Like most of us with interest in these matters I've done some reading on Sumer
(and later Babylonia) and separately on ancient Egypt. Today was browsing those
OOPARTS (at a creationist site) and came across an image they said was evidence
for dinosaurs in human history. It was a Sumerian (Mesopotamian) cylinder seal,
and its impression, showing two long-necked `saurians' with their necks
intertwined. It is at the Louvre Museum in Paris and is dated to 3,300 BCE. That
immediately reminded me of `Narmer's Palette' which, on the back has a similar
image of intertwined saurians. Wiki says that `Palette' dates to 3,100 BCE and
Egyptologists (the most opinionated and least intelligent `scientists' I know
of) say the two saurians represent the unification of Egypt - Crap!
Now most `experts' claim there wasn't any interaction between Sumer and Egypt
(although they were both active at the same time and not too far away from each
other) mainly on the basis that there was no linkage of Sumerian writing
(cuneiform) with Egyptian hieroglyphs.
So what do these almost identical images (of `impossible' dinosaurs, one found
in Egypt and one in Sumer), actually mean?
Ray
Original subject: Non-excluded Middles [was: Dinosaurs and Humans]
Non-excluded Middles [was: Dinosaurs and Humans]
Many so-called scientists use the `law of excluded middle' (which really should
only be used in mathematics, and carefully even then) whereby they make a
proposition, then prove that its opposite (or negation) is untrue, and so
automatically conclude their proposition MUST be true.
Not so!
So I feel able to make use of data from sources which seem to be opposed to each
other's ideas or concepts. And the good thing about `convinced' or even
fanatical folk is that they have the motivation to do lots of weary research -
as these creationist folk have done for this excellent video.
"Dinosaur didn't die 65 millions years ago, they are still alive today"
Like they say: how could all those folk, all over the world, throughout history,
make accurate drawings, carvings and even written accounts of what we now know
as various types of real dinosaurs if they hadn't actually seen them, or at
least had recent accounts of them?
Cheers
Ray D
PS - note for modern `scientists' - being convinced and wrong feels exactly the
same as being convinced and right.
