100,000-year-old art studio uncovered
From cave painters to Greek sculptors to post-modern filmmakers, humanity has always had its share of artists. Now, there's evidence that humans were decorating things thousands of years earlier than we thought.
Archaeologists have uncovered what they believe is a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in Blombos Cave, South Africa, about 186 miles east of Cape Town. The discovery, discussed in the journal Science, indicates that our early Homo sapien ancestors had a basic knowledge of chemistry and the ability to make long-term plans.
"The recovery of these toolkits at Blombos Cave adds evidence for early technological and behavioral developments associated with H. sapiens and documents their deliberate planning, production, and curation of a pigmented compound and the use of containers," the study authors wrote.
"Ochre" is the term archaeologists use to describe dirt or rock that contains red or yellow oxides, or hydroxides of iron; it is basically early paint. Researchers found hammers and grindstones that could have been used to make this ochre powder in the cave.
Additionally, they found two sea snail shells called abalone shells that probably served as containers to store a red concoction of ochre, bone and charcoal. Pigment residue on one of the bones suggests it was used for stirring and transferring the mixture out of the shell.
There is evidence that this mixture had been heated; perhaps liquefied bone marrow was used as a paste. Urine or water was also probably added to make it more fluid.
This is also the oldest evidence for use of a container, said Francesco d'Errico, study co-author and researcher at the University of Bordeaux in France. It appears that these containers were used multiple times.
"They really knew what they were doing. It’s not just idiosyncratic behavior, but it’s a very planned process," d'Errico said.
Ancient fragments of ochre have been found before from earlier than 100,000 years ago, but never in association with the objects to make it, or in containers, d'Errico said. Chemical analysis reveals three different types of pigment were used in this workshop, including yellow and red shades.
"It’s really relatively complex behavior going on there that clearly indicates that the production of pigment for them was not just occasional," d'Errico said. "It was a very planned process involving a number of different raw materials."
This cave seems to have been used as a workshop, and then the early Homo sapiens left it behind shortly after making these compounds. It appears that sand blew into the cave and very quickly covered these objects, preserving them throughout the millennia.
So far no paintings have been found on the walls of the cave. Scientists speculate that the paint was used for body decoration, or as an antiseptic for preparing animal skins, or both.
"It may be combination of functional and symbolic reasons," d'Errico said. "In traditional societies, these reasons – symbolic and functional – often go together. One reason cannot exclude the other."
@CNNLightYears on Twitter
People in Orbit
Expedition 36 Commander
Expedition 36 Flight Engineer
Expedition 36 Flight Engineer
Contributors
-
Elizabeth Landau
Writer/Producer -
Sophia Dengo
Senior Designer
Thank you for any other wonderful article. The place else could anyone get that type of information in such an ideal way of writing? I have a presentation next week, and I am on the look for such information.
Arguing is fun!
Unacceptable time frame mentioned. Initiate anti-evolution response...
Why does the story say H. sapien instead of Homosapien?
Note that the story is quoting from the article in "Science" and is probably how it was originally written. This is typical short-hand when referring to the Homo-species of hominids. For example, Homo erectus, Homo habilis, Homo neanderthalensis will be referred to as H. erectus, H. habilis, H. neanderthalensis, and so forth. This is a convenience to avoid the tedium of repetitious full-spellings of "Homo" for each.
Happy little cave drawings. Pre-historic Bob Ross'.
I LOL'd. You, sir, win the post of the day.
Possibly one of the best comments of all time. I LOL'd too.
"Ochre" is not an archeologists' term for primitive paint. It is a term for paint still in use today in oil paint and tempera paint. The yellow and red ochres happen to look more life-like in paintings. These are the colors of the Renaissance masters, the iconographers, etc. The modern "cadmium" paints are not only much more toxic (see books such as "Artists Beware"), but also much less life-like. Yes, ochre paint is the same paint described, and painter's mixing palates do look a bit like shells, eerie. The archeologists should take some lessons; maybe that is why Mona Lisa is smiling.
I agree on all points except one: the author, not the archeologists, should take lessons.
"ochre" is a common name for earthy hematite, an iron rich sediment which is colored shades of red, yellow, or brown depending on the amount of iron present and the exposure to oxygen. This mineral has been used as a pigment for tens of thousands of years. The oil paint color is named after the mineral. Perhaps there are many lessons to be shared...
Fascinating find! I'll read the actual article when I have the chance. I'm curious to know if the original authors also use the phrase "art studio" or just Ms. Landau. Just because it involves paints does it make it "art" as we know it? It seems a stretch to make that value judgement. Do we consider our ball-point pens, #2 pencils, paper, make-up, computers, telephones, books, and clothing as being art supplies? Are make-up and, say, tattoos , just body art even today? Or are they a form of communication and identity? Are petroglyphs on a wall of a cave merely decorations? I'm not saying that artists today aren't in the business of communicating. I'm just pointing out the problem with presuming we know what motivated our forebears. What would make this archaeological discovery an "art studio" as opposed to a store, hospital, factory, chemistry lab, writer's studio, a print shop, a church or just a collection of someone's personal writing supplies?
Humans have been on this planet a lot longer than they'll have you believe. The real questions which need to be answered are what happened here, and who or what was responsible for humanity's decline. My best guess is that those responsible are among us now.
I hope that when our creators do finally return to us, they will have the benevolence to uplift and teach us. I hope they don't want us to go back to our original purpose for which they created us.
I don't get how they figure out how old something is? Just because something they may have seen before could be 100,000 years old...doesn't mean it is. Just like the dinasaur bones...how do you know they are 65 million years old? They have relatives around that time? Somebody was there and wrote it down?
Haven't you ever heard of Carbon-14 dating?
I've read that they used Optically Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) dating. And perhaps they used other methods as well.
Carbon-14 can't date to 100,000 years. It's upper limit is something like 62,000.
Wow. People that have obviously not taken any science classes questioning science. Might as well lump Donna and the first guy in with creationists. Carbon-14 dating is just one of several methods used to date objects. There are methods accurate to maaaaaaaaaany more years. Check it out, on the 'internet'
Um. wow. You are on the internet, google it.
I think its great that they found old shells of paint. Maybe we should give our ancestors more credit for there inovation. As for the whole God verse science debate...well if i remember correctly science did prove a possibilty of the existence of where God could or rather should be mathimatically speaking. String theory, in the eleventh dimention. As for where he is at now? Well in the Bible he said after the flood he wouldnt interfere in mans life. Or if you dont believe that there is a God then theres nothing for you to worry about when you die. It is quite interesting to ponder. Maybe one day we people, science and religious, can find the common ground to co-exist on. Either way, it does seem so fascinating that we can continue to discover new things about our past in which we know so little about.
