It is interesting that what you outline, is very close to what I have
proposed. The only exception is that placement of the flood. If there were
a flood with only 8 human survivors, there would be absolutely no way for
pre-flood technology to be transmitted to the subsequent generations.
Anthropology and archaeology clearly show that there has been no sudden
break in technology for the past 2 million years. It shows that the
technology has grown more and more complex over that time frame. Technology
requires specialists and 8 souls aren't enough to maintains all the
specialties. Thus the loss of technology must be prior to 2 million years
ago. The only way out of this is to have a non-anthropologically universal
flood.
>I do not want to follow your rigorous line of argument since all the
>arthopolgoical data are more circumstantial that need a lot of inference
>to make sense. I am currently pursuing a project on analyzing the
>molecular data on a possible scenerio of polyphyletic origins of life,
>which seems to me a more fruitful approach. You probably will not hear
>from me any more on the issue of anthropological evolution.
I would disagree with you on the amount of inference in anthropology. Yes
there is some, but then so is the science inferring the mass of the
neutrino an inference. If we can accept the one, we ought to be able to
accept the other.
I will miss the discussion with you. I would like to leave one parting
thought. One's research program should not ignore the fact that there is
no breack whatsoever in technology over the past 2 million years. Such
data needs to be incorporated in the theory. Here are two examples for your
consideration. The inches of cutting surface per pound of flint has
steadily increased throughout the ancient time.
Source:Chris Stringer and Clive Gamble, In Search of the Neanderthals, (New
York: Thames and Hudson, 1993), p. 55.
from a pound of flint
abbevillean obtained 2 inches of cutting surface H. habilis
Acheulean obtained 8 inches of cutting surface H. erectus
Mousterian obtained 40 inches of cutting surface
Neanderthal/H. sapiens
Magdalenian obtained 40 feet of cutting surface. H. sapiens
And here is the sequence of steps necessary to manufacture that increase in
cutting surface:
"Figure 15-3 Steady progress in the manufacture of tools is traced in this
diagram, which shows how increasing numbers of blows (dots) and of
different steps (clusters of dots) in toolmaking led to finer tools and
more efficient use of raw material. The most primitive tools required 25
blows and one step; the latest and most sophisticated took 251 blows and
nine complex steps." ." ~ Bernard G. Campbell and James D. Loy, Humankind
Emerging, (New York: HarperCollins, 1996), p. 432
early homo erectus hand axe : 1 step 25-blows
Late Homo erectus hand axe: 2 steps: step 1-20 blows; step 2-45 blows
Neanderthal knife:4 steps:step 1--35 blows; step 2-25 blows; step3-1 blow;
step 4-50 blows
Modern human knife:
9 steps: step 1-3 blows; step 2-15 blows; step 3--2 blows; step 4-30
blows; step 5-10 blows; step 6-1 blow; step 7-50 blows; step 9-130 blows.
As you can see it is a progression.
>I would never place the Latin American culture before the flood. This is
>only your interpretation.
No it is not my interpretation of the data. It was my incorrect
understanding of what you wrote. I didn't think you believed that as I
thought I indicated.
My brief reference to these lost cultures were
>only in regards to the possibility of advanced culture being wiped out in
>a short time without leaving behind any anthropological traces. I am not
>qualified or interested in dating the flood with these meager data.
Without dating the flood, it has no reality in earth history.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm