113 replies to this topic

[MusicOne]

Did mankind co-exist with the dinosaurs?

The mystery of the Inca Stones.....

[Makka]

Very well know fake factory produces them.

[MusicOne]

Very well know fake factory produces them.

I'm sure.....but that does not invalidate the original find....

Quote:

Dr. Javier Cabrera was professor of medicine and head of his department at the University of Lima. He has retired from that position and is presently the Cultural Anthropologist for Ica, Peru. In the early 1930's, his father found many of these ceremonial burial stones in area's numerous Inca tombs. Dr. Cabrera has continued his father's research and has collected over 1100 of them. Approximately one third depict the pornographic culture of the Incas, graphically portrayed in the artifacts of that period. Some picture their idolatry, other represent amazing accomplishments, such as successful brain surgery confirmed by scarred skulls which demonstrate healed recovery. Almost one third of the stones depict specific types of dinosaurs, like those seen below, as well as Triceratops, Stegosaurus and Pterosaurs.

Edited by MusicOne, 07 May 2012 - 08:25 AM.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Did mankind co-exist with the dinosaurs?

Still do. Crocodiles are dinosaurs. If you are referring to the rest of the dinosaurs that were all killed off 65 million years ago, then no. That does not stop many charlatans from believing and promoting their lies.

[MusicOne]

Still do. Crocodiles are dinosaurs. If you are referring to the rest of the dinosaurs that were all killed off 65 million years ago, then no. That does not stop many charlatans from believing and promoting their lies.

Zaph, that comment does not explain the existence of the authentic stones, apparently discovered by reputable people.

[Makka]

Reputable people have been shown to commit fraud too, or be conned by locals.

[MusicOne]

Reputable people have been shown to commit fraud too, or be conned by locals.

By definition, if they are reputable, they have not committed fraud.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Zaph, that comment does not explain the existence of the authentic stones, apparently discovered by reputable people.

I'm not trying to explain the existence of stones. I'm stating that, apart from crocs, there have been no dinosaurs on this planet for 65 million years. I recall drawing pictures of cars, back when I was ten years old (1963) that looked remarkably similar to a Lamborghini Diablo. That does not mean I had a Lambo to copy my design from. It was pure imagination.

[doobius]

Did mankind co-exist with the dinosaurs?

No.

Zaph, that comment does not explain the existence of the authentic stones, apparently discovered by reputable people.

Wikipedia explains it well enough: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Ica_stones

[ayou2]

The inquisitive mind quickly has its wings clipped at SNA.

[Makka]

By definition, if they are reputable, they have not committed fraud.

not afterwards, no.

Is this a sneaky introduction of "Intelligent" Design?

Edited by Makka, 07 May 2012 - 04:22 PM.

[MusicOne]

None of the above responses are in the least surprising.....a lot of closed minds on SNA....there are many unexplained mysteries from the ancient world, and no amount of rationalizing by blinkered dilettantes can explain them away. The Inca Stones, may, or may not be genuine, but quoting 'authorities' such as Wikipedia is an easy cop-out.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

None of the above responses are in the least surprising.....a lot of closed minds on SNA....there are many unexplained mysteries from the ancient world, and no amount of rationalizing by blinkered dilettantes can explain them away. The Inca Stones, may, or may not be genuine, but quoting 'authorities' such as Wikipedia is an easy cop-out.

What are you trying to say here?

Are you saying that dinosaurs existed alongside humans, based on some drawings on some rocks? Rocks that may or may not have been made relatively recently.
Are you saying that humans have existed on this planet for more than 65 million years, despite the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that homo sapiens did not appear until around approximately 200,000 years ago?
Are you saying that, despite there being no real evidence of the fact that dinosaurs (apart from crocs) did not die out 65 million years ago?

[Makka]

Perhaps you also noticed how many of the people on those rock drawings had a pipe in their mouth.
You have to wonder what they were smoking

Oh, and you didn't answer about the Intelligent design.
Are you a Christian?

Closed mind?
Perhaps you didn't read the alien thread.

Edited by Makka, 08 May 2012 - 07:28 AM.

[MusicOne]

Perhaps you also noticed how many of the people on those rock drawings had a pipe in their mouth.
You have to wonder what they were smoking

Oh, and you didn't answer about the Intelligent design.
Are you a Christian?

Closed mind?
Perhaps you didn't read the alien thread.

What has intelligent design got to do with the issue? As to my being a Christian, that is my own business....I haven't asked you about your religious beliefs...the matter is irrelevant.

[MusicOne]

What are you trying to say here?

Are you saying that dinosaurs existed alongside humans, based on some drawings on some rocks? Rocks that may or may not have been made relatively recently.
Are you saying that humans have existed on this planet for more than 65 million years, despite the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that homo sapiens did not appear until around approximately 200,000 years ago?
Are you saying that, despite there being no real evidence of the fact that dinosaurs (apart from crocs) did not die out 65 million years ago?