I'll bet that scienctist, in all their wisdom, could mathematically prove that these ingredients all came together in the cave through random chance, the same way they say the ingredients to form life did. Therefore this find proves nothing. All these things must have just coincidentally got together
Poor Shaky One, you just don't "get it", do you?
Hawkings proved that there is no need for a god for our universe to exist.
Donna,
You write that Hawkings proved that there is no need for a god for our universe to exist. I am curious to ask you, do you believe that Hawkings proved this because you read that Hawkings proved it or do you believe that Hawkings proved it because you read and understand his proof? My point is, Hawkings wrote his proof in a priestly language, mathematics, that only the high priests of science understand. We poor lay people simply have faith that the priests have proved something because they say they have, not because we can read and understand their language. This would make your belief in Hawkings proof more akin to a religious belief rather than a scientific one.
Space Alien, I have watched his lecture on the subject, but I am not a physicist and the math involved is way over my head. I would need to go to school for years to fully understand what he talking about. But there are lots of specializations I don't have expertise in, but I tend to believe people I perceive as experts about those things. My personal belief in his expertise is akin to other people's belief in who they perceive as experts, and that could include matters of religion. However, his work is constantly being scrutinized by other scientists, and that's a process I trust, unlike religion, which is dogmatic. I know that Hawkings works from the scientific method. And that is a process that I do understand personally, and I do have expertise in, though in biology rather than physics.
I believe that Hawking is alive through a miracle; his brain cells shouldn't exist. I have known other sufferers of his disease, and the cells can't survive under those conditions. So, I guess that I would believe in Hawking, if I believed in miracles, but that would discount his proof, wouldn't it?
Elizabeth, you are well and truly an idiot.
First of all, Hawking's disease does not affect the brain in any way.
Second, the fact that you knew other people (which I highly doubt given the rarity of the condition) who died from a disease does not mean someone else might survive it for many years.
Spacealien, you are an even bigger idiot than Elizabeth. The "priestly language" of math and physics is what has created the world you live in. It created the computer you use to post your drivel and expose your stupidity. That is an objective fact. Go live in a cave someplace if you doubt its validity.
Bitsinmotion,
You inferred too much, from what I wrote. I did not write that I doubted what Hawkings proved, but simply that any layperson’s belief in that proof is closer to a religious belief than a scientific belief. Also, please consider that his proof is theoretical and not physical. There are no universes for him to put into test tubes and manipulate to demonstrate a repeatable phenomenon. We have one universe, which we can observe, think about and propose theoretical ideas. Hawkins is not infallible, and to believe that he is would bring one even closer to a religious belief rather than a well thought out, and skeptical scientific one. In science there should be no absolute truths, or infallible individuals, because when there are, that is truly when it becomes a religion. Any good scientist has a cold eye, and is always questioning, though I agree, sticking to established methods of good science. I am not arguing from a position of a belief in gods, or a disbelief of science. I did not intend my reference to mathematics as a priestly language to deride the language. I was making the point that it is a language exclusively understood by a small elite group of highly specialized individuals, the priests of science. Laypeople can only believe in science by faith in the discipline and its methods and not by any true understanding in a scientific way. We do not speak the language.
For the love of... whoops, almost caught me there. Anyway, I think you're all missing the point. Hawking wasn't trying to 'disprove' the notion of God. He was simply stating that there are enough understandable, concrete rules about how and why it works, that we don't need 'miracles' to fill the gaps. It's a constantly changing, constantly growing, but complete 'system' that we live in.
Here's some light shed on carbon14 and the debate:
http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v10i10f.htm
(That is, if the moderator allows this external web address).
It's to bad you couldn't find a legitimate site to support your point. Linking to this site is like linking to a Fog Horn Leg Horn cartoon to support the existence of talking roosters. Good try though.
Roosters can talk? Cool!
Great! I was going to ignore the web address until you told me it was a cartoon, and it turns out to be the actual explination of Carbon 14 dating.
lol couldn't they get a web designer living in the 21st century?? Looks like one of the early websites from the early 90's...
I am a religious person, therefore, I DO believe in Carbon 14 dating, and I DO believe that half-life of radioactive materials requires us to reconsider and NOT allow nuclear power plants to poison this earth.
Psst. . . you know that Nuclear material is mined out of the ground, right?
And it's always "on". It doesn't have to be in a reactor to be radioactive. It just is.
And it's in the ground. Right now. OMG WE"RE ALL DOOMED!!!!!!!
You can lead a person to knowledge but you can't make him think.
I love this article, and its discovery. Its fascinating to learn about the early humans, their behaviors and their tools.
Yet when I read these comments from trolls + people trying to engage them, I just get so sad. Don't you see? There's always gonna be people who are determinedly stupid. They've got nothing better to do than tear down knowledge. Its all they've got. Feel sorry. Feel angry, if you must, but don't engage them. It only encourages them. They want us to not learn. They misinform on purpose. Ignoring them helps to marginalize their ills.
Trolls may try to tear down knowledge, but actually science tests, re-tests, and tests again, measuring not only a mathematical theory but also the statistically repeated experiment, which is a good thing. Scientific dogma is the most dangerous kind of dogma.
You mean like people going against our cleanest, safest, best energy source in nuclear generated power because they don't know squat about nuclear science? Is that what you're talking about?
Phil, you're a moron. Science cannot explain how a Bumble Bee can fly with its body mass and tiny wings. Give me a break. Did you co-star on Nacho Libre?
Yeah right...I'm a moron with two masters degrees. One in physics and the other in electrical engineering. I obviously know nothing...but apparently knew enough to obtain two advanced degrees.
Science answers everything.
god answers nothing.
I bet you think Stephen Hawking is a moron too because he doesn't believe in god.
Take your religious bull somewhere else because no one wants to hear about it.
I think his point was that science does NOT have an answer for everything...but since you insist, how DOES a bumble bee manage to fly?
Science doesn't explain the creation of the universe, yes the big bang but what created the matter that was condensed to create the big bang? I say God created the universe because nothing else can explain it.
I've got four advanced degrees and I'm amazed that anyone can claim to know that God (or whatever higher power one believes in) is positively, absolutely out of the realm of possibility. How does the old adage go, "The more I learn, the more I understand how little I really know." If you can believe in the possibility of alien life forms, why not be willing to believe in the possibility of God?
Here's one thing science can't explain: Why people like Phil believe that they are always right and that those who happen to believe in a higher power are always wrong.
Perhaps another advanced degree, or two, would be in order.
From Wikipedia: "According to 20th century folklore, the laws of aerodynamics prove that the bumble bee should be incapable of flight"
Note the word "folklore".. just like religion is folklore, the religious will use folklore to discredit science!
a quick google search answers that, http://www.livescience.com/528-scientists-finally-figure-bees-fly.html
or you could pray for an answer..... lol!!
Of course it can. The physics is pretty basic.
