Phew!

[thplinth]

It is in many places once you start to look.

One other obscuring factor is that many old sites were taken over and used as platforms for new sites.

Baalbek.

You can see the real old stuff as the base layer (i.e. massive massive massive stones laid perfectly) and then the much more recent more 'advanced' building (i.e. crumbling) layer. I recall it was the romans who built that later stuff (the romans man!) and it still looks like shit versus the bottom half. It is a curiosity that is for sure.

[biffer]

Ok, do you want a bit of science that's completely redefining? Do you? 

Here you go...

http://www.nature.com/articles/nature22065.epdf?referrer_access_token=tGNUGleBw49ae4WSrr_s4tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Odq55Wqltd4FPUqYwCTOB2IrOnkHrOr5WzFT30V6_TbXGUzczcXolggqU9hpovjhwGjCY64hkCCLNXHIws6HxpoUbnbwPB6bXMM7zKgQUEORyJBmhLufu7eh73zDEskusj7RuDnfkyvPV3C9zT1MResAFLodrWxAnV5w8hxrANw81wC2Fs5Qb2DVAohoUNG2T3CgU5LzjQUqbY_h1aStFWTBeP0CG5D5uO_EJTbuEdC03pRl2XC_BRNM-4aRX5gYv0HeCtDaIDvM9t2CakjOWN&tracking_referrer=www.iflscience.com

New study showing an unspecified species of genus Homo in the Americas 100,000 years earlier than anyone had ever thought previously. Truly remarkable and assuming it's correct, has the potential to entirely redefine the evolutionary history of humanity 

[Ally Bongo]

The TAMB certainly gets around it would appear

Is it a coincidence that within a week or so of this thread appearing an archaelogical hoo ha starts in America with the claim that humans came to North America 130,000 years ago (115,000 years sooner than previously thought) ?

Is it also a coincidence that me and Phart's favourite, the erudite Michael Shermer, will be discussing this with the same Graham Hancock on The Joe Rogan show - May 16th ?

I think not

 

https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27111

Edited April 26, 2017 by Ally Bongo

[phart]

Not sure what you're getting at or why carbon dating is being used, when it was dated astronomically as a 2nd corroborating piece. 

The only time i see anything to do with Shermer these days is when you post about him.

 

 

 

[Ally Bongo]

2 minutes ago, phart said:

Not sure what you're getting at or why carbon dating is being used, when it was dated astronomically as a 2nd corroborating piece. 

The only time i see anything to do with Shermer these days is when you post about him.

 

 

 

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit ?

https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27111

Edited April 26, 2017 by Ally Bongo

[phart]

31 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit ?

https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27111

I still have no idea what you're saying. Anyone else know?

[phart]

That article argues against the scientific method in favour of human instincts (common-sense). A bold  opening move to be sure.

[DonnyTJS]

9 hours ago, phart said:

The difference is 13000 years later scientists can "read" what Pillar 43 says, the Chauvet paintings can't be "read" can only be seen.

Pillar 43 contains symbols that people are interpreting, Chauvet contains symbols that are also open to interpretation. The interpretative work by Sweatman and Tsikritsis may well be correct, but to equate it with 'reading' and 'writing' is to distort the sense of what we usually take those words to mean, which is the sense I was using when I was questioning the GT discoveries as evidence for urban civilization.

 

[Ally Bongo]

17 minutes ago, phart said:

I still have no idea what you're saying. Anyone else know?

Michael Shermer is going to be discussing with Graham Hancock the very same subject that this thread has developed into AND as this thread has been ongoing a new hoo ha has broke in America about the same subject 

That was the coincidence

The article was something Shermer referred to in his role as a Skeptic

Referring to Shermer as our favourite was the sarcasm bit

All clear lol ?

 

Edited April 26, 2017 by Ally Bongo

[phart]

15 minutes ago, DonnyTJS said:

Pillar 43 contains symbols that people are interpreting, Chauvet contains symbols that are also open to interpretation. The interpretative work by Sweatman and Tsikritsis may well be correct, but to equate it with 'reading' and 'writing' is to distort the sense of what we usually take those words to mean, which is the sense I was using when I was questioning the GT discoveries as evidence for urban civilization.

 

Understood.

 

14 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Michael Shermer is going to be discussing with Graham Hancock the very same subject that this thread has developed into AND as this thread has been ongoing a new hoo ha has broke in America about the same subject 

That was the coincidence

The article was something Shermer referred to in his role as a Skeptic

Referring to Shermer as our favourite was the sarcasm bit

All clear lol ?

 

ok. You asking if it was a co-incidence threw me off, i'm hopped up on various anti-manflu meds so might need to be told everything thrice till i feel better.

[DonnyTJS]

9 hours ago, phart said:

The current pyramids construction theory requires a 3 tonne block to be placed every 5 minutes 24/7 for 20 years with 4000 workers. With the stone used quarried miles and miles away.

All the while aligning it to true north and keeping it in scale with larger properties of the earth.

As I mentioned, my knowledge is outdated (I'm going back 30 years), theories develop, my memory declines. However ... a quick read of Wiki's summary of the current theoretical landscape suggests a number of things:

a. There is no 'one' current pyramid construction theory.

b. I was utterly wrong in my mention of pulleys.

c. Are you sure you didn't mean 40000? Proposed numbers range above and below that figure, but none that I see go ten times lower.

d. The twenty-year construction time is also wide open to alternatives, a number of them going significantly lower.

