mistake of assuming that it referred to that deluge? Floods occur, a lot. People need water to live so they often live on waterways that flood at times. As a result many cultures have flood myths. Ironically Egypt does not have that sort of flood myth since they rely on annual floods. For them floods are life givers. And Japan, which is for the most part a country that is very well drained and is not subject to very many floods also tends to be lacking in flood myths.


Different cultures, different flood myths, inspired by different floods.

A worldwide flood would have left a mark, and there is no such mark.

Good grief man! Have you never heard of Godzilla. Proof that dinosaurs were on the ark.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not all about the same flood or about it being global in extent. Again, some cultures had no flood mythology.

If your culture was centered around water as many were, flooding was a reality. That it would be part of a mythology is not surprising, but neither does that corroborate the flood described in Genesis.

That the Black Sea flooding of 7500 years ago is the source for several related myths or that later mythology was built on the original mythology, I accept. It makes sense. There is evidence for it. What we don't have is evidence for a global flood that occurred about 2,500 years ago or any of the related claims.

I think that the flooding of the Tigris, Euphrates system that I linked earlier is a more likely culprit. The Black Sea flood buried a lot of cities. But cities cannot move. It took about a year for it to occur flowing into an already good sized body of water. The advance would have been slow but relentless. A flood that people could have easily have walked away from, but the hones where they lived could not .