Actually, half-wit, it most certainly can. I studied fluid dynamics in graduate school, and we were all amused at that urban legend about the bumble bee. Nothing but ignorance, passed around by the stupid to make themselves feel better about the fact that they have a double-digit IQ.
Why are all you numbskulls talking about God? This is an archeological find. They didn't find anything about God.
And they never will. But put an obscene "long ago" time out there and people of faith will flock to the forums and proclaim how it's false in some form or another.
Then some moron quotes text from a bedtime story book and the flame war starts.
Phil, there are countless things in this little story book as you call it that science cannot explain....I'm amazed at your ignorance.
What can't science explain?
Remember long ago when the church declared it to be heresy to believe that the Earth was not the center of the universe? That stars were holes in the floor of heaven shining their light down. That an angry god would eat the sun during a solar eclipse?
All of that was proven BY SCIENCE to be false. Protons can pop in from nowhere and vanish...they do this all the time. Is that magic? No. Does god have something to do with it? No.
There was nothing before the big bang. No god, no time – no anything. It, just like the protons popped into existence from nothing (well actually it was an extremely dense singularity) - but whatever.
Just because you can't understand the science behind the universe, it does not make those who do not believe in god, stupid.
I as well have advanced degrees. Phil, you state that if people can't understand the science, it doesn't make the people who do stupid because they do. I understand your logic. However, what I don't understand is how you can call people names (or stoop to that level) because people do believe in God. Phil, use your educated mind better and move on. You need to understand people have different opinions and name calling will only exacerbate the issue.
BRANTICUS-
Science also can't explain giants, dragons, and how Santa Claus can get to every single house in one night. That does not make those things any less fictional, just like the stories in your book.
Me PETE...me use PEN.
How many "Gods" are there? Many are written about in that black book. Many times it say that the GODS – that is plural for those without an education – so the GODS came down from Heaven on their firery chariots – really. I like the God that let me figure out the so called bible is just another myth and fable. I met a young woman that said dinosaurs were not real. Wonder who made those objects found embedded in coal. Wonder who built the hundreds of pyramids around the world. Wonder what the Nasca lines are about. That is what I have been given from the Gods – the ablity to wonder – exactly what they wanted us to do.
The gods of mythology have always been myriad, but the God of the Bible (the God of Abraham) has always been different.
The gods of mythology had elaborate genealogies and histories, the God of the Bible has no mother or father and no beginning.
The gods of mythology were all nature gods and as such existed in nature and drew their life and strength from nature; the God of the Bible is not a nature God, he exists outside of and above nature.
The gods of mythology were limited in their power and abilities; they were said to have sex with each other (and humans), to kill each other, to die and come back to life. The God of the Bible was never like this.
Unlike the gods of mythology, the God of the Bible cannot be manipulated, as the gods of mythology were, through rituals and magic.
The gods of mythology were said to have little regard for humans, but were consumed with their own selfish desires; the God of the Bible holds humans as his central concern.
The gods of mythology expected humans to serve them, providing them with wine and food; the God of the Bible needs nothing from humans, and it is he who supplies the needs of the people.
The gods of mythology were capricious and often unethical. The God of the Bible demands that people be just and compassionate to each other; and, to the extent that humans behave justly, they would be blessed and cursed for failing to be so.
It could be said (and has) that the God of the Bible is not a god, at all. He is a living vital force in the universe, consumed with righteous principles.
Awesome, Barry G., you do know your stuff : ) However, I doubt if the dimwits will get it.
God of the Bible didn't Kill?? There was mention of a really big flood, pretty much wiping out everyone who wasn't on the Ark. Those who were turned into a piller of salt, probably did not survive. Thourghout history, all myths, including the Bible, which was written by man have a 'creater'. The myths of pagan religions at least gave human qualities to their gods. Throughout history, there are myths of a savior or son of God. At least in pagan religions, women had a role as goddess. The only thing in Christian religions that come close to a goddess is the mother of the son of god. And she was a perpetual virgin. Really?
Ever wonder why dinasours are not mentioned in the Bible? Who created them that lived for 65 million years?
ALL gods are man-made and therefore myth. There's no evidence to support any of them, therefore to the best of human knowledge, they do not exist.
WAIT A MINUTE!!! Didn't "the God of Abraham" have sex with Mary to produce Jesus? Well, maybe not sex, per se. but didn't he "fertilize" her? She was supposed to have been a virgin beforehand, right? But, wait... hmm... she was married – so how did THAT happen? I was raised on all that crap, but don't believe one iota of it. Give me true science any day!
And the thing they all have in common is that they don't exist and never have existed. The end.
God was pretty freaking angry in the old testament. It wasn't until the new testament when Jesus appeared that God got serious about love. But then Paul came along and wrecked it for everyone by sharing the god hates you mantra.
There is no such thing as God or any Gods
Only a fool says there is no god. Research the Cosmological argument. Don't worry....I felt stupid too after I learned about it.
Yes the Cosmological Argument: or the First Cause... we call it the Big Bang... No God or gods required.
Barry, read your bible a little more carefully if you think your god is compassionate and tells us how we should treat each other so nicely...
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
Kill children?
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces. (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB)
Kill sons for the fault of their fathers??? Praise Jeebus!
Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and posses the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants. (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)
You must kill those who worship another god. Exodus 22:20
Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. Deuteronomy 13:6-10
Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16
Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7
Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Deuteronomy 17:12-13
Kill any false prophets. Deuteronomy 18:20
Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mark 6:11
Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don’t believe in him. Jude 5
Pirate, I do not know how any sane person can believe in your god. My god does promote killing. Don't quote a version of the bible that only you believe in.
My god created everything and man is just trying to figure out how He did it. The Big Bang only makes sense if God started it.
Neither you nor Barry get it. There is this "thing" or "who" that is infinite. Infinity plus one is still infinity. If intelligence exists, then infinity plus intelligence is still intelligent infinity, which tends to be called (by human cultural habit) "Who," not "What." Yes, it can kill (and leaves can fall off deciduous trees in autumn). Yes, it can be merciful, such as keeping Prof. Hawking alive. Yes, mathematics and science can exist, or co-exist with it. And ochre paint is still exciting; do you know that if you paint dark ochres first, and then instead of painting shadows you paint lighter and lighter ochres (mixing with white pigments finally), you will create a very life-like 3 dimensional effect? Well, that's a bit more on the topic of this article.
A while back I attended a Van Gogh exhibit in Philadelphia, and I recall that there was an innovation during his lifetime, which revolutionized painting.
During Van Gogh's lifetime and career they began developing pre-mixed paints, which enabled the painters to paint outdoors more freely. (As I understand it, they had to mix their own paints, until this time, and this deterred them from moving outdoors and painting in the light.)
With this innovation, painting began to be brighter and more vibrant.
Of course the scenes became more lively, because the painters could work more easily outside of the studios, in the natural surroundings, as well as the sun and fresh air.
