'Astonishing' skull unearthed in Africa

Originally posted by MKULTRA

HEY ITS A PIC! I BELIEVE IT NOW!

But if they told you it was a picture of an alien skull, wouldn't you naturally doubt it?

How do we know this is not a hoax?

MK

Usually things like this are taken serious, I would doubt that anyone would attempt to make a fake. And Besides unless they can some one make a fake out of 7 million year old bone, its impossible.

Why do people have to seperate religion and science? How about this?

God created the universe = true.

God is an all powerfull entity = true.

This is because God is the energy from which all matter was created.

He says he was always around, before time existed. Time only exists if you have memory of the past.

Ok, so we have this energy (god), floating around in nothingness...this energy starts to get a conscience (don't ask how, haven't worked that part out yet). Energy turns into an intelligent entity. Entity begins to have thought & memory. The moment this entity gains memory of past events, this is the beginning of time. This is why god refers to itself as "I Am". Because, what do you call yourself when you were around since time began, do not age, do not have a physical form, can't be destoyed, and have no knowledge of what came before you (because nothing came before you).

All this energy starts to come together, growing more and more dense (Black hole). Reaches "critical mass", blows up (big bang theory).

Energy starts to come back together again but in smaller "clusters". Matter begins to form, then dust, gas, rocks, asteroids and eventually planets.

Earth is in the right spot for this energy to take the form of microbes.

Microbes grow, evolve, turn into apes among other things (adam & eve). Apes continue to evolve, and wolla, you got homospien.

We are still evolving...but evolution is slow, it's not obvious. We are being born larger. Our thumbs are becoming more dextrous, feet larger, index finger shorter, other fingers longer. Our brain volume is growing (from 1100cc to 1300cc in the last few hundred years).

God still exists, because everything is created from energy. God is the earliest form of this energy, therefore would be the most evolved, intelligent and omnipotent being in the galaxy.

He is all around us all the time (as the bible says), because he is the energy from which all matter was created.

He will be there till the end of time. Time only ends if there is nothing left to remember the past. A new theory suggests the universe sort of pulsates. You have big bang, it expands, stretches matter (energy) as far as it can go, then starts to contract (back to black hole). Energy hits critical mass, and bang, another big bang, another universe (the second coming of christ and creation of the new world for those saved). If we are energy, then technically, if everything did compress back to a black hole, explode & form a new universe, we would be saved, because the energy we are created from still exists. Energy cannot be destroyed, it only takes other forms.

So there you go. A theory. Has some holes, but so do all theories. You've got big bang, evolution, creation, god, black holes everything...all nicely squished together to make a nice uber-theory that at least to someone like me who isn't simultaneously a master of physics, biology, history, quantum mechanics and religion is possible.

Ps: If people want to start supporting this theory, from this day forward, it shall be known as super-duper quasi-metaphysical metamorphic energy theory.... go force and procreate erm... propogate my sons, may the force be with youse.

[edit on 24-9-2004 by LordGoofus]

I don't know about you but I have seen people alive today with heads a similar shape to that one.

Many of the missing links they have found have turned out to be either human or ape. Never something in between.

What about Nebraska man, who was based on one tooth. This tooth turned out to be a pigs tooth.

Any how with this new skull, why didn't they find a whole clan, why is there always only one.

To change from one thing into another you need new information added to the gene arm. Mutations and natural selection always result in a loss of information.

To answer how the dinosaurs got on the ark is simple, they took baby dinosaurs.

[edit on 25-9-2004 by rosebeforetime]

im a christian who doesn't really believe most of the stuff in the old testament as it is just ridiculous. The only things i really believe in are the prophesies made the prophets, and the whole mosses expierence. I also consider Noah's ark to be true as well. The creation of earth i believe is actually a parable. You know god created us in his image, and then for some reason we decided to sin thus he kicked us out of having direct contact with God. Although i will say that this "skull" doesn't really look too convincing. I have too seen people alive today that look like that!

Originally posted by rosebeforetime
Any how with this new skull, why didn't they find a whole clan, why is there always only one.

[edit on 25-9-2004 by rosebeforetime]

i think thats because of the remarkably small chance of getting the circumstances for fossilisation right......oh and its 7 MILLION YEARS OLD!! we're lucky theres still one

Originally posted by rosebeforetime
Any how with this new skull, why didn't they find a whole clan, why is there always only one.

[edit on 25-9-2004 by rosebeforetime]

Here's a thought, whatever it is how does one even know it is representative of anything? Could be a malformation of a species (birth defect, etc). In which case, good chance it was shunned and lived a solitary life, therefore no clan.

There is really just no way to have a clue on something that old. Only theories whatever anyone comes up with on this one.

so wait dinosaurs came before humans? did god make them or what? and why no mention of them in the bible.

