31 Aug '15 02:39>
http://blog.world-mysteries.com/science/top-10-unexplained-ancient-artifacts-fact-or-fiction/
Which ones of these are interesting to those here?
Which ones of these are interesting to those here?
Originally posted by whodeyFrom an archaeological point of view, the Antikythera Mechanism and the Baghdad Battery are both extraordinary finds which genuinely challenge widely accepted beliefs. The Costa Rica stone balls are interesting. Most of the rest of the list has been pretty comprehensively debunked.
http://blog.world-mysteries.com/science/top-10-unexplained-ancient-artifacts-fact-or-fiction/
Which ones of these are interesting to those here?
Originally posted by humyYou sound more like a right winged Young Creationist than a science lover.
Occasionally, genuinely honest mistakes are made when scientifically dating things. Perhaps this link neglects to mention more up-to-date attempts to date these some items that gives a much earlier and credible date to them.
There is also the possibility that some people, desperate for publicity and/or funding, may deliberately give false information about t ...[text shortened]... se this link doesn't rule out the two above vastly more credible possibilities I mentioned here.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatI think we can agree that the vast amount of human history is left unrecorded. Ancient people were highly intelligent, and I dare say on par with those today. Ancient man was not just trying to survive, he was flourishing. I wonder just how modern ancient civilizations like Sumer actually were in comparison to previous ancient civilizations, like Atlantis, that we know nothing about.
From an archaeological point of view, the Antikythera Mechanism and the Baghdad Battery are both extraordinary finds which genuinely challenge widely accepted beliefs. The Costa Rica stone balls are interesting. Most of the rest of the list has been pretty comprehensively debunked.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatModern people immersed in technology tend to underestimate the capabilities of ancient cultures. It is well to remind ourselves that ancient peoples were no less intelligent than we are. They had the same brains we have and were just as curious about nature. They sailed open seas and populated the islands of the Pacific and Indian oceans long before Europeans re-invented navigation with sextants. The Chinese had printing presses and gunpowder well before the Europeans. A great deal of knowledge about the natural world, mathematics, astronomy, and medicine, got 'lost' (suppressed) during the Dark Ages in Europe; some of it was preserved by the Moors and re-discovered / re-invented in Europe later on. We should not be so surprised to re-discover how clever people were before the curtain of blind faith descended upon us.
From an archaeological point of view, the Antikythera Mechanism and the Baghdad Battery are both extraordinary finds which genuinely challenge widely accepted beliefs. The Costa Rica stone balls are interesting. Most of the rest of the list has been pretty comprehensively debunked.
Originally posted by whodeyActually the vast majority of ancient people were not as intelligent as the average person today. Intelligence is determined by both nutrition and education, neither of which were as good in the past. If you go to Zambia today and find some people living on subsistence farming who have not been to school, I can guarantee that you can do any type of intelligence test you like, and you will find them on average to be less intelligence than richer people who have had good quality food growing up and a good education.
I think we can agree that the vast amount of human history is left unrecorded. Ancient people were highly intelligent, and I dare say on par with those today. Ancient man was not just trying to survive, he was flourishing. I wonder just how modern ancient civilizations like Sumer actually were in comparison to previous ancient civilizations, like Atlantis, that we know nothing about.
Originally posted by twhiteheadi think we can also add to that by saying that poor people that live in an economically and socially and sensory poor environment, such as a slum, generally are not in an environment that gives the kind of mental stimulation that encouraging learning and curiosity and this is bound to limit mental development. It is hard to imagine how someone, even if his genes are all favorable for giving him greater intelligence in the right environment, in a dirty crime-ridden slum were he would be constantly mentally distracted by concerning himself with the mundane need for everyday survival, would be mentally simulated to go on to do something to get a Nobel prize in science.
Actually the vast majority of ancient people were not as intelligent as the average person today. Intelligence is determined by both nutrition and education, neither of which were as good in the past. If you go to Zambia today and find some people living on subsistence farming who have not been to school, I can guarantee that you can do any type of intell ...[text shortened]... intelligence than richer people who have had good quality food growing up and a good education.
Originally posted by moonbusI think people just look at ancient civilizations as primitive cause they did not have a cell phone.
Modern people immersed in technology tend to underestimate the capabilities of ancient cultures. It is well to remind ourselves that ancient peoples were no less intelligent than we are. They had the same brains we have and were just as curious about nature. They sailed open seas and populated the islands of the Pacific and Indian oceans long before European ...[text shortened]... rised to re-discover how clever people were before the curtain of blind faith descended upon us.
Originally posted by twhiteheadAnd you derive this belief from what exactly?
Actually the vast majority of ancient people were not as intelligent as the average person today. Intelligence is determined by both nutrition and education, neither of which were as good in the past. If you go to Zambia today and find some people living on subsistence farming who have not been to school, I can guarantee that you can do any type of intell ...[text shortened]... intelligence than richer people who have had good quality food growing up and a good education.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI suspect however that if you were to examine hunter-gatherer societies rather than subsistence agriculturalists the comparison would be rather more interesting and might well end up favouring the ancients.
Actually the vast majority of ancient people were not as intelligent as the average person today. Intelligence is determined by both nutrition and education, neither of which were as good in the past. If you go to Zambia today and find some people living on subsistence farming who have not been to school, I can guarantee that you can do any type of intell ...[text shortened]... intelligence than richer people who have had good quality food growing up and a good education.
Originally posted by whodeyAtlantis?
I think we can agree that the vast amount of human history is left unrecorded. Ancient people were highly intelligent, and I dare say on par with those today. Ancient man was not just trying to survive, he was flourishing. I wonder just how modern ancient civilizations like Sumer actually were in comparison to previous ancient civilizations, like Atlantis, that we know nothing about.
Originally posted by whodeyIn ancient days, for the most part, poor nutrition would mean lower intelligence. That does not mean there will never be the occasional Archimedes (thought to have invented the Antikethera mechanism) but they would have been statistically fewer per thousand population.
And you derive this belief from what exactly?
I am discussing unrecorded human history as I look at unexplained artifacts that prove that ancient intelligence has been underrated.
Originally posted by twhiteheadCare to give some evidence for that? In pre-industrial societies they didn't necessarily have poor nutrition most of the time, what they did have was poor food security and were vulnerable to famines. I'd want some data from bone analyses of ancient skeletons before accepting that claim.
Actually the vast majority of ancient people were not as intelligent as the average person today. Intelligence is determined by both nutrition and education, neither of which were as good in the past. If you go to Zambia today and find some people living on subsistence farming who have not been to school, I can guarantee that you can do any type of intell ...[text shortened]... intelligence than richer people who have had good quality food growing up and a good education.
Originally posted by whodeyWe remember what is important to remember. Only conservatives like you hold on to things because it is traditional to do so without knowing why.
Meanwhile, the average cell phone owner now has no idea what their own telephone number actually is now.