And to think, this development, which occurred in Van Gogh’s lifetime, actually began about a hundred thousand years before.
No, they were mixing their own paints – in a shell. Premixed paints come in tubes – even in VanGough's time.
If that's the case I need to get them to refund my money. Either that or I better start paying closer attention.
Probably the latter.
There are still some artist who mix their own oils. I would imagine he would have known how to do this. It is not rocket science. You just need the raw materials. I am a potter and make my own glazes because it is a lot less expensive than buying the powder or premixed. You may have heard right. He may have used both.
Wow, the curator discovered this (wrong) fact! It's amazing what curators discover (invent). How do you think that frescos, which dry in minutes or seconds, could be painted without pre-mixed colors? Tell Michelangelo that his Sistine Chapel was invented by Vincent VanGogh.
Oh, For Heaven's Sake, gullible people will believe whatever they're fed.
I found shells like this all along the Mediterranean shore lines a few years back.
Hey, I've got 500,000-year-old smart phone that I found in a mustard seed while visiting over there ...Yeah, it's what I'm typing on now. Yup, carbon test shows it's that old.
The shells aren't the find, but the premixed color found within the shells. It's not found in nature but had to have been mixed together. It's call science. Carbon dating is real – not fantasy like your bible.
You must be one of those conservative Americans who thumb your nose at education and intelligence. It shows in the stupidity of your comment.
@Got to be kidding. I am one of those "Conservative Americans" and I absolutely do not thumb my nose at education. I have a Bachelors degree and have told my kids they WILL go to college and make something of themselves and I cringe at the Marines I deal with who say they are not going to college. I love the way people assume all Conservatives are like those so-called Conservatives who give us a bad name, just like those who call themselves Christian and then go out and protest and everything un Christian give us a bad name.
This story is about a cool archaeological find, not about religion. I was an archaeology major in college before switching to Sociology and stuff like this is interesting. History is interesting (history – something that the world today has completely forgotten about, which is why we are the way we are because we refuse to learn from past mistakes.)
Again, all the gullible idiots....where do they all come from? Two examples right here above : )
pot tells kettle?
You're a creationist, aren't you? If so, you're an idiot.
No?
Then provide proof that carbon dating is incorrect...otherwise, STFU.
Found plenty of ?!it in all of the comments from "Wisdom". By the way, calling yourself something does not mean that it is true. You need a new name and a much, MUCH broader mind. (Yes, I am assuming you have one. Pretty optomistic of me wouldn't you say?)
SCIENCE IS REAL. GOD IS REAL. THEY CAN COEXIST.
Science is real.
god is not real. Prove it...show me evidence that can't be proven by science. I've got roughly 40 years left before I die for you to work something out.
For something to coexist, there has to be two of them. Since one of them isn't real (god) then there is no coexisting.
I agree.
I agree with Searching.
Your cannot prove that god does not exist either.
Your leetle finite brainz... INFINITY. That's the answer. If intelligence exists, then infinity CONTAINS intelligence. Proof? INFINITY. Co-exist? That's one way to put it, or how about... ONE.
Most of the prehistoric art we see in caves were actually news reports, believe it or not. It's how early humans communicated with each other and notified each other of what to expect from that area. Not much has changed over the years. Back during the great depression, many men took to the road and traveled usually by train all over the country looking for work and a bed. They carried chalk in their pockets so that they could leave certain coded messages for the next weary traveler, usually on a fence post or the side of a wall. A circle with an arrow pointing up, for instance meant that the owners of a particular estate had work, and welcomed vagrants. An arrow pointing down meant the residents were mean and didn't want to be bothered.......etc. So next time you see prehistoric drawings in some cave, remember, it's not art, it's a CNN news report given by a prehistoric reporter.
Well of course.
Art and life (religion, politics, history, etc.) have always been intertwined and have informed each other.
That's what makes art "Art", and that's what makes it so marvelous.
Michelangelo–now there was an artist. And note how history, economics, politics, and religion influenced his great works and how he influenced them.
A member of Mensa? NOT!
More like Mental.
No, I'm not a member of Mensa.
And if I were, I wouldn't flout such an accomplishment, but would keep it a secret.
I'm learning that gretness is found in humility, compassion, kindness and loving and serving others.
Have a good, safe weekend all, and enjoy some good art!
.
"gretness"? Right! You don't have to tell me you're not a member of Mensa, I can tell...okay? I just hope you don't have to write for all those you're serving. Ha!
LOL... I like theis Barry guy.... you got it together dude!
Wow Barry, it's like you kicked a sleeping dog over there. You have a great weekend too my friend and thanks for your post.
Yeah I saw that movie too. Turned out to be the magician who was the thief.
Tif, Not sure what movie you're talking about, but I've seen movies about the revolutionary war too, but that doesn't mean it's fiction.
And today we simply hang Rock and Roll posters on our walls. Have we really advanced that much?
Well said.
There is a famous quote, where an individual complains about the problems of the day–how they youth disrespect the elderly and how they behave so badly; about crime and how society is going to the dogs; etc..
At the end of the rant, which sounds like it could have come from last night's letters to the editor section of the newspaper, the man's name and the date of the writing are given. The statement was written thousands of years ago in ancient Egypt. I apologize for not having the actual citation with me.
(Egypt and Mesopotamia were the oldest civilizations, with Egypt growing up only a little behind Mesopotamia.)
Kohelleth said it well, when he said: "There is nothing new under the sun."
"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
–Plato
Thomas,
Thank you for posting the quote from Plato.
As I'm sure you're aware, Plato lived from the late fifth century to the mid fourth century BCE, and his teacher Socrates from the mid fifth to the early fourth centuries BCE; but, the quote to which I alluded to is thousands of years older and was uncovered in Ancient Egypt, which is a good bit older than the Classical Greek period.
Your point is still valid and quite good. Well done.
I'm sorry. I meant Timothy, not Thomas, for my last post.
Well done, Timothy.
What a neat find!
If they say it's 100,000 years - then it's 100,000 years. Earth has been around over 4 billion years and the universe for even longer. We evolved - we weren't made by a magical being who took the rib of a man and made a woman who populated the earth. That's stupid and defies the laws of a self sustaining society.
I don't care what the religious groups think - they've always been wrong about everything.
"Hear this now, O foolish people, without understanding,
Who have eyes and see not, and who have ears and hear not:
Do you not fear Me?’ says the Lord.
‘Will you not tremble at My presence?" Jeremiah 5:21-22
God sayeth unto me directly: "Believeth you not in the Bible, nor any Holy Book claiming to speak for Me, for they all were written long ago by self-serving ancestors to suit purposes of their own times. No tome can ever fully articulate My Glory and Majesty and Scope."
He DID say that to me. Don't believe me? Who are you to say He didn't? Besides, using your standards ("You're wrong about the Bible because it says you are"), the proof is right there, because I say He said it!!
