Rambling postulations

[pwd72s]

Why is this thread continuing? I told everybody long ago that the answer is cat.

[afterburn 549]

OK
Cats- Cats can be traced back to about 12 million years ago, quite awhile, and yet they are quite the same .
Oh they may be bigger smaller, different color etc.
Now what about humanoids?
We will be truly grasping in the wind if we say 80,000 years ago.
But never the less some will say 135,000 or 200000 years ago, it is only a blink, a boink in time compared top the rest of known breathers.
Whichever year you wish to grasp the answer is, is a SO SHORT TIME ago, comparatively speaking to other known species.
So no the cat is not the answer.
They have remained pretty much as they were /are for millions of years.
The human is almost an unwelcomed pest that landed here by some mistake .
However, how come we can really only trace them back about 6000 years?
If they (we) have been around for so long......
I truly doubt our brains changed much between now and 6000 years ago or 600 years B4 that.
Yet 6000 years ago they started to articulate words..........

I ramble yes, i postulate yes.
But the frame work for the answer is there, or at least the question.
Once we look at the 3.5 billion year timeline, and so many other creatures..no humanoids.
Until a minute ago.
Boink, blink whichever you choose.
IF we evolved ( and this is NOT to be construed as any other argument or postulation as stated )
It should be EZ to see the trail of misfits and misery.
blink.

[Hawkeye's-911T]

Some of this stuff harkens back (in a left-handed sort of way) to a piece posted in the past by another member of this board:

The Most Annoyingly Obtuse Argument

Cheers
JB

[afterburn 549]

When we get to the obtuse , then, we have to introduce the monolithic's.
it is much more simpler, and a lot more EZ to keep a tangent in the linear.
There is no use in haveing to induce shear vectors for sake of some prior ramblings.
This is all brand new vernacular and has a mean baseline.
We can pardon mistakes made in the quest of the circumference without the petty beatitudes .
Let us focus on the form follows function segment, followed the distance used in the ticker tape time line using the 1/4 inch increments per 100 hundred years.

[stevej37]

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

When we get to the obtuse , then, we have to introduce the monolithic's.
it is much more simpler, and a lot more EZ to keep a tangent in the linear.
There is no use in haveing to induce shear vectors for sake of some prior ramblings.
This is all brand new vernacular and has a mean baseline.
We can pardon mistakes made in the quest of the circumference without the petty beatitudes .
Let us focus on the form follows function segment, followed the distance used in the ticker tape time line using the 1/4 inch increments per 100 hundred years.

Totally agree with you.

[rcooled]

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

If the pyramids were around B4 the flood they would be full of silt or there was no flood, or, as many believe the Egyptians built them.

First of all, the Great Flood mentioned in the Bible wasn't global. Most likely a regional event, like maybe the Mediterranean breaching the Bosporus and creating or enlarging what is now the Black Sea.

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

No matter how the math is done, they would take longer to build then most of the royalty lived.
Being a block would have to go into place something like every 3 minutes to "getter" done in 20 years.

New theories on the construction of the Great Pyramid suggest that it may not be made up of solid blocks all the way thru after all. The new thinking goes on to say that the outer 'skin' of the pyramid is indeed made up of solid stone blocks...maybe several courses deep...but the inner core is composed mostly of unused stone and the rubble left over from dressing the precisely-cut outer blocks. The final shaping of the outer blocks would've resulted in massive quantities of scrap material, yet there is no evidence of such debris anywhere near the pyramid site.
One of the real astounding aspects of pyramid construction is the level of organization required for a project of such immense scale. Tens of thousands of mostly-illiterate workers had to be trained, housed, fed and supervised so that their efforts combined seamlessly to produce the result that we see today. Try managing a half-dozen sub-contractors to remodel or build a house these days and you'll see what the ancient Egyptians were up against.
It's also been suggested that the Great Pyramid at Giza was actually a site for religious ceremony rather than for a burial...thus no interior decorations as found in the royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings.

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

Why do they continue to call the lost treasure of Oak Island just that, when it is perfectly obvious it was a mining operation long ceased...

