-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
God Recreated the Earth 6,000 Years Ago!
- Thread starter Salvador
- Start date
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
There have been major advancements in all sorts of areas over the many thousands and millions of years, plus there's been a significant changes in human brain configuration over the millions of years of our existence, including a fourfold increase in size.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Very true.
They've taken molds of the inside of the skull of several specimens, and they can see the folding, but also what areas were less evolved than today. One of them were Broca's area if I remember correctly, which makes complete sense.
And comparing a neanderthal skull with a modern sapiens, or even an archaic, it's very obvious differences in brain formation.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
mest: 4218951 said:
I was not suggesting going back into prehistoric times. Just from around the stone age. When man became truely modern.
this is too short a period for changes to be measured even if they exist.
changes since then will have been masked by the natural variation between individuals.
the ancient Greeks invented and construced a mechanism to calculate future astrological events, including eclipses of the sun.
Ancient Greek Computer's Inner Workings Deciphered
This has been extremely hard for modern scientist to visulise and emulate.
Last edited:
outhouse
Atheistically
But he quite clearly stated recorded history. That means in the past few thousand years I believe.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Generally speaking, human evolution is a slow process as we are not fast evolvers. However, with that being said, we now know much more about what is called "brain patterning" than we did even several decades ago.
Studies have shown that children being brought up when very young subject to certain forms of stimuli tend to have a different "brain" after a while as compared to children who are subject to the same stimuli. IOW, the brain is very flexible, much more so than what was previously believed.
With that knowledge, isn't it logical that over many, many generations that there eventually be some physical changes in the brain, such as what we've seen in the past?
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
In time the Brain will have noticeably evolved to better meet our needs. It will probably also evolve in a way that meets no known needs.
It probably has capabilities now, which we do nor understand or make any use of.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Probably.
BTW, I anticipate that in maybe a couple of generations humans will have much more extremely highly developed thumbs because of all the texting the younguns are now doing.
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
That makes the assumption that we don't move past texting into some form of simpler cognitive messaging system by then, simply blinking twice and sending messages straight to someone's retina HUD. Texting will only be around for a little while longer.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
So going by how things are verbalized today, it would be called hudding.
I think it will go even further than that. It will be mind-controlled. Put in a chip. Text your thoughts. Thoughting?
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
Thought winkies will be called "thinkies"So going by how things are verbalized today, it would be called hudding.
I think it will go even further than that. It will be mind-controlled. Put in a chip. Text your thoughts. Thoughting?
Thought texting will be called "thinking"
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
"We don't have to think to survive, so nobody listens..."
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
This is called the "No True Scotsman Fallacy" because as you know there are plenty of schools that teach the Bible as fact, but you wave a magic wand and say they are all "not credible". I could as well say that all people who disbelieve the Bible are not credible. But I think it more reasoned to say I know very credible educators who variously believe or disbelieve in the Bible as fact.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
You mean like a bomb leaves clear traces of the things it blows up? Like a fire leaves clear traces of the paper it consumes?
Oh, wait, this is a universal flood that covers everything. Perhaps it signs itself, "Floody was here!" like graffiti on Everest!
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Like pyramids that are older than the flood that doesn't have water damage and not covered in a mile of mud, like the other supposed strata of animal fossils that supposedly came from the flood. There would be traces of sea life in the pyramids, and there would be traces of many other kinds within the tombs because having them standing under water for a year would make water seep in everywhere. But it didn't.
outhouse
Atheistically
Its not the case.
You obviously don't understand how this fallacy works
So what? they are theological schools and paper diploma mills.
99% of the school teach the opposite of what you follow
outhouse
Atheistically
Because you FACTUALLY refuse modern education and knowledge.