“Accept His Noodly Magnificence into your heart, into your soul, and ye shall forever be free. R'Amen.”
Hear this now, you foolish person, let your Lord write his own post's, and when he does we will believe.
Hey d-bag, grow up. No one with a working brain believes in god anymore. You Christians really eff up by not accepting anything logical into your views. You're barking quotes at people who don't care, never will, and don't fear the fairy tales.
Go back trolling where you belong, like a Sarah palin forum or something..
These are My words, oh dimwits!
"Hear this now, O foolish people, without understanding,
Who have eyes and see not, and who have ears and hear not:
Do you not fear Me?’ says the Lord.
‘Will you not tremble at My presence?" Jeremiah 5:21-22
@Someones Uncle – Why do you assume the knee bender to be a Christian? Jeremiah was an old testament dude.
I'd be tempted to reply simply by restating Reynolds first two Laws:
R first Law: There are no supernatural Creatures.
R second law: I am an Ape, I do not have a soul. (second law part B: So are you and you don't either.)
RCR
Someones unclue:
Are you serious?
Many from every strata of every society continue to believe in God. This, of course, includes people of limited, mean and exceptional intellectual abilities; and, it would be sheer stupidity to suggest otherwise.
And to suggest that "no one with a brain believes in God today" is an absurd statement of unfounded arrogance. Many respected and admired people continue to believe in God, continue to make great contributions to the world and continue to be respected by both believers and non-believers.
I encourage you to open a book or two and do your homework, before you speak or write.
Perhaps you should begin by reading the works of Socrates, his student Plato or his student Aristotle. Perhaps they can impart some wisdom to you. By the way they believed in the diviine.
I pity you, and I pity your children and spouse, if you have any.
@ cosmicc,
I thought Jerimiah was a bullfrog... dunh, dunh, dunh...
and he was a friend of mine... dunh, dunh, dunh...
🙂
‘Will you not tremble at My presence?"
No, I hardly ever tremble in the presence of non-existent beings.
And by the way, most people find no reason to capitalize "my" in the middle of a sentence – it would be like capitalizing "christian", no point in that, either.
I am perplexed as to why there is an argument. An archeologist finds some old paint in shells. It is dated very old. And suddenly there are people who start bashing God, and others bashing the scientists.
Is there some reason why the scientists are nervous as soon as anybody but themselves speaks? Is there some reason why there is no interest in logic either? Can anybody believe in infinity and in intelligence?
This should be no argument, but a celebration of life. I do not pity anybody; I am envious of all of you, both scientist and religious, who do not have a husband who has cancer, and many other problems...
Why is all of human culture, which produced education and scientific method, under attack by the scientists that benefit most from it? Are you born spouting equations; didn't a mother raise you? Didn't you learn to use a fork, even if a fork has no rational reason for use? If some story that you do not understand said that your mother came out of a man because he needed somebody to be his master, then you would complain most furiously, because you think that with a few years of higher education you have mastered all the secrets of the universe, and a woman, heaven forbid, would not need to help a man. Yes, I can turn this into women's rights, because you have turned this into something about Adam's rib; which at least would have a complete set of DNA (and DNA can be found in teeth too, but that's way to scary for most men). Most people don't understand metaphor, but at the very least, I think that you might be able to understand at least enough about culture to know that women, not men, provided most of the nurturing and cultural education, and a woman invented the first and most difficult of the musical modes (and logic), and it is only through culture that you have any "institutions of higher learning." And as it says in "The Right Stuff," "Without the bucks, no Buck Rogers." The coin referred to is a cultural coin which promotes the existence of higher learning.
phil you lost i guess the world was created from a asteroid or a boom theory man come on and think i guess the sun was created by man too or a big bang theory mannnnnnn come on and think dont be ignorant think for yourself.
I can tell you exactly how any star, including our sun and all the planets were created...and it didn't involve this magical creature people call god.
I believe in science because it proves things. It shows how things work. In my opinion, god doesn't exist. And that opinion is shared by many other brilliant people.
There was a big bang. But god wasn't needed to start it. god is an imaginary being created by the mind of a primitive man who was bent on controlling people.
The church threatened to put many people to death because of their beliefs. They did kill many as a result. But over time, we became a more civilized society - in most parts of the world at least.
It's only a matter of time before people don't believe in god at all. But sadly, that won't happen in my lifetime.
I'm not a misguided person because I'm an atheist. I'm free to think what I want without the constraints of religion. I'm very happy as a result. So is my 13 year old son, who's also an atheist.
Logic and reason will guide you away form faith. Let it. You'll be happy you did. None of it makes any sense.
"god created the universe" "god created the earth" "god created the sun"
Where the f is god? Why is he hiding, why won't he show himself? Oh, that's right. It's because he isn't real.
Phil, funny how you rewrite history. The church, during the dark ages, was the only place where people had any higher education. Read "How the Irish Saved Civilization." No, I don't agree with every word in that book, but it showed the outpouring of literacy that occurred because thousands of monks risked their lives to teach a continent of bloodthirsty barbarians how to read and write after those barbarians had overthrown Rome (the secular state, not the church). It wasn't until much later that any religious people killed any scientists, and even then it was mostly because of political forces that had made the church more secular; the status quo had to be protected for the secular state as far as they were concerned.
While I agree religious groups get most things wrong, please do NOT allow these renegade Evangelical Christians to claim to represent normal Christian thought. The VAST majority of Christians belong to sects that officially believe evolution was the method used to produce the modern world. You can even find a discussion supporting evolution in the introductions to Catholic Bibles and those variations on King James produced by mainline Protestant groups. As a consequence, Evangelical claims that the earth is only 7000 years old can be viewed as a form of heresy against standard Christian thinking!
so basically you only believe the fairy tales that make sense. like god sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself and then rising from the dead. not those CRAZY stories like adam and eve.
"they've always been wrong about everything."
Funny. I always thought the "all men are created equal" was one of the things they got right.
Here we go again, typical religious person misquoting things to try to lend credibility to their beliefs. The Bible didn't state "all men are created equal", that was the Declaration of Independance, written by mostly diests who, above all, wanted to ensure freedom of AND from religion. So its particularly ironic that you quote a document that leads off with an anti-religious establishment clause as "proof" that your Bible is right. Nice one, you should work for Fox News.
Phil science can prove different things this is true. Your very correct in that statement. I defy you though to start with nothing, absolutely nothing, no air, no soil, no gas, no molecules. Now I want you to start with this void and through science make me something simple say an earthworm. Through your science this should be easy it is only a little earthworm. Oh and after you get the earthworm done make me a nice big blue whale and for your great finale a human being. It shouldn't take you that long.
What amazes me is that through all your "knowledge" you can't do one thing with it. Sure you can build things based upon things that were already here. Start with absolutely NOTHING and you great minds of science have squat.
