Metallurgical Evolution

[Sir_Loin]

Scientists have us believe that man first made use of softer metals such as copper during the Copper Age.
This was followed by the use of a copper alloy, bronze, which occured during the Bronze Age.
Then, as man evolved intellectually, he discovers how to use iron, bringing the Iron Age.

But archeology contradicts this view of metallurgical evolution.Archeology proves that man had become skilfull using gold, silver, iron, copper, bronze, lead and tin by at least the year 1000BC.
Iron and gold have been discovered inside pieces of coal. This indicates that man had been using iron and gold before the time of A flood when coal was formed- as even many scientists agree that a violent flood is the only possible explanation for the rapid formation of coal and fossil fuel.

/Discuss!

 

[Thief]

Yeah!
and I've seen a process demonstrated by one man, who seems to have a handle on the manner used by European northerners.

At some time in the past Man discover a recipe.
All in a clay urn and kilned to a high temp.....one lump of high grade steel.
REAL high grade!

Then with great labor fashion a blade out of it.
Then more labor to carve and then inlay a name for the blade.
Then more labor to finish the shape and bring it to a proper temper.

Amazing.

But no one knows how Man learned the recipe and all the metal working skills!

 

[Avi1001]

To the OP, you are not actually disagreeing that there was a metallurgical evolution, just about the dates.

In the same way, you are also not disagreeing about reasons for the formation of oil, gas and coal, just the sequence. Wrt the flood, you have confused cause and effect.

Your religion claims agnostic, but your post looks fundy....perhaps you are passive/aggressive.

I suggest a little further study of quality scientific literature will help. That means do not use religious sources for scientific information. If you are interested in the science, I will be glad to help. Good luck.

 

[Brickjectivity]

One of the problems with talking about prehistoric ages: good ideas often get forgotten and then re-discovered. The Romans built with concrete and also iron, but then when the Roman empire failed people forgot how concrete was made. Recently western culture discovered concrete again, so now people live in the age of concrete buildings and we call the Roman age 'Iron'. We call it iron but really it was iron and concrete, too.

 

[Avi1001]

One of the problems with talking about prehistoric ages: good ideas often get forgotten and then re-discovered. The Romans built with concrete and also iron, but then when the Roman empire failed people forgot how concrete was made. Recently western culture discovered concrete again, so now people live in the age of concrete buildings and we call the Roman age 'Iron'. We call it iron but really it was iron and concrete, too.

You are right, Brickj, it is amazing how long the idea of concrete was lost...I guess we have to write this stuff down !!

 

[Valjean]

Sure there was metal usage here and there, but how widespread was it? Was there an actual metallurgic industry, or were people finding native gold and copper, meteoric iron or puddled metal at ore bordered firesides and finding some use for it?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Dividing human history into neat, simplistic little labels has more to do with easy referencing than comprehensive, historical analysis.

 

[Sir_Loin]

To the OP, you are not actually disagreeing that there was a metallurgical evolution, just about the dates.

Of course, I don't believe that man became skilfull with all metals from point-go, but I believe that man became skilfull with soft metals, then harder metals and so on and so forth.

Side Note: The text in the OP is an exerpt from a textbook- I decided to post it here to have a friendly discussion/debate about it where people can bring forth their opinions

In the same way, you are also not disagreeing about reasons for the formation of oil, gas and coal, just the sequence.

I am quite lost by this statement- could you please make sense of it?
Also, what reasons did the exerpt give for the formation of oil, gas and coal? I only saw one reason there.

Your religion claims agnostic, but your post looks fundy....perhaps you are passive/aggressive.

See the side note.
Also, you keep using the word "agnostic", I don't think you quite understand what it means.

One of the problems with talking about prehistoric ages: good ideas often get forgotten and then re-discovered. The Romans built with concrete and also iron, but then when the Roman empire failed people forgot how concrete was made. Recently western culture discovered concrete again, so now people live in the age of concrete buildings and we call the Roman age 'Iron'. We call it iron but really it was iron and concrete, too.

You're right! Which might mean that millions of years ago, a guy may have actually perfected teleportation, but was killed by an elephant-lion hybrid... perhaps I should stop now..

Sure there was metal usage here and there, but how widespread was it?

Of course there would have been only localised discoveries

Was there an actual metallurgic industry, or were people finding native gold and copper, meteoric iron or puddled metal at ore bordered firesides and finding some use for it?

Your rhetorical question answers itself correctly!

Dividing human history into neat, simplistic little labels has more to do with easy referencing than comprehensive, historical analysis.

Like chopping up an apple for a child so that he can eat the apple easier.
However, as one grows up the apple no longer needs to be chopped up.

 

[Desert Snake]

Very interesting, thanks for the info. it's good to have some more advanced discussion, cuts the carrots with the slop.

 

[Yerda]

Side Note: The text in the OP is an exerpt from a textbook- I decided to post it here to have a friendly discussion/debate about it where people can bring forth their opinions

Which textbook?