From the article:

"I knew I would one day find it... I've been looking for 25 years," said Michel Brunet of the University of Poitiers, France.

Okay...having a mission in your archaeological research is one thing...but to freely admit that you've been looking for this one item your entire life is a mistake...in the archaeological community, that brings reason for doubt and skepticism...

It lends an inherently bias approach to his research which suggests that anything and everything this man finds is walked through a procedure to check if it is indeed this fossil...and when they stumble across something that meets a certain portion of their required items on the checklist, the ones that don't quite fit on the list are simply twisted in their already made up mind...

As far as the possibility of it being a fake - I'd say that's near impossible...before the science of archaeology actually developed into a intellectual field, there were many fakes and myths...Piltdown man is a clear example...


[edit on 9/25/2004 by EnronOutrunHomerun]

This story is not exactly news, as the skull was found in the summer of 2002. Undeniably the find has set the world of Anthropology on its ear and impacted many unrelated fields such as baseball.

Consider the following:

The remarkable and momentous discovery of the 7-million-years-old Chad skull ("Sahelanthropus tchadensis") sheds new light on the present Phillies' ownership.

Several salient facts about Chaddy link him definitively to the hominids occasionally seen shambling through the owners' boxes at the Vet. The chimp-sized brain, of course, is obvious, but the abominable condition of its teeth clearly points to an inadequate or non-existent dental plan, just what you would expect from the cheap Phillies' management.

The empty eye sockets prefigure the blindness of the present owners, clearly men of no vision. But most significant is the mouth. The jaws gape, but nothing emerges. In fact, the skull appears to be hollow, empty, utterly devoid of anything, all reminiscent of what emerges from the empty maws of Montgomery, Giles, Wade, and the other faceless skulls who run the Phillies.

Does Sahelanthropus tchadensis offer any hope to Phillies' fans? Well, yes. Sahelanthropus tchadensis became extinct.
baseball-fever.com...

Consider the impact on Darwinsim, which is counter to the arguments of some:

The latest evidence to shatter the evolutionary theory's claim about the origin of man is the new fossil Sahelanthropus tchadensis unearthed in the Central African country of Chad in the summer of 2002.

The fossil has set the cat among the pigeons in the world of Darwinism. In its article giving news of the discovery, the world-renowned journal Nature admitted that "New-found skull could sink our current ideas about human evolution."213

Daniel Lieberman of Harvard University said that "This [discovery] will have the impact of a small nuclear bomb."214

The reason for this is that although the fossil in question is 7 million years old, it has a more "human-like" structure (according to the criteria evolutionists have hitherto used) than the 5 million-year-old Australopithecus ape species that is alleged to be "mankind's oldest ancestor." This shows that the evolutionary links established between extinct ape species based on the highly subjective and prejudiced criterion of "human similarity" are totally imaginary.
www.darwinismrefuted.com...
www.albalagh.net...

The well-known Nature magazine's editor and paleontologist Henry Gee wrote in an article published by the Guardian newspaper:

Whatever the outcome, the skull shows, once and for all, that the old idea of a 'missing link' is bunk... It should now be quite plain that the very idea of the missing link, always shaky, is now completely untenable. (4)

Hurriyet Science disregards cunningly the problems the age of the Sahelanthropus tchadensis fossil poses for the evolution theory. With the discovery of this fossil the timing of the branching out of man and chimpanzee claimed by evolutionists to have happened 6 million years ago revealed itself to be inconsistent. Tobias refers to the Swedish Ulfur Arnason's research and states that with the S.tchadensis fossil, Arnason's dating method must be adopted. Arnason puts the age at between 10 - 13 million years. Hurriyet Science might believe that it has bypassed this problem easily enough but when Arnason's research is considered it becomes apparent that the magazine resorted to cheating on behalf of evolution, because its dating of the branching out of man and chimpanzee is based on the molecular clock system which is wholly a product of imagination and prejudice. Arnason opposes the previous dating and "resets" the molecular clock, which interestingly, uses whales as the life form when "setting" the molecular clock to time human evolution. The contradictions are clearly visible in the dating efforts in support of evolution and evolutionists use the "setting" of the molecular clock that suits their purpose. Evolution is not a fact proven by scientific discoveries but is a dogma which misconstrues scientific discoveries for its ends.
www.darwinism-watch.com...

While the faith of others is unshaken"

" There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." - The Origin of Species, Charles Darwin

With these inspiring words, Charles Darwin concluded his book, 'The Origin of Species', and from that date in 1859, nothing in science would ever be the same again. Darwin's concept of Natural Selection was the keystone in an edifice which explains the diversity and nested relationships of species. It is a beautiful and powerful concept, and, as the famous biologist Theodosius Dobzhansky said: "Nothing in Biology makes sense except in the light of Evolution"
evolutionpages.com...

Further discussions can be found here:

www.google.com...