Who started this whole thing we call a universe? Did one day trillions of years ago oxygen come into being? Then a little while longer hydrogen? HOWWWWWWWW did this come to pass?
Come on so your parents drug you to church and now your grown up and you will defy there is a God just to show your grown up. Wake up man you can never do one thing without what was placed here by a higher being. I will loan you a test tube with a rubber stopper remove everything "humanly" possible from it Then I want YOU, Phil to make me one grain of common dirt.
Where should I mail your test tube Phil?
The Flying Spaghetti Monster created it all – it said so on my jar of Ragu. None must question the Great Jar!!!!!!!
Larry, I can use your own argument against you. Let's face it, you can say that the Big Bang is a load of crock because matter had to be created. However, if you believe a God created it, then who created God? How about we look at the Big Bang the way you look at your religion... the universe is eternal.
If you're going to state that your God always existed, which is a necessary condition for creationism... then something had to create God. Just out of logic.
If you say that God is eternal, then I say, the Universe is eternal.
Also we need to define nothing. Is it the absence of matter? Because if so, then God can't exist. Because, he created Man in his image, it follows that he must be made of matter. Since Images have matter. Therefore there is no God that could have created man and the Universe.
Also, if God was so incredible, then he was probably intelligent enough to know that subatomic particles are held together through electromagnetic forces. Which are made possible through photons (which is light).
Okay now stick with me here. God created the heavens and the earth first. But, the Earth and Heavens (We'll define heavens as stars and outer space stuff just as the people who wrote the bible would have.) were created first. Now, any rational person would have learned that subatomic particles hold together everything. And hopefully, we understand that photons hold together subatomic particles. So, if God didn't bother to create light until after he put some matter together and called it a day, then he defies science, logic, and physics, which are pretty strong argument basis.
In order for creationism to work, there has to be certain aspects of existence. And since and Omnipotent and Omniscient God would clearly know how his universe worked, then he surely would have told us his story in the correct order for basic Physical laws to exist.
Maybe I'm wrong about some specifics of my Physics, but I'm still learning, and that's the beauty of life. We can learn without relying on just one book for every answer, we can explore, we can discover, and we can live free of damnation. Seems like a pretty sweet gig if you ask me.
So go out into the world, and read more than one book, learn about new ideas, and try and disprove everything.
It was the art studio for an advertising agency. ~ "The Wheel. Except no substitutes!"
Accept no substitutes?
"Hey Barney..what ya painting?"
"Hi Fred..I'm painting what I think Betty would look like if the bush was shaved."
"You just mught have something there Barney...get away from the cavewoman craze & go for the natural beaver look."
What in the hell are you idiots talking about ‘Christians are freaking out’ just because of the so called time line? I don’t think so!
The Bible says: “But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.” 2 Peter 3:8
Therefore 100,000 years divided by 1,000 years equals 100 days, helloooo!!
That’s not long, only a little less than 1/3 of a year in God’s time. Ha!
This is not hard for Christians to understand, but to the rest of you bozos I guess it would be hard to comprehend. Duhhhh!
met·a·phor [met-uh-fawr, -fer] noun
1. a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God.” Compare mixed metaphor, simile ( def. 1 ) .
2. something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.
Nice one. ROTFLMAO
Well..he says that a day with the lord is LIKE a thousand so it's more of a simile...
@ Frothing at the Mouth ~~~~ unintelligence
adj.
Having or displaying a lack of intelligence.
Not invested with intelligence.
blind [blahynd] verb, noun, adverb
adjective
1. unable to see; lacking the sense of sight; sightless: a blind man.
2. unwilling or unable to perceive or understand: They were blind to their children's faults. He was blind to all arguments.
3. not characterized or determined by reason or control: blind tenacity; blind chance.
4. not having or based on reason or intelligence; absolute and unquestioning: She had blind faith in his fidelity.
5. lacking all consciousness or awareness: a blind stupor.
@ Frothing mouth ~~~~
"...the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed." John 3:19-20
"... if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.
"For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus’ sake. For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God...." 2 Corinthians 4:3-6
"Hear this now, O foolish people, without understanding,
Who have eyes and see not, and who have ears and hear not:
Do you not fear Me?’ says the Lord.
‘Will you not tremble at My presence?" Jeremiah 5:21-22
You are such an idiot, you dont even know a metaphor when you see one. You are using math to say 1000 bible years is just 1 day but you ignore the first part of the sentence where it says 1 day is like 1000 years. By your logic 1000 years is actually 365,000 days. How can you be that dense? It is referring to time not having any meaning to god, it is not some secret formula to how long a day is. Wow.
Wisdom4u2:
You clearly are don't understand the significance of numbers (numerology) in the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures.
For instance the number seven holds literary significance by virtue of its utilization in the first chapter of Genesis, which speaks of creation, along with the priestly teachings of boundaries and holiness; the number ten holds significance not only because of the Ten Commandments and the ten plagues leveled against Pharaoh and Egypt, but also because of its significance in the division of the Twelve Tribes of Israel under Rehoboam’s reign; the number 1000, being a factor of ten and 100, well, I’ll let you do your own research and figure this one out for yourself.
Perhaps you should select a more appropriate name, under which you write.
I hate this new math.
Oh please!!
You clowns can't be serious, are you?
Just look at all the members of Mensa International commenting on my comments! Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
I am a believer in the Christ idea, but I do not take every word in the BIble literally. If I did, I would have to believe that Jesus literally thought that he was inside of the people to whom he preached (John 17:26), a tiny, fleshly man kicking back in the belly of every person who heard him speak. Now that would be ignorant! Therefore, I know that I can't take every word in the Bible to mean exactly what it says. I have to interpret the Bible in a logical way, undestanding some words and phrases to be metaphors or symbolic. Get some wisdom!
wisdom4u2
1. "Oh, For Heaven's Sake, gullible people will believe whatever they're fed."
2. "What in the hell are you talking about..."
Wisdom4u2, there is also no heaven and no hell. LOL. Religion was created by neanderthals who couldn't explain the sun and the stars because they hadn't invented telescopes. We have telescopes and spaceships and robots on other planets, and satellites, and commercial trips into space. Get with the times. Odds are there are millions of other planets suitable for life. We've already identified over 1000 various planets elsewhere. So there's probably some kind of life elsewhere, 10,000 light years away. Did God create that life too?
Here again, I am, bewildered, but not surprised, at the number of sub-humans responding, crouching in their beloved ignorance of established science...striking rocks...and still not catching up with the rest of us..
Perhaps these primitive believers should beat their chests and piss all over the forum like you? This is intelligence? You're an impostor! Now, go watch Family Guy!
I love to watch those who believe themselves to be religious squirm every damn time we discover another link to our prehistoric past. They just hate it when something is carbon dated 100,000 years back because it means some bonehead at some Kreationist Kollej (yes yes I do know how it would be spelled if you could call them colleges) has to work overtime to 'splain that one. It's getting harder and harder for them to push away reality, but humans are good at it, whether they are religious or not. And thank you RosaF for having an intelligent post about this fascinating find.