It's because the Lagina brothers sold the History Channel a bill of goods and convinced them to bring their cameras out to film them trying to dig up some kind of "treasure". More reality TV shenanigans. The Oak Island site is most likely either an old mining operation as you suggest, or a salt processing facility. Back in the 18th century, salt was a valuable commodity and heavily taxed by the government. Oak Island was sufficiently remote at the time to enable salt to be processed and sold without attracting the attention of govt. tax collectors. This is all very similar to the way moonshiners still operate today in remote parts of the Ozarks.
How the heck was anyone back in the day supposed to recover this "treasure" anyway, if dozens of attempts at digging it up with modern equipment have all failed?

[Hawkeye's-911T]

How the heck was anyone back in the day supposed to recover this "treasure" anyway, if dozens of attempts at digging it up with modern equipment have all failed?

Straying from thread theme a tich but - Touché. All of it certainly begs the question.

Cheers
JB

[afterburn 549]

We can certainly ponder the largeness, the whereabouts of the flood.
It is almost a moot point, as it either happened or it did not.
If they find the Ark many people will gasp.!
I will postulate that the flood did occur, as every culture on earth is said to have it in their history.
Back to pyramids.
Lets say- pyramids and agendas.
It is a great benefit to Egyptian tourism, nationalism and several other "isms" to teach that the pyramids are part of the Egyptian culture.
It is not by mistake that they sort of teach that the Kings were at first laid to rest in them.
What is not taught is sort of suggested.
I ask you to walk up to almost anyone and ask them, "who was buried in the pyramids?"
Almost everyone will say, Egyptian mummies, kings, ETC.
That is just one of the lies that trespasses most everyone.
Yet no one blinks an eye.
My point- the Egyptians lay claim to them, and almost no one refutes it as it is taught as fact without any fact at all!
If history goes back 10, 12, 30 thousand years as it should...many civilizations have risen and fallen.
Those pyramids have given up no clues as to how old they are.
Yet, other "works" around Egypt have.
The great monuments still have old copper tools buried next to them.
But the pyramids give up no secrets
Again, it makes no sense at all humans started writing just six thousand years ago.
If that is actually true, we have a problem not accepted by the mainstream and that is some sort of creation occurred like it or not.
BUT- that does not even explain RH pos/neg.
Or humans with 3 chamber hearts .
Like I say- we have some very important pages missing and, no one seems to care.

[MRM]

Well clearly the answer lies with superfluous apostrophes and sentence fragments.

[afterburn 549]

Originally Posted by MRM

Well clearly the answer lies with superfluous apostrophes and sentence fragments.

After your diligent study of this thread, that is all you have to offer?
Truly an embarrassment for you is it not?
Combined with small dendrite action of low HP to even see why it would be embarrassing for you.
Your study of apostrophes, sentence fragments, dots, dashes is the main course here?
You come here and table up punctuation as the idea worth grasping for?
Late at night when contemplating life, time lines, extra vertebrae in some humanoids, you gravitate to sentence structure and overtures over and whimsical Mary Poppins nursery rhymes?
Really?
Tht is your choice?
Is that all you bring here?
Disappointing truly.
Totoaly unworthy.
Perhaps you are like a 4-year-old with mommy at her work, and you discovered a bug flying about, and you just have to interrupt your mother .
She now has to give you some sort of validation, say to MRM "Oh how wonderful for you MRM that you did this!
Is that what we have to do for you?
Validate your little sentince structure correction service here?
Bow dwn and honor you with "OH my how right you are little MRM"
Say " oh how wonderfull for you , you have discovered proper puntuation in your boorish little life ?"



Medical Journal A1 A, exhibit b, line 3 chapter 40 page 10 says- " lack of testosterone creates a sort of wannabe internet school marm nazi syndrome."
Something about indecision and a monthly curse.
Where no real cause in life, lack of direction, living at mums home, with wheels under it, all have ties to this problem.
Effeminate men are more prone to this attribute than others..
DNA scoring is a problem because, one, of the lack of procreation, cancels it out,
Yet it keeps raising its head.
It is a "which came first thing, the chicken or the egg deal."
Usually, the cure is reading books with ideas that will help one find direction in life, creating original ideas, metamorphosing into adulthood without a long track record of child abuse and repeating offenses.
This editing syndrome is quantitive with other anemic masculine qualities.
The other antidote is testosterone shots and other scheduled maintenance.
Postulations include too much TV with Rosie Donald, soap operas, drag queen shows etc.
Do try to find a way to get some calluses on your hands without masturbating being the cause.

