Tervuren |
07-17-2019 07:13 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by masraum
(Post 10526316)
I'm not an archeologist, and I didn't stay in any sort of hotel last night, but I think your uncle is right in many ways. I think lots of scientists over the years and possibly still many/most think that ancient man was primitive and couldn't figure much stuff out. I think that's short sited. I think a lot more went on than scientists think. I think man has always done a lot of traveling, probably mostly by foot or animal, but also by boat that science has always thought was unlikely. I think that a lot more was known by the folks way back than they are given credit for. Just because we don't have a written record doesn't mean that it wasn't complex.
|
Great Uncle, he was retired from being active on the front edge about the time I was born.
He lived a long trek away, wish I could have spent more time listening to him. Brilliant, very knowledgeable; he had an attribute I admire of some one who posses these, an attitude that acknowledged he could be dead wrong.
He could easily separate information from conjecture. In teaching, he would give the information and conjecture separately. Much of his contrarian conjecture is playing out in new information in my life time. The mainstream conjecture of his day is not fairing as well.
He made it known that our initial bias causes us to lower or raise the value of particular information in order to paint the picture we desire. You can create entirely different pictures from the same set of paint.
The more one knows the greater the boundaries of what they recognize they do not know.
I am not a firm believer in steady continuous unnoticeable change. Rapid change is becoming more and more evident.
|