You mean Christians...there are more than enough religions that don't have an issue with 100,000 year old humans.
You mean Christian FUNDAMENTALISTS... the majority of Christians have no problem with the notions of evolution or an 'old' earth. Heck, biblical monogenesists (who believed that all the races of man derive from a single origin) of the 17th & 18th century are one of the groups that spurred scientific inquiry into the nature of differentiation and ultimately speciation.
Actually, Christians know better than you do, so there is NO squirming.
We don't have to hear of a 'link' to our past, we've been given first hand knowledge by the Creator, Himself. Ha!
You can’t get any better knowledge than that!
Every religion purports to be " The Only True " religion.. so therefore, you are ALL wrong.
Religion was created by man as a way to explain, what he could not explain. Anything is possible if it is " Devine ".
Religion has also caused more human suffering & death throughout recorded history, than any other motive.
Talk about having eyes and not being able to SEE...
Hey, look. No one cares about Christians, okay? Keep your weird beliefs, but go do something useful with your hands, like writing checks to your evangelistic tv stations or Sally strutters, or go touring the world (country) in Palin's bus. Shut jer pie hole.
LOL!! Idiots. (shaking my head)
What is this giant attack on Christians? It is mostly against Christians; the Christians haven't said anything bad about the 100,000 year date. But people are saying now that religion is a bunch of mass murderers?
How about atheism? Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc. etc. etc. Add to about a billion murdered.
Sure are a lot of may haves, could be's, and perhap's in this story, and nothing solid.
Unless you have a time machine, it'll stay that way. Nobody can sit here and guess to 100% accuracy what the people who made these were thinking.
Adam was a good artist. This is his work. I had a talk with a priest. He told me, Adam and Eve were having fun in that garden, that is modern day Africa. God loved them so much, that is why he planted a tree of forbidden fruit, right there and told them not to eat. God love them so much that as soon as they ate the fruit from that tree. God punishes them for their own good. Then God punished their kids, grand and great grand kids. When love of God grew, world became populated. God wanted to punish every living, non living being for their own good. So, God gave different religions, earth quakes, tsunamis and so on.... When people complained, God said, it is devil who caused the all pain. He has freedom of expression. What I granted him. So it is his fault and showed his @$$. These art work is proof of what I am saying. I am prophet from God. Now you all git the proof. Please send 100.00$ to me and secure your salvation after your death.
Adam and Eve were Gentiles.
What in hells bathroom is that ? I am prophet and send me money. What language you don't understand ?
Awesome!
"When I was a kid, my favorite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school we'd all go play in his cave, and every once in awhile he would eat one of us. It wasn't until later that I found out that Uncle Caveman was a bear."
Very deep thoughts, hahaha. Nice.
LOL! Just proof that there is nothing new under the sun!
"What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun."
Ecclesiastes 1:9
"A girl phoned the caveman and said...Come on over there's nobody home. He went over... Nobody was home!"
These weren't "artists". They were gangs of thugs who went around leaving their graffiti in caves and on the sides of slow moving Brachiosaurus'.
roflmao thugasaur – there is always more than one way to look at something, isn't there!
Three cavemen were sitting around a fire, talking about how hard it is to grow old.
One said to the other two, I'm getting old and think my memory is going. He said I'm standing at the entrance of the cave, and I'm not sure whether I just came in or am abuout to go out.
The second caveman said, I know what you mean. I'm standing by my the ledges of the cave, and I'm not sure whether I just came down or am about to go up.
The third caveman said. You're both crazy. Thankfully I have no problems like that–knock on wood (as he knocks on the wooden table).
Suddenly he says to the other two: Hold on just a moment. I think I hear someone knocking on the door of the cave.
Five cavewomen were sitting around having lunch..discussing the up-coming divorce one was going through.
"Here's my lawyer's card Wilma..he did all 4 of my divorces..& if I ever get married again..he'll do that one, too."
The world is billions of years old. Dinosaurs were smart and flew in hover cars. They left the earth on starships bound for dinotopia in the dinosaur nebula which doesn't exist anymore. They dinosaurs didn't die from meteors. This studio was actually a dinosaur art room at a dinosaur high school.
When this news leaks out, teabagger's heads will be exploding everywhere.
I guess there's always something marvelous about artists, no matter what the date is.
Artists sure do seem to have their own peculiar, but wonderful ways of thinking and being creative.
I also appreciate the archeologists, who have revealed this and so many other matters of history for us.
Urine? Well they say an artist always puts a little of his self into his work.
Good thought, but it is "himself," not "his self." You are forgiven.
Actually, if you interpret "self" as an objective thing with real existence that we possess, he's correct in his phrasing. Arguably, anyway. Or, perhaps, we're both being pedantic and should shut up until we have something real to contribute. I as$ign you to write a 250 word essay on art as an ancient trait, and how it is intrinsic to the human soul. Discuss why Darwinistic trends would select for artistic behaviour, and how art may have helped one tribe survive while others did not. This is your punishment for pedanting all over a clever comment that you didn't make. Try to put your better self into future submissions.
Oh you mean there were humans hundred thousand yrs ago? but.. but.. my school teaches intelligent design and it says we are only 6000 yrs old..
And your school is absolutely right ! By the way, did you know that early man would park their dinosaurs in the Roman coliseum while they were in church ?
Ya and Charles Darwin went back through time and jacked off into the primordial soup
I'm a little older. I actually remember this. We had "drive-in restaurants" in those days. Because of the grumpier dinosaurs, the servers didn't last long.
Teabaggers believe that the Flintstones is a factual documentary of early man. Teabaggers believe that the first automobiles really were foot powered.
But I'll bet they don't have a "gay old time" do they?
Not every believer has a narrow view of science, history and the universe.
Matters of faith have been held precious by those of limited, mean and exceptional intelligence and abilities. This has always been the case.
I'm surprised that a well-informed person would be ignorant of this and insensitive to each person's uniqueness.
Some might say that such comments suggest an attitude of unfounded arrogance and stupidity.
Well, maybe. It is generally understood that it is the fundamentalists that are the butt of the jokes. They fully earned that position by loudly and dogmatically rejecting any point of view, be it scientific or otherwise, if it varied from their particular interpretations of religious mythology. And then they compound the issue by hijacking the right wing to politicize their dogma to the point of forcing it on the general population, regardless of how ridiculous it seems with regard to substantiated fact. So yeah, they have earned the ridicule.
interesting argument.. but still does not discount the fact that a child is exposed to skewed beliefs of an adult with questionable judgement during their most impressionable time of their life. There is a word for such a practice.. it starts with "Brain" and ends with "wash"
snow,
All children are exposed to what you referred to as "skewed beliefs". (Which of us scrutinizes every thought and action, by using rigorous statistical analysis; and, besides, this would be absurd to do so.)