The pyramids were built (the three at Giza, plus the much smaller 'Queens' pyramids' on the site; the earlier step pyramid at Sakhara and others of approximately similar antiquity in the area). Some of the earlier ones, like Meidun, collapsed. Another, the bent pyramid, evidences a false start that clearly was going to be unstable and so was completed at a less extreme angle. The Giza pyramids didn't appear sui generis, they are the result of previous trial and error. When you pull back from the Giza plateau and look at the whole area in its chronological and developmental context, I still don't see a problem with the generally accepted dating and broad construction methods of the Great Pyramid and the other two.

Quote

It was built by experts not unemployed slaves.

I'm getting this mental image of Richard Rogers teetering up the scaffolding of the Pompidou Centre carrying a hod of bricks.

Edited April 26, 2017 by DonnyTJS

[Orraloon]

9 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit ?

https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27111

Hmmm.... Both the geometry problem and the Clovis thing fall down at step 37? I smell shyte.

[Orraloon]

8 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

Michael Shermer is going to be discussing with Graham Hancock the very same subject that this thread has developed into AND as this thread has been ongoing a new hoo ha has broke in America about the same subject 

That was the coincidence

The article was something Shermer referred to in his role as a Skeptic

Referring to Shermer as our favourite was the sarcasm bit

All clear lol ?

 

I'm not too keen on coincidences. Maybe Mr Shermer actually posts on this board and is trying to plug his new show?

 

[phart]

4 hours ago, Orraloon said:

Hmmm.... Both the geometry problem and the Clovis thing fall down at step 37? I smell shyte.

The idea that common-sense should replace empiricism, it's almost written like a piece of scientific satire.

The whole point of the scientific method is to get around the known failings of human intuition. Just before Einstein and quantum/black-body radiation some scientists were saying they understood reality now just a few i's to dot and t's to cross and that's it sorted. 

Let's look at A.A. Morely from the experiement cited he wrote

"...The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote..."

Nice bit of common sense from Morely there

 

Edited April 27, 2017 by phart

[Ally Bongo]

23 minutes ago, phart said:

The idea that common-sense should replace empiricism, it's almost written like a piece of scientific satire.

 

 

I suggest you go and read the article again if that's what you think it says

[Orraloon]

44 minutes ago, phart said:

The idea that common-sense should replace empiricism, it's almost written like a piece of scientific satire.

The whole point of the scientific method is to get around the known failings of human intuition. Just before Einstein and quantum/black-body radiation some scientists were saying they understood reality now just a few i's to dot and t's to cross and that's it sorted. 

Let's look at A.A. Morely from the experiement cited he wrote

"...The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote..."

Nice bit of common sense from Morely there

 

The fact that the author didn't understand the basic error at step 37 of Mr Bridgess's geometry question might explain why he ended up studying geography instead of a real science subject?

[phart]

1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

The fact that the author didn't understand the basic error at step 37 of Mr Bridgess's geometry question might explain why he ended up studying geography instead of a real science subject?

Why was Mr Bridgess's trolling maths students instead of advancing his superior scientific method?

[Orraloon]

7 minutes ago, phart said:

Why was Mr Bridgess's trolling maths students instead of advancing his superior scientific method?

Mr Bridgess was the geometry teacher of Mr Diamond. I think he was just trying to work out which of his students might have what it takes to become scientists and which ones would end up being geography teachers. Mr Diamond is the geography teacher who, later, came up with the "common sense" " superior scientific method". Possibly because he couldn't understand the maths?

I don't think Mr Bridgess is at fault here.

[thplinth]

19 hours ago, biffer said:

Ok, do you want a bit of science that's completely redefining? Do you? 

Here you go...

http://www.nature.com/articles/nature22065.epdf?referrer_access_token=tGNUGleBw49ae4WSrr_s4tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Odq55Wqltd4FPUqYwCTOB2IrOnkHrOr5WzFT30V6_TbXGUzczcXolggqU9hpovjhwGjCY64hkCCLNXHIws6HxpoUbnbwPB6bXMM7zKgQUEORyJBmhLufu7eh73zDEskusj7RuDnfkyvPV3C9zT1MResAFLodrWxAnV5w8hxrANw81wC2Fs5Qb2DVAohoUNG2T3CgU5LzjQUqbY_h1aStFWTBeP0CG5D5uO_EJTbuEdC03pRl2XC_BRNM-4aRX5gYv0HeCtDaIDvM9t2CakjOWN&tracking_referrer=www.iflscience.com

New study showing an unspecified species of genus Homo in the Americas 100,000 years earlier than anyone had ever thought previously. Truly remarkable and assuming it's correct, has the potential to entirely redefine the evolutionary history of humanity 

I can't acces that link but is it the mastodon bones site? Yeah very intriguing indeed. If so...

[biffer]

9 minutes ago, thplinth said:

I can't acces that link but is it the mastodon bones site? Yeah very intriguing indeed. If so...

Yeah, it's the article in Nature. (When I say article I mean letter, but a letter to Nature is not like a letter to the Times where any old loony can sound off - still requires sound methods and explanation and still some review before publication but I don't think it's a full peer review process as it would be for a paper in Nature). 

Edited April 27, 2017 by biffer

[biffer]

The link still works for me, not sure what's happening there. 

[thplinth]

IT is my very old tablet not the link probably. 

I know  the article however. Bunch of smashed bones next to stones that look like a make shift hammer and anvil. It does seem convincing but they will get destroyed for it I expect.

They will keep pushing it back time wise... 

[Orraloon]

1 hour ago, biffer said:

The link still works for me, not sure what's happening there. 

The link works fine for me. Interesting stuff.

[Orraloon]

This might be a daft question but are they super confident that it was a human species that was responsible? Could it have been another animal? I've seen otters use hammer and anvil technology.

 

[andymac]

Might have been a Fifer