Biblical history vs. Modern Archaeology

Patristic theology, and traditional teachings of Orthodoxy from the Church fathers of apostolic times to the present. All forum Rules apply. No polemics. No heated discussions. No name-calling.

Moderators: Maria, phpBB2 - Administrators

User avatar
Maria
Archon
Posts: 8018
Joined: Sat 12 June 2004 12:39 am
Faith: True Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOC
Location: USA

Biblical history vs. Modern Archaeology

Postby Maria » Tue 13 January 2015 2:02 am

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2005 ... are_btn_fb

    It appeared to be one of archaeology's most sensational finds. The skull fragment discovered in a peat bog near Hamburg was more than 36,000 years old - and was the vital missing link between modern humans and Neanderthals.

    This, at least, is what Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten - a distinguished, cigar-smoking German anthropologist - told his scientific colleagues, to global acclaim, after being invited to date the extremely rare skull.

    However, the professor's 30-year-old academic career has now ended in disgrace after the revelation that he systematically falsified the dates on this and numerous other "stone age" relics.

This news article dates back to 2005. Have modern archaeological texts been republished to rectify the errors of this modern fraud?
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.

User avatar
Barbara
Protoposter
Posts: 3447
Joined: Sat 29 September 2012 10:03 pm

Re: Biblical history vs. Modern Archaeology

Postby Barbara » Tue 13 January 2015 3:39 am

Good that the truth got out here ! I hate that kind of connection made to gorillas/monkeys. Now we know that
such things are FORCED, either by individuals or organizations or pressure groups, so that Creationists will be
discredited entirely.
Now the truth came out, so their tactics backfired ! I wouldn't put it past some of the "scientists" to create
some artificial replica and announce that THAT one will be "the missing link". I know they will keep trying....

Like many lies, it is unlikely that the texts have been corrected fully or promptly. Or if so, in such a tiny footnote
that no one will take the time to read it ! Same with newspapers and magazine articles on many subjects today.
It's an old tactic.


Return to “Theology and Tradition”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests