1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ANTHROPOLOGY.PALEO

  • Evidence vs logic

    From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to All on Thu Sep 21 11:19:39 2023
    I am claiming that people were much more advanced than what science is
    claiming. Science is using evidence, I am using logic. The latest
    evidence of wooden structure is 476 ky old. How old was the previous
    evidence? 9 ky.
    So, science concluded that people weren't advanced based on 9 ky old
    evidence. Why they are not using logic instead? Logic is much more accurate.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to Mario Petrinovic on Sat Sep 23 01:36:55 2023
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:

    I am claiming that people were much more advanced than what
    science is claiming.

    Paleo anthropology isn't a science.

    Science is using evidence, I am using logic.

    The problem with logic is that we think it's "a" thing when in fact
    there's as many different versions as there are people.

    The latest
    evidence of wooden structure is 476 ky old.

    Bullshit.

    Remember THIS:

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/144203370383

    There is a never ending flood of absolute BULLSHIT claims
    made by the fraudulent pseudo science. But, when it
    comes to the Out of Africa purity idiocy, they throw the
    bullshit into overdrive... or they start feeding laxatives to
    the bulls.

    And in this particular case, the incredibly UNscientific
    selection bias is working overtime:

    https://deeprootsafrica.blog

    Yeah, THAT'S who "Found" and are making these claims.
    They're actually telling you that they're not looking for
    human origins. They're telling you that THEY KNOW
    human origins already, and all they're doing is digging
    in Africa, where they already decided humans originated,
    looking for those humans...

    It's EXACLY what "Biblical Archaeologists" do, only they're
    honest about it. The Biblical Archaeologist are honest. Not
    the paleo anthropologists.

    How old was the previous evidence?

    About 400,000 years old. In France. Terra Amata.

    So, science concluded that people weren't advanced based
    on 9 ky old evidence.

    If they find a broken rock in Africa: Tools! *Billions* of them!
    Dig down a meter or METERS and you keep finding hand
    axes... acres of them...

    If they find a '57 Cadillac in the Americas: Geofact! Totally
    natural. It just looks man made.






    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/144203370383

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM is so reasonable on Sat Sep 23 12:27:02 2023
    On 23.9.2023. 10:36, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:

    I am claiming that people were much more advanced than what
    science is claiming.

    Paleo anthropology isn't a science.

    Science is using evidence, I am using logic.

    The problem with logic is that we think it's "a" thing when in fact
    there's as many different versions as there are people.

    Well, this isn't the fault of the logic, it is the fault of people who
    are delusional, just like you are.

    The latest
    evidence of wooden structure is 476 ky old.

    How old was the previous evidence?

    About 400,000 years old. In France. Terra Amata.

    Everybody, except you, know that those two things aren't the same.
    Something is terribly wrong with you if you make such superficial
    conclusions.

    So, science concluded that people weren't advanced based
    on 9 ky old evidence.

    If they find a broken rock in Africa: Tools! *Billions* of them!
    Dig down a meter or METERS and you keep finding hand
    axes... acres of them...

    If they find a '57 Cadillac in the Americas: Geofact! Totally
    natural. It just looks man made.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM is so reasonable on Sat Sep 23 17:07:12 2023
    On 23.9.2023. 16:57, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:
    JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:
    How old was the previous evidence?

    About 400,000 years old. In France. Terra Amata.

    Everybody, except you, know that those two things aren't the same.

    You're barking at the moon again... incoherent gibberish.

    Fake science: "France? No way! It's just a rock that looks like wood
    or something."

    Fake science: "It looks like a notch on this wood in Africa! The Spruce Goose was made of wood, CLEARLY they were building airplanes in
    Africa 8 million years ago! Plus Naledi invented Calculus."

    Again, very superficial thinking.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to Mario Petrinovic on Sat Sep 23 07:57:17 2023
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:

    JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

    Mario Petrinovic wrote:
    How old was the previous evidence?

    About 400,000 years old. In France. Terra Amata.

    Everybody, except you, know that those two things aren't the same.

    You're barking at the moon again... incoherent gibberish.

    Fake science: "France? No way! It's just a rock that looks like wood
    or something."

    Fake science: "It looks like a notch on this wood in Africa! The Spruce
    Goose was made of wood, CLEARLY they were building airplanes in
    Africa 8 million years ago! Plus Naledi invented Calculus."




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/144203370383

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to Mario Petrinovic on Sat Sep 23 09:40:58 2023
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:

    Again, very superficial thinking.

    Of course it is! And I just said that!

    The people promoting the social program here, pretending
    that they're finding billion year old houses, organized to
    "Prove" their pre conceived notions.

    Or "a-prior assumptions," if you prefer.

    They made up their minds and are hunting for rationalizations
    at this point. Everything is interpreted with the framework of
    their conclusions. Their conclusion isn't arrived at, they are
    hunting for excuses to justify it.

    Here: https://deeprootsafrica.blog

    Read it for the first time.




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728481130049896448

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)