Truth, I do not see any dichotomy between believing in a 16+ Gyear-old- Universe, a 4+ Gyear-old solar system coming together from leftovers from a Type I star, thanks to gravity and conservation of angular momentum, macro- and micro-evolution, and plate tectonics ....

...And accepting the handiwork of The Program Manager, Who conceived and implemented the grandest Project imaginable, Whose implementation plan was faultless, Whose oversight is complete (not a sparrow shall fall...), and Whose Management Reserve funding was robust enough to enable Him to send His Son to die for our sins and rise again for our justification.

yea humans have evolved. but most christians dont believe that. my stupid health teacher said "if humans evolve then why arent we a different speciese today" what a retard i thought to myself. dont you know that like 700 years ago the average height was like 5 feet.

anyone else noticed the date on this article....."Wednesday, 10 July, 2002, 18:00 GMT 19:00 UK"......THIS STORY IS 2 YEARS OLD!!!!plus, if i remember correctly, this find, for one reason or another, didn't radically shake the scientific community.

microbes within us outnumber human cells by a factor of 10+. Worlds within worlds. We are no different. We are most likely just too stupid and without the necessary sensory ability to "see" the world as it truly is.

Originally posted by TheBadge
so wait dinosaurs came before humans? did god make them or what? and why no mention of them in the bible.

There are some references to creatures fitting the description of dinosaurs in the bible. I believe Job mentions these "behemoths" as well as some other old testament books. Not that it's indicative of much, but there is some mentioning of dinosaur-like animals.

First off, looking for a LINK between chimps and humans is a dead end. We evolved from a common root ancestor (looking unlike either man or chimp), but then diverged in different ways over millions of years.

Why do most creationists believe evolutionists think we evolved directly from chimps or apes?

As far as the possibility of it being a fake - I'd say that's near impossible...before the science of archaeology actually developed into a intellectual field, there were many fakes and myths...

Not really, does the James Ossuary ring a bell? Well done fakes exist to the present day...some going years without being revealed.

I'm more curious as to the gap in the fossil record between 4.7 and 5.2 million years ago (rounded out numbers, from the chart on the original link). WTH happened then? Plenty of a record before then, and plenty after... Why the gap?

Originally posted by Gazrok
Not really, does the James Ossuary ring a bell? Well done fakes exist to the present day...some going years without being revealed.

For sure...in fact I was going to use that very scenario for a more modern day example as well, but figured piltdown would suffice...My point was that even though they do still occur, given my response of it being "near impossible"...lol...it's highly unlikely...this sort of fake would be more at home in a pre-Ales Hrdlicka archeological environment....

I'm more curious as to the gap in the fossil record between 4.7 and 5.2 million years ago (rounded out numbers, from the chart on the original link). WTH happened then? Plenty of a record before then, and plenty after... Why the gap?

Another think to consider though is the dating...these dates are from 30-40 different radio carbon date samples that all come back with a slight difference, but all have the huge margin of error at the end...so sometimes 100,000 years here or there are shared between friends as a casual but acceptable error...

From my standpoint, I think the timeline is always a good thing to be aware of and know, but it holds little importence in proving evolution to those who doubt it...not to mention I've seen better timelines...but they are better used as tools for those who are more interested in character changes between two species over time...but we can clearly see those changes occuring in the morphology of the bones...so putting a time on it only helps us to see a slightly clearer image in an already fogged view of what the environment and other conditions surrounding them may have been...

[edit on 9/29/2004 by EnronOutrunHomerun]

Originally posted by DanTodd
yea humans have evolved. but most christians dont believe that. my stupid health teacher said "if humans evolve then why arent we a different speciese today" what a retard i thought to myself. dont you know that like 700 years ago the average height was like 5 feet.

Dont you know that a thousand years before that the average height was 8 feet.

The precurssor to modern man (maybe) were giants.

Or how about that the Neanderthals were made extinct by an a completely seperate species of humanoids.... That proved to be more cunning and had a higher concept of language and skill set.

This is a fact that back in the day there was more then just one kind of "man". Why did one "species" of man evolve faster and smarter then the other ? Provided that their ancestors were the same monkey/humanoid origin. Yet they were different in so many ways.

Evolution does not have the whole story on where we came from and in what order.

Our ancestors were eight feet tall?!
This is definitely news to me.
Well you learn something new everyday

Originally posted by astroblade
anyone else noticed the date on this article....."Wednesday, 10 July, 2002, 18:00 GMT 19:00 UK"......THIS STORY IS 2 YEARS OLD!!!!plus, if i remember correctly, this find, for one reason or another, didn't radically shake the scientific community.

That would mean it's even older than we thought.

Originally posted by Belgarath

That would mean it's even older than we thought.

Oh my God, are you trying to tell me that the skull is 7 million and...and...two years old!?!?!