And which home and which parents are perfect–yours?
We all inherit ideas and beliefs, which are less than perfect and less than scientific; and, this applies not only to our spriitual and religious educations (or complete lack thereof), but it also applies to our political ideologies, language and communication skills, problem solving skills, prejudices, etc..
To suggest otherwise is naive, at best, and dishonest or foolish. at worse,
As children grow and mature they begin to think for themselves. This gradual process becomes pronounced when a child reaches about nine or ten years of age.
At this point they begin to think for themselves in a significant way, and they begin to develop their own values. This process continues for years. (See: Erik Erikson and Judeth Wallerstein.)
What is important is whether a parent or parents love, nurture and impart and instill values in their children, which will enable them to be healthy, independent, and responsible and productive members of the community.
This, of course, is one of the main goals of god-fearing individuals.
Unless one is perfect, they would be wise to use restraint, when criticizing those who are committed to doing such.
Ah the joke that only parents have a hand in the child's learning.. Let me take an example.. Lets say that there is an atheist, who was homescooled till he reaches 10th grade or so. By then the child has enough maturity to make most of the decisions about what he wants and what he does not. He decides to start attending school for a change.. On the first day of school, the teacher says he should read the pledge that includes "under god". And he refuses because he does not believe in god. What do you think the teacher would do? of course they are going to impose the rule that he MUST say the pledge. He is forced to say things he does not want to by adults who want to change his mind about his ideals.. Don't you call it an attempt to brainwash?
This is really VERY interesting. There's something of a debate about when the capacity for symbolic thought/behavior (i.e., art, music, language) arose in hominins, and so far a lot of archaeologists have believed it to be an Upper Paleolithic occurrence taking place all over Europe around 40,000 years ago. There are isolated examples of potential symbolic behavior from earlier sites, including Blombos, but there's a lot of discussion about what this means in terms of cognitive capabilities in our species (and were earlier species capable of such thought? So far, the evidence does not support such an idea.). It's pretty fascinating to find evidence suggesting that humans were capable of such complex thought so long ago. Has such complex behavior always been a part of Homo sapiens, or did it develop at some point after the species appeared? This is an area I was particularly interested in when I was a graduate student....I LOVE human evolution! (And I love being a spiritual/religious person, fyi. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Those creationism museums are kind of ridiculous.)
Wow! You said a mouthfull ! But if you want the real facts, please see my post below.
Sarah Palin believes that the earth is only 6,000 years old and that early man walked with the dinosaurs. Sarah Palin believes that early man rode dinosaurs to church every Sunday.
Darwin believed that humans evolved from dinosaur poop
Well, we certainly know that the teabaggers did.
You're in a rut, please move on to something other than Palin. Please!
Just shows that there was a whole age of mankind that was lost to us in history, most likely by natural disaster.
Whooo whoooohooo whoo whhhooooo OOOoooooohh
World's oldest art studio? Hardly . . . I read an article just a couple of days ago about a giant cephalopod from, like, 60 million years ago, that was apparently arranging the carcasses of its giant ichthyosaur prey into lovely, tentacled self portraits!. Now THAT's an old art studio.
This is not possible because we know that the world is only 6000 years old.
Trolling fail.
Try again?
you're a troll too
There's a creation museum in KY which is a few days drive for me, and I plan on going to it in the next few months. I'm an atheist and all I want is a picture of me riding a dinosaur.
I have one less than 40 miles from my house... maybe we can swap backgrounds?
I went to a creationism museum once. I think everyone should go at least one time in their life. It's funnier than your local comedy club only they don't serve alcohol...
I'm a couple of hours from the creation museum and I'd love to go – but I refuse to pay them so I won't. I will not give even a $1 to promote ignorance. Also, my wife says they would kick me out from laughing so hard.....
What did they paint back then? Ads like "For a good mastadon burger..eat at Caveman Joe's." or "For a good time....see
Lola the water nympho.".."For a 3-bedroom cave....see Snakepit Reality..located at the 3rd tree from the stream."
Lolz.
Funny, made me LOL. 🙂
The usual "porn".
LOL 🙂 FTW
such a mature first post to an interesting article. thanks a lot.
Lighten up Susan..learn to see the humor in everything.
real mature response
Just a troll trying to get people to react, its better to ignore them.
What was found in Blombos Cave, South Africa...an ancient attempt to transcribe 'hologram codices' projecting from 'Petro Photoglyphs'... http://www.impactoptics.com .
The Media for Transferring Ancient Knowledge to Man...The Platform that will eventually be understood as 'Contact with an Advanced Alien Intelligence.
Yes, either that or humans are just plain smart and can invent things without any help from space aliens. One of these things is definitely true.
Occams Razor
Looks like they found a rotten old dinner plate 🙂 Who will pay millions for this?
Someone please send this article to Rick Scott, Gov. of Florida....
Apparently he doesn't want Florida tax dollars going to arch. degrees....
And no, I didn't make that up....Fact check it if you like...
He doesn't want anyone finding out that he has a caveman fetish.
It's not just anthropology degrees. He is attempting to partially defund programs that are considered either liberal arts or "soft" science programs. It's unfortunate, really. The less engineers there are in this world, the more I get paid.
Should be "fewer" instead of "less". Stupid enumeration rules.
Someone please send this article to Rick Scott, Gov. of Florida....
Apparently he doesn't want Florida tax dollars going to arch. degrees....
And no, I didn't make that up....Fact check it you like...
I thought Rick Scott's rant was against anthropology degrees, which he feels should be eliminated from higher education because he believes they do not lead to jobs. I didn't hear that he also has a problem with archaeology degrees too. However, I wouldn't doubt it.
All you teabagging chumps really believed that I was going to run for president, didn't you ? I just wanted you to send me money ! LOL
Holy miss cue Batman, wrong forum there man.
Nah, he's just a troll. Or a dogmatic liberal who can't help but try to be condescending towards conservatives, no matter how unrelated politics is to the article he's commenting on.
Trolling or just on the wrong board: The point is still true. Besides, when I thing of prehistoric humans I think of the Palins. I don't think of them when I think of art though.
patrick: "Trolling or just on the wrong board: The point is still true. Besides, when I thing of prehistoric humans I think of the Palins. I don't think of them when I think of art though."
*yawn*
Partisanship at its finest.
Please don't vote.
@Nah
big business ~ multi nationals ~ arms makers ~ wall street
.
They all like buffons like you ~ too stupid to even troll.
Voting is meaningless ~ if you have not figured that out by now there is no hope for you.
.
Partisanship is crap ~ no matter which side it comes from.
Pick up your knuckles and close your mouth.
cooper: "big business ~ multi nationals ~ arms makers ~ wall street"
Lol. Okay. If you say so?