Thursday, December 15, 2005


As I noted in a different post I am collecting them, mostly those that do not fit the Darwinian paradigm. Unfortunately the Darwinian paradigm is not even really far enough along and defined enough to either recognize anomalies or be falsified because it is mainly just vague hand waving: "This looks a little like that or somethin'." So when new data comes up that seems contradictory it is: "Well, this over here may look a little like that...or somethin' and maybe somethin' else too. Well, I did just murmur about millions of years and that seems good to me!"

I.e., the hypothesizing collapses and expands as is hypothetically necessary like the Ptolemaic system or phlogiston used to.

This person is collecting anomalies from the mythohistorian "the gods were ancient aliens" type of perspective.
There is a great deal of archeological evidence that the history of life on earth might be far different than what current geological and anthropological
texts tell us. Consider these astonishing finds:
The Grooved Spheres
Over the last few decades, miners in South Africa have been digging up mysterious metal spheres. Origin unknown, these spheres measure approximately an inch or so in diameter, and some are etched with three parallel grooves running around the equator. Two types of spheres have been found: one is composed of a solid bluish metal with flecks of white; the other is hollowed out and filled with a spongy white substance. The kicker is that the rock in which they where found is Precambrian - and dated to 2.8 billion years old! Who made them and for what purpose is unknown.
Impossible Fossils
Fossils, as we learned in grade school, appear in rocks that were formed many thousands of years ago. Yet there are a number of fossils that just don't make geological or historical sense. A fossil of a human handprint, for example, was found in limestone estimated to be 110 million years old. What appears to be a fossilized human finger found in the Canadian Arctic also dates back 100 to 110 million years ago. And what appears to be the fossil of a human footprint, possibly wearing a sandal, was found near Delta, Utah in a shale deposit estimated to be 300 million to 600 million years old.

Out-of-Place Metal Objects
Humans were not even around 65 million years ago, never mind people who could work metal. So then how does science explain semi-ovoid metallic tubes dug out of 65-million-year-old Cretaceous chalk in France? In 1885, a block of coal was broken open to find a metal cube obviously worked by intelligent hands. In 1912, employees at an electric plant broke apart a large chunk of coal out of which fell an iron pot! A nail was found embedded in a sandstone block from the Mesozoic Era. And there are many, many more such anomalies.
(THE 10 MOST PUZZLING ANCIENT ARTIFACTS from Paranormal Phenomena at About)

I would begin with the pyramids and holes drilled through granite in the copper age, supposedly with copper tools. Modern engineers have taken a look at them and estimated how fast the drill would have to be as well as how hardened the drill bit. I suppose there must have been an egyptian with fast hands twirling a bit of copper, very fast. Then when it wore out, again, and again. There are other anomalies worth discussing as well, of course some of them may turn out to have more mundane explanations than one might think. Yet it is hard to see how all of them taken together could ever fit the orthodox type of idiocy and scientism that academics are intent on believing for now. It seems that people will believe virtually anything in order to prop up some mythological narratives of Naturalism based on Darwinian principles. Those narratives don't even get around Haldane's dilemma on their own questionable terms, as the dating method and type of pseudo-geology that supposedly set the terms has been falsified empirically repeatedly. According to Creationists as well as a curmudgeon type geologist I read they say it is the one and only dating method that gives the desired answer of millions of years which are supposedly suitable for the Darwinian creation myth.

I just ordered books written by Creationists to get the young earth perspective. I think there's probably holes in their texts too. But at least they have the option of relying on faith openly and honestly instead of denying it and then, oops. I read a collection of essays written by them already and they usually begin with the limitations of science. That's the honest thing to do.

[Related posts: The accomplishments of ape-man...]

No comments: