Started By
Message
Skeleton discovered in 1922, confirmed to be from Ur.. circa 6500 BC
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:16 pm
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:16 pm
quote:
The skeleton lay hidden in a crate in the “mummy room” of the museum for decades. Curators at the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology (Penn Museum) knew about it, but had no idea who lay buried there—or even in what long-ago era he had lived. Now, a careful examination of records has revealed his identity: The bones belong to a man who lived in the ancient Mesopotamian kingdom of Ur, 6500 years ago. They may be the oldest known from this early city, located in present-day Iraq.
quote:
The Penn Museum has a large collection of artifacts from Ur, because in 1922, British archaeologist Sir Leonard Woolley led a famous series of excavations there, a joint operation between the British Museum and Penn, bringing back precious stones and pottery, and uncovering an ancient human sacrifice. But researchers thought that the 30 excavated skeletons were shipped back to London and that Penn received only artifacts
quote:
The ancient man appears to have been about 50 and led a healthy life. He stood about 1.7 meters tall—huge for the period, when people averaged about 1.6 meters, Hafford said. (About 5'5")
quote:
Monge already has a plan for studying the bones. A CT scan is a top priority, to confirm whether the man was as healthy as he looks. Researchers also may be able to extract DNA from his exceptionally well preserved teeth or use isotopic chemical analysis to discover what he ate.
But the skeleton can tell us much more than his personal habits, says Richard Zettler, curator-in-charge of the museum’s Near East section. “The remains come from a period of great change,” when people were just beginning to organize into city-states, Zettler notes
Will be interesting to see what they can discover upon testing, seeing as this is around the birth of organized civilization. The city of Ur gave way to what many say are the first laws of man with the Code of Ur-Nammu. As well as having mention in Biblical text and suggested as the birthplace of Abraham.
LINK
4
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:23 pm to Alahunter
quote:
As well as having mention in Biblical text and suggested as the birthplace of Abraham.
Impossible. I learned on the rant that the bible is nothing but a fictional universe, like Marvel or HP.
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:26 pm to Alahunter
That would make it older than earth. So I'm kinda skeptical.
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:30 pm to Alahunter
I have it under good authority that Abram did not exist.
"By the beginning of the 21st century, and despite sporadic attempts by more conservative scholars such as Kenneth Kitchen to save the patriarchal narratives as history, archaeologists had "given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac or Jacob credible 'historical figures'"
So put that in your juicebox and suck it.
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:32 pm to Grizzley
quote:
That would make it older than earth. So I'm kinda skeptical.
I think the typical Creation Narrative is something like ~6,500 and 10,500 as far as I know. so that's actually right when Earth was created for this fellow. Probably Enoch or something.
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:53 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Gentleman, I think we've found Adam.
Posted on 8/7/14 at 8:58 pm to Stacked
quote:
Gentleman, I think we've found Adam.
Posted on 8/7/14 at 9:13 pm to Alahunter
quote:
6500 years ago
Didn't happen
Posted on 8/8/14 at 9:15 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
I think the typical Creation Narrative is something like ~6,500 and 10,500 as far as I know. so that's actually right when Earth was created for this fellow. Probably Enoch or something.
Pretty sure its true you science hating hack.
LINK
quote:
The results from some radiometric dating methods completely undermine those from the other radiometric methods. One such example is carbon-14 (14C) dating. As long as an organism is alive, it takes in 14C and 12C from the atmosphere; however, when it dies, the carbon intake stops. Since 14C is radioactive (decays into 14N), the amount of 14C in a dead organism gets less and less over time. Carbon-14 dates are determined from the measured ratio of radioactive carbon-14 to normal carbon-12 (14C/12C). Used on samples that were once alive, such as wood or bone, the measured 14C/12C ratio is compared with the ratio in living things today.
Now, 14C has a derived half-life of 5,730 years, so the 14C in organic material supposedly 100,000 years old should all essentially have decayed into nitrogen.19 Some things, such as wood trapped in lava flows, said to be millions of years old by other radiometric dating methods, still have 14C in them.20 If the items were really millions of years old, then they shouldn’t have any traces of 14C. Coal and diamonds, which are found in or sandwiched between rock layers allegedly millions of years old, have been shown to have 14C ages of only tens of thousands of years.21 So which date, if any, is correct? The diamonds or coal can’t be millions of years old if they have any traces of 14C still in them. This shows that these dating methods are completely unreliable and indicates that the presumed assumptions in the methods are erroneous.
Come at be bro, I'm in a fighting mood today.
This post was edited on 8/8/14 at 9:16 am
Posted on 8/8/14 at 10:12 am to cokebottleag
Radioactive materials' rate of decay is not a constant rate, it is an exponential one. It takes 5730 years for half of a given sample of c-14 to decay, it may be thought that after 11460 years that there would be no c-14 left, but that's incorrorect. In fact, there would still be 25% of it left. After another half life, there would be 12.5% and on and on. The less radioactive material there is, the less decays, but it's always half over the period of a half life, no matter how imperceptibly small that amount may be. Hence, these radioactive materials never reay completely degrade and there always tiny trace amounts that can be used to date things. The accuracy of the techniques used to measure these increadibly tiny amounts is open to criticism, but not the validity of the process itself.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 10:37 am to cokebottleag
quote:
Pretty sure its true you science hating hack.
I don't believe the Earth is ~6,500 years old, just the acknowledgment of the narrative.
They're trying to link this to Abram even though he was something like 2,000 years after this guy.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 2:25 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
Come at be bro, I'm in a fighting mood today
We can't all copy and paste from "Answers in Genesis"
Posted on 8/8/14 at 2:49 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
Impossible. I learned on the rant that the bible is nothing but a fictional universe, like Marvel or HP.
The Bible is a fairy tale.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 3:18 pm to TeLeFaWx
I'm not sure I would say that.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 3:22 pm to Reservoir dawg
Maybe not a fairy tale but a lot of it, like a campfire story told from generation to generation, was exaggerated(jesus walking on water/coming back from the dead etc). Don't get me wrong, I think he was a real guy. Just don't believe he performed miracles.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 4:35 pm to The Dutch Oven
Jesus was a liberal progressive political leader who completely changed traditional biblical teachings. Compare his teachings with those in the Old Testament, night and day difference.
For all we know Jesus was just a man claiming son of God, and everyone who follows him is going against the real Gods heavy handed ways.
Who really knows? I'm a Christian but I love analyzing different possibilities...I believe in a Creator but acknowledge that Christianity could be entirely wrong and we were misled by a political cult of personality. Which would explain why the Jews killed him
For all we know Jesus was just a man claiming son of God, and everyone who follows him is going against the real Gods heavy handed ways.
Who really knows? I'm a Christian but I love analyzing different possibilities...I believe in a Creator but acknowledge that Christianity could be entirely wrong and we were misled by a political cult of personality. Which would explain why the Jews killed him
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News