Zaph, I remember, as a boy, owning a set of encyclopedias which showed quite clearly the outlines of the canals on Mars. This was a picture taken from Earth...so a bit blurry...many of the canals had been given names, and it was thought by the science of that time, that the reason the canals appeared to wax and wane, was because vegetation surrounding the canals flourished and then died, due to seasonal variations. In fact, they claimed that what we saw from Earth, was not the canals themselves, but the vegetation surrounding them!

Point being....what is today's verity, is tomorrow's myth.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Zaph, I remember, as a boy, owning a set of encyclopedias which showed quite clearly the outlines of the canals on Mars. This was a picture taken from Earth...so a bit blurry...many of the canals had been given names, and it was thought by the science of that time, that the reason the canals appeared to wax and wane, was because vegetation surrounding the canals flourished and then died, due to seasonal variations. In fact, they claimed that what we saw from Earth, was not the canals themselves, but the vegetation surrounding them!

Point being....what is today's verity, is tomorrow's myth.

Perhaps you may care to address my questions. I STILL don't understand what you are claiming.

[MusicOne]

Zaph, I remember, as a boy, owning a set of encyclopedias which showed quite clearly the outlines of the canals on Mars. This was a picture taken from Earth...so a bit blurry...many of the canals had been given names, and it was thought by the science of that time, that the reason the canals appeared to wax and wane, was because vegetation surrounding the canals flourished and then died, due to seasonal variations. In fact, they claimed that what we saw from Earth, was not the canals themselves, but the vegetation surrounding them!

Point being....what is today's verity, is tomorrow's myth.

Perhaps you may care to address my questions. I STILL don't understand what you are claiming.

Try taking the Intuitive Leap!

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Try taking the Intuitive Leap!

Pretend, for a moment, that I am as dumb as a rock and have no idea what you are trying to say. Near as I can see, you are trying to say one of the following:

* That humans lived 65 million years ago (despite the lack of evidence).
OR;
* That dinosaurs lived up until a few thousand years ago (despite the lack of evidence).

Which is it?

Or is it something else, that my feeble brain cannot grasp?

Edited by Zaphod Beeblebrox, 08 May 2012 - 09:43 AM.

[ayou2]

Its pretty easy Zaph. Sorry for speaking for you here Musicone.

What if, just what if ... what we currently think is not correct ? The stones are either genuine or they are not. In western thinking we get caught up in all the grey areas, probability, likelyhood blah blah blah. Eastern thinking tends towards yes or no, right or wrong, ying or yang if you like.

It couldnt hurt you to be a little more open minded about things.

Im guessing you have a bit of respect for Albert Einstein, so give these a bit of thought

He who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead; his eyes are closed.
Albert Einstein

Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions.
Albert Einstein

Im hoping you wont dissapoint with another assertion for clarification.

[MusicOne]

Pretend, for a moment, that I am as dumb as a rock and have no idea what you are trying to say. Near as I can see, you are trying to say one of the following:

* That humans lived 65 million years ago (despite the lack of evidence).
OR;
* That dinosaurs lived up until a few thousand years ago (despite the lack of evidence.

Which is it?

Or is it something else, that my feeble brain cannot grasp?

Just as a matter of interest, Zaph.....is your starsign Taurus?

[ayou2]

btw .... <snip>

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Its pretty easy Zaph. Sorry for speaking for you here Musicone.

What if, just what if ... what we currently think is not correct ?

I simply asked questions that relate to the topic at hand. I am STILL waiting for those questions to be answered.

And, FWIW: I am sure the stones are genuine. They were carved by humans, but no one can positively state when they were carved.

My sister has a painting of the Mona Lisa in her living room. There are several possible methods by which it ended up haging on her wall. They include:

* She and her husband travelled to Paris, entered the Louvre late one night, circumvented the security systems, stole the original and hung a fake to fool the curators.
* Aliens whisked the painting out of the Louvre and delivered it to my sister one day.
* My sister purchased a paint by numbers kit 30 years ago and painted it.

Which is the more plausible explanation?

Occam's Razor and all that.

Edited by Zaphod Beeblebrox, 08 May 2012 - 09:38 AM.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Just as a matter of interest, Zaph.....is your starsign Taurus?

My "starsign" is irrelevant. As you would already know, the stars are moving.The constellations that were visible yeasterday and not the same as those visible tomorrow. In 10,000 years, they will be barely recognisable. Will astrological charts need to be altered to reflect those changes? Will people who are born in (say) Virgo today, be born under some other "starsign" in a few thousand years, even though they may be born on the same date?

I would be really happy if you would just answer my questions.

FWIW: Leo with Cancer rising.

