Of course, but we use what we have. Israel was never a tropical paradise. Just not enough ground water. Do want me to start showing you geological findings? You can do that on your own, too boring for me. There's plenty of evidence, geological evidence, that the Negev was a desert more than 500k years ago.
“Teeth from a fossilized portion of a modern human upper jaw, c found in Israel’s Misliya Cave date to between 177,000 and 194,000 years old, which suggests that modern humans were present in the Levant at least 50,000 years earlier than previously thought.”
Modern Human Fossil in Israel Pushes Back Migration Dates - Archaeology Magazine
This may push back the timeline for human origins back a bit.
And year after year, long accepted theories are blown out of the water by new theories.
We attempt to make the best of what we've got. Doesn't warrant being correct or mistaken.
Even after proving his theories were functional, Alexander Graham Bell was confronted by criticism from the then president of Western Union, who claimed men would never want to speak to each other over wires. Obviously, the man knew nothing of women. Prior to germ theory, surgeons saw no reason to wash their hands, and followed the general theory prevalent in Europe, bathing could make you sick. Everyone knew night vapors were the cause of diseases.
Please pass me that bottle of hand sanitizer. We're still most likely to contract sepsis infections on battlefields and in hospitals, especially the latter.
Diabetes is a disease. Modern theory says no, diabetes is a collective definition of symptoms which may or may not have common cause and therefore it is not a disease.
Modern research shows the brain manufactures a form of insulin which plays no known role for blood sugar metabolization control. No one yet understands the function of this form of insulin. Do you have a explanative theory?
Yes, theories can be proven wrong, but to simply say "It's just a theory, doesn't mean anything" would be a bad argument.
That's why I've said nothing like that. On the other hand, using theories as if they were facts and a closed case, merely because they are generally accepted, is a far poorer excuse for intellect.
I don’t believe that’s true....even the Sahara and Arabian deserts were wet at some point- 40,000 and 12,000 years ago, respectively.
https://www.thenational.ae/uae/when...ed-early-man-make-leap-out-of-africa-1.114720
The three oldest known deserts and the geological underpinnings can easily be researched. It's a question of substrata, earthquakes, volcanoes and such. The Negev and the Gobi both about 1.65 mil years old, with the Tanami more than 1.75 million years of age. There is water under the Peninsula and that desert stretch can be revived. The Sahara is a very different story. Wherever Arabs have gone there is desert. No, that's not anti islamic, there are Jewish, Christian and Mari Arabs. You still need to learn the differences between types of deserts. And the most populous islamic nation is not an Arab nation, nor does it have any deserts.
Enjoy doing the research. Time for me to start preparing dinner for the wife and myself. Last night was takeout, and we're still suffering from over eating. I need to come up with a light, but fulfilling meal, and I've been procrastinating.
A lot of date playing here by the media. I first read about this find a few years ago, in one of the Israeli newspapers, before any peer reviews were available. Look around, you'll find more than a few similar finds in areas of Europe, particularly Spain, Europe, and most recently the British Isles, the Russian steppes, various parts of China, even in South and Central America, with dating analysis reaching as far back as 400k years ago. Questions, of course about dating methods, since these finds challenge the currently popular out of Africa theories and a rigid archeological and anthropological status quo. No one is venturing a guess about human remains, modern human remains found recently in Australia, possibility dating back 300k years, well before any known migrations to the subcontinent can be established.
Unfortunately, our theorists are stuck with evidence that has been found, not found yet doesn't enter the equations. But it looks like the the out of Africa theories may be biting the dust, along with the concept of a single common progenitor species. Denisovans comes to mind, how many others we haven't begun to speculate about as we develop better DNA and now RNA analytical tools. It may well come to a point whereby we no longer need to rely on fossil finds, there may be living evidence. Sheer speculation now, may become meatier with more time passing.
It was believed that the Gaelic language was imported to Eire. Recent linguistic theory is beginning to show the opposite. While the Romans invented the Celts to explain those they found in lands they conquered and make for a common culturally united enemy, and historians along with linguists traced the language back to India when East Indian Company troops found bagpipe players in northern India, and Gaelic speaking Irish travelers to the Pyrenees found they could easily understand some of the Basque languages. More recent examination of the cultural paths show the cultural migration may have been reversed for political reasons, and in fact the cultural migration may have started is Eire, export both northeasterly and southerly. The Etruscans who the Romans absorbed as second citizens of Rome (the first citizens actually a bunch of Greeks from Asia Minor), were Celts by Roman definition.
Recent examinations of the Catalan language showing it is not related to Spanish, vulgar Latin spoken by the Romans who colonised the Tarragona area along with recognizable Gaelic words and phrases, but more important Gaelic speaking rhythms, indicate, along with other "forgotten, not so forgotten" much older Iberian and southern French languages indicated evidence of that Gaelic migration.
"I'm so confused." Vinnie Barbarino
Perhaps even a reason to re-examine your signature line, "there's more to the apple than meets the mind at first look." Here we have a lesson about the superficial pondering of mankind, use it.
My understanding is:
Basque is a language isolate.
Catalan is a Romance language, different branch than Spanish but still related.
Most European languages fall under the Indo-European family of languages, not all.
Where did you get this information I have not come across it before?
Oh, you’ll find him a font of information no one has ever come across before!
Oh! Lol
Blackhawk fan eh? Good club.
I guess a blizzard of irrelevant facts allows you to avoid the point...which is that the entry to the Middle East from Africa was not restricted by vast desert as it is today, and Mesopotamia (which has nothing to do with the Negev desert) was a wetland in the Neolithic and probably before that, too.
My understanding is:
Basque is a language isolate.
Catalan is a Romance language, different branch than Spanish but still related.
Most European languages fall under the Indo-European family of languages, not all.
Where did you get this information I have not come across it before?
https://www.jstor.org/journal/jlinguistics Have a field day. Theories abound. Theories are not facts.
Thank you
“Teeth from a fossilized portion of a modern human upper jaw, c found in Israel’s Misliya Cave date to between 177,000 and 194,000 years old, which suggests that modern humans were present in the Levant at least 50,000 years earlier than previously thought.”
Modern Human Fossil in Israel Pushes Back Migration Dates - Archaeology Magazine
This may push back the timeline for human origins back a bit.
Here come the theorists:
https://gizmodo.com/advanced-stone-tools-found-in-india-may-change-timeline-1822588376
Your point?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?