[DanielDudley]

Don't derail your own train. This thread could have legs.

[afterburn 549]

Humor is a must.

I am waiting for postulations from others on the
Mathematical discrepancies that we have been forced to say yes to.
Examine the timeline even from the most elementary is gigantic oxymoronic
symbolism with hardly a place for the humanoids.

[Jim Richards]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/monkey-say-monkey-do-baboons-can-make-humanlike-speech-sounds/

[afterburn 549]

Study this for a minute and visualize / realize what we have been talking about.
Look at the time chasm between 150,000 years ag0 and say a million.
If we can or want to use evolution, what could happen in a 100000 years?
If it is evolution, its faster then ball lightnin !

World History Timeline | Visual.ly


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timelines_of_world_history

[Hawkeye's-911T]

In light of some of the foregoing - maybe it is time to resurrect this article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18524911.600-13-things-that-do-not-make-sense/#.U_ox_4dOWM8

Cheers
JB

[afterburn 549]

Tis a good read!
thanx
I know a little about dark matter, and god particles......paraludes for sure

[afterburn 549]

What I do know is -science and archeology seem to be at odds with any common sense unless one ha an emotional agenda to prove something unprovable.
To me, the facts seem to rail in the face of postulating the evidence of early man.
If man was walking around 10000 to 15000 years ago he should have been smart enough to write something down.
This is a great chasm to deal with "why the earliest writings do not go back no more than 4 to 6000 years ago.
Then, claim in the next breath they (we) have been here a much longer period of time.
This makes no logical cognitive accumulative connection.'It seems to be an assertion rather than a stated theory with no basis.

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

What I do know is -science and archeology seem to be at odds with any common sense unless one ha an emotional agenda to prove something unprovable.
To me, the facts seem to rail in the face of postulating the evidence of early man.
If man was walking around 10000 to 15000 years ago he should have been smart enough to write something down.
This is a great chasm to deal with "why the earliest writings do not go back no more than 4 to 6000 years ago.
Then, claim in the next breath they (we) have been here a much longer period of time.
This makes no logical cognitive accumulative connection.'It seems to be an assertion rather than a stated theory with no basis.

My Great Uncle was an archaeologist, he noted that mankind appeared to have the same base level of intelligence through out human history.

The problem I personally see, is that Darwinism became popular around the same time we started making significant inroads into digging up our pasts. Our base, or start, in archaeology is rooted in a heavy bias driving conclusions off belief rather than fact.

Conclusions based on Darwinist believers of over a hundred years ago in the field of archaeology do not appear to have been re-evaluated, even when we no longer accept those same conclusions as they relate to other conclusions by Darwinist; such as white's being a higher order of evolution than blacks.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

What I do know is -science and archeology seem to be at odds with any common sense unless one ha an emotional agenda to prove something unprovable.
To me, the facts seem to rail in the face of postulating the evidence of early man.
If man was walking around 10000 to 15000 years ago he should have been smart enough to write something down.
This is a great chasm to deal with "why the earliest writings do not go back no more than 4 to 6000 years ago.

It's even worse than that. Why wasn't man building computers and traveling to the moon and, for that matter, why wasn't he building cold fusion reactors?

I suspect writing, like a lot of other inventions, didn't come along until it was needed. If everyone you know is within earshot, why take time off from eating and breeding to do something as useless as write?

[afterburn 549]

WDFTEEN-
IDK- but your slant is we have come a long way in 6000 years?
people are no smarter but information more readily available?
WHY
You could real EZ argue,
everything.
EVERYTHING has remained the same, unchanged until the late 1800s
We went from horse and carriage to the moon in less then a hundred years.
No one seems surprised by this.
Its a total gigantic step in less than a universal 1/100th of SECOND!

Tevrven,
True,
Darwin said himself in the preamble of his book his theory will be proved true or not in a short time.
When we look at the fossil record we should see slow changes.
We see leaps.
In fact, we could we say, are they just new discoveries and did not change?
Its possible.
IDK
For conversation, we have to look at the many species that have remained unchanged since the beginning of times.
It would seem everything should migrate (evolve to better)
Everything transparently does not evolve.
PLEASE -no one take this as pseudo backdoor biblical advancement. We are just listing facts as they are known)