[ayou2]

Occams Razor would give us Creation over Evolution.

"so one day something happened in the universe that we cant really explain, but it was a giant inflation or big bang if you like and the universe was formed in a perfect working order, imagine pouring a bag of sawdust out and a tree forms, and then, even though man kind has never been able to reproduce it, life sprang forth, then this happened, then that happened etc etc etc fill the next 1000 pages"

"A supernatural being created it"

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Occams Razor would give us Creation over Evolution.

Let's see:

A supernatural creature created each and every form of life on this planet.

OR:

Creatures responded to evolutionary pressures, altering their characteristics, via mutation, in order to fit in with their environment.

Let's look at what we know:

* There is not, nor has there ever been a single shred of verifiable evidence to support the notion of the existence of anything supernatural.
* Evolution of various species has been observed, both in the laboratory and in nature.

Therefore, Occam's Razor supports evolution over creationism.

"so one day something happened in the universe that we cant really explain, but it was a giant inflation or big bang if you like

Correct. Science cannot explain the big bang. OTOH, science CAN explain, with great confidence, everything that has occured within a few microseconds after the inflation began.

and the universe was formed in a perfect working order

Define "perfect working order".

, imagine pouring a bag of sawdust out and a tree forms, and then, even though man kind has never been able to reproduce it, life sprang forth, then this happened, then that happened etc etc etc fill the next 1000 pages"

Why would you want to imagine that?

"A supernatural being created it"

Prove it.

[MusicOne]

My "starsign" is irrelevant. As you would already know, the stars are moving.The constellations that were visible yeasterday and not the same as those visible tomorrow. In 10,000 years, they will be barely recognisable. Will astrological charts need to be altered to reflect those changes? Will people who are born in (say) Virgo today, be born under some other "starsign" in a few thousand years, even though they may be born on the same date?

I would be really happy if you would just answer my questions.

FWIW: Leo with Cancer rising.

Sorry Zaph....I was just trying a bit of humour....you certainly sound like a Taurus.

As to your questions, I think I have already answered them....perhaps not the sort of answers you regard as sufficient, but then, we never get all we want, do we.

[MusicOne]

Occams Razor would give us Creation over Evolution.

"so one day something happened in the universe that we cant really explain, but it was a giant inflation or big bang if you like and the universe was formed in a perfect working order, imagine pouring a bag of sawdust out and a tree forms, and then, even though man kind has never been able to reproduce it, life sprang forth, then this happened, then that happened etc etc etc fill the next 1000 pages"

"A supernatural being created it"

Or perhaps....Is man a Microcosm of the Macrocosm? If this is so, and by extension, the Macrocosm is intelligent.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Sorry Zaph....I was just trying a bit of humour....you certainly sound like a Taurus.

Of course. There is no science involved with astrology. It's bunk. Wild guesses are just as accurate.

As to your questions, I think I have already answered them....perhaps not the sort of answers you regard as sufficient, but then, we never get all we want, do we.

You haven't explained anything. You have not answered my questions. Your lack of response tells us all exactly what we need to know.

[ayou2]

Let's see:

A supernatural creature created each and every form of life on this planet.

OR:

Creatures responded to evolutionary pressures, altering their characteristics, via mutation, in order to fit in with their environment.

Let's look at what we know:

* There is not, nor has there ever been a single shred of verifiable evidence to support the notion of the existence of anything supernatural.
* Evolution of various species has been observed, both in the laboratory and in nature.

Therefore, Occam's Razor supports evolution over creationism.



Correct. Science cannot explain the big bang. OTOH, science CAN explain, with great confidence, everything that has occured within a few microseconds after the inflation began.



Define "perfect working order".



Why would you want to imagine that?



Prove it.

I think we've had this dance a few times, the last time it happened the thread got closed.

I'll just say that basing everything you believe on what you can see is what lead us to once suppose the earth was flat.

As far as we can see is just that ... As far as we can see.

[MusicOne]

You haven't explained anything. You have not answered my questions. Your lack of response tells us all exactly what we need to know.

You are such a literalist, mate....I give up...and I will ignore the put-down.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

I think we've had this dance a few times, the last time it happened the thread got closed.

I'll just say that basing everything you believe on what you can see is what lead us to once suppose the earth was flat.

Nope. It is easy to see the curvature of the Earth from a high hill near the ocean. Science taught how to prove that the Earth was roughly sperical THOUSANDS of years ago.

As far as we can see is just that ... As far as we can see.

And that is all we need to concern ourselves with. Making up fairy stories to explain that which cannot yet be explained is not logical. However, we have veered dramatically off-topic. Let's get back to the stones. What is the most logical explanation for their existence, given the facts that are known. These facts are:

* All the dinosuars died out around 65 million years ago.
* Humans appeared around 200,000 years ago.
* Humans and dinosaurs did not co-exist.

[MusicOne]

* All the dinosuars died out around 65 million years ago.
* Humans appeared around 200,000 years ago.
* Humans and dinosaurs did not co-exist.

We do not know any of these things, for certain.....the points you make are simply the latest educated guesses....in 50, or 100 years time, the educated guesses may look very different. Science is a moveable feast.

[ayou2]

Spock: check
Kirk: checkmate
Spock: your illogical approach to chess does have its advantages on occasion Captain.
Kirk: I'd prefer to call it inspired
Spock: as you wish

From the episode Charlie X

[ayou2]

If all we need concern ourselves with is what we can see, then Einstein would just have accepted time was fixed, by watching a clock.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

We do not know any of these things, for certain.....the points you make are simply the latest educated guesses....in 50, or 100 years time, the educated guesses may look very different.

Indeed. It is probable that science will provide more accuracy for those figures. Let's say they determine that dinosaurs died out 64 million years ago and humans appeared 210,000 years ago. There's still many orders of magnitude difference between the dissapearance of the dinosaurs and appearance of humans.

Science is a moveable feast.

Indeed, but not by as much as the charlatans would have us believe. Dinosaurs did not co-exist with humans. There is no evidence to suggst that dinosaurs existed beyond 65 million years ago.

[Zammo]

I call "Russel's Teapot" on MusicOne and Ayou2. Science is science, mysticism is not.

[ayou2]

Nope. It is easy to see the curvature of the Earth from a high hill near the ocean. Science taught how to prove that the Earth was roughly sperical.

After someone decided to think beyond what they could see. The curvature was at first explained as a drop off. like a dinner plate upside down if you like.

[Zammo]

After someone decided to think beyond what they could see.

"Think", theorise, observe, measure....yes, science.

[ayou2]

I'm not asking anyone to prove anything nor discounting completely what is in our textbooks.

I just think it is fun to wonder about things.

Be open to possibilities.

Anyone would think I'm trying to pull a Nigerian style scam here. If I was, i could understand the hostile undertones and assertions of fairy tales.

Believing what you believe seems logical to you, believing what I believe seems logical to me.

If you look at one side of a sheet of paper with the letter A on it, then your truth is that the letter A is on that sheet. If whilst you are examining that sheet by holding it in front of you, I notice their is a letter B on it, my truth is that B is on that sheet.

I accept science and logic are necessary, useful and completely valid ways to investigate he world, but I also think there maybe more to this world than what we can see, measure etc etc.

So my truth becomes A & B are on that sheet. Sceptics, for want of a better word, seem stuck looking at their side of the sheet.

Edited by ayou2, 08 May 2012 - 01:28 PM.

[Tappy]

Occams Razor would give us Creation over Evolution.

"so one day something happened in the universe that we cant really explain, but it was a giant inflation or big bang if you like and the universe was formed in a perfect working order, imagine pouring a bag of sawdust out and a tree forms, and then, even though man kind has never been able to reproduce it, life sprang forth, then this happened, then that happened etc etc etc fill the next 1000 pages"

"A supernatural being created it"

Dave Allen's perspective on how things happened...

[ayou2]

If I said my 4 yr old doesn't understand the economy, therefore it doesn't exist, you would say, no no, she just hasn't developed enough intelligence or maturity to understand it.

So, do we know everything, like children think they do ?

Or have we not gained enough intelligence or maturity yet ?

It is scientifically verifiable that we only use a small percentage of our brain.

[Tappy]

This is how a 4 year old thinks..

[Zammo]

If I said my 4 yr old doesn't understand the economy, therefore it doesn't exist, you would say, no no, she just hasn't developed enough intelligence or maturity to understand it.

So, do we know everything, like children think they do ?

Or have we not gained enough intelligence or maturity yet ?

It is scientifically verifiable that we only use a small percentage of our brain.

Sorry ayou2, but such an analogy does not stand up to even the mildest scrutiny. 4 year olds don't understand the existence of The Flying Spaghetti Monster, yet does it exist? At some point, you need to call "bullsh1t" on crackpot theories that attempt to provide answers for the unexplained.(again, I refer to Russel's Teapot - read it up if you haven't heard of it.) There is much Science cannot yet explain - it always has and probably always will be that way. That does not mean our knowledge void needs to be filled with rubbish like fake Ica Stones and Astrology.

Edited by Zammo, 08 May 2012 - 02:30 PM.

[ayou2]

Why is religion being brought into this ?

Thinking creation is a possibility isn't the same thing as taking the book of Genesis literally. Or believing much else in the Bible for that matter.

It's an Agnostic viewpoint, that is all.

IMO its only the mediocre minds of the intelligentsia (and those that flock around them like sheep) that think they know everything.

The true greats had a touch more humility.

"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit ....." A.E.