The Most Ancient Creation Story?
by Joy
In the rugged Tsodilo Hills region of the Kalahari Desert in northwestern Botswana, the San people [a.k.a. "Bushmen"] claim a python god first created humanity.
Today it was reported that a rock carving of a python's head and neck as tall as a man and 20 feet long was discovered inside the Rhino Cave along with artifacts at least 70,000 years old.
"You could see the mouth and eyes of the snake. It looked like a real python," said Sheila Coulson of the University of Oslo. "The play of sunlight over the indentations gave them the appearance of snake skin. At night, the firelight gave one the feeling that the snake was actually moving."
Charring of the artifacts indicates some sort of ritual according to Coulson, making this site evidence for human religious behavior 30,000 years before scientists previously believed human beings evolved the intelligence to perform group rituals. Some of the spearheads buried near the python are particularly beautiful, and were brought to the site from hundreds of miles away.
Behind the python carving, scientists found a secret chamber that showed signs of having been used continually over a long period of time. It also contained a secret exit!
"The shaman, who is still a very important person in San culture, could have kept himself hidden in that secret chamber," Coulson explained. "He would have had a good view of the inside of the cave while remaining hidden himself. When he spoke from his hiding place, it could have seemed as if the voice came from the snake itself. The shaman would have been able to control everything. It was perfect."
The cave comports to the full creation mythology of the San people, making it a most extraordinary find. From the LiveScience link:
While cave paintings are common in the Tsodilo Hills, inside the python cave there are just two small paintings, of an elephant and a giraffe. The images were painted at the exact spot where water runs down the wall.
One San story has the python falling into water, unable to get out. It's saved by the giraffe. The elephant, with its long trunk, is often a metaphor for the python in San mythology.
"In the cave, we find only the San people's three most important animals: the python, the elephant, and the giraffe," Coulson said. "That is unusual. This would appear to be a very special place. They did not burn the spearheads by chance. They brought them from hundreds of kilometers away and intentionally burned them. So many pieces of the puzzle fit together here. It has to represent a ritual."
December 2nd, 2006 at 7:28 am
Uh oh. Someone has been using ID theory to ascertain whether something is naturally occuring or designed by an intelligence.
Comment by ehans — December 2, 2006 @ 7:28 am
December 2nd, 2006 at 9:12 am
No, not the most ancient. Again, dating techniques aren't particularly accurate in many cases, and the Genesis Creation story is the true account, and so would obviously have been the "most ancient", though the Torah itself would not have been written earlier than the "Python god" was carved. I would note, though, that such a "god" is quite consistent with Satan's desire to be worshipped, and to replace the true God. It is also consistent with Satan's influence in pagan religions, and in particular in "shamanic" practices (read the book, "The Return of Quetzalcoatl" published just last year).
Yep, the ol' Serpent from the Garden is still trying to sow lying seeds even now, just as then. Nice to see archaeologists are digging up some of his rotten fruit.
Comment by Douglas — December 2, 2006 @ 9:12 am
December 2nd, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Douglas:
Well, there's a bit of a gap between 6,000 and 70,000 years. I thought it was interesting per the "Out of Africa" scenario. Which one camp of antropos are fairly desperate to confirm, while others aren't so convinced. Just months ago they were claiming the ancestors came from Ethiopia instead of Botswana, but Australian sites for 'modern humans' – i.e., not Neandertal – look to be older than any of these.
I find it all very interesting. Some of the Native American mythologies are quite complex as well. Some are ceramic (like the Hebraic tribal ones), others have animist gods doing the creating (like in Botswana). Animism/shamanism was perhaps not the original form of religion, but it is one of the most tenacious. When agronomic civilization arose it moved into pantheons with organized temples and priesthoods, and from there developed toward monotheism (Aten-Ra, forms of Indus Valley cults, the post-exodus Hebraic conception, etc.).
I don't have a problem with the idea that human religions 'evolved', and developed through stages just like other aspects of human culture and civilization. Much of the written textual history describes just that (prior to the Egyptian sojourn the Hebraic tribes maintained personal, household and tribal gods/godlings too). The attention to historical accuracy instituted by the Mosaic scribes and maintained thereafter makes these ancient texts useful for Middle Eastern archaeology, and has pinpointed many of the ancient city-states and confirmed many incidents recorded. So long as one doesn't count the included tribal mythologies as science (both traditions, which were kept on purpose), the cultural history is impeccable.
I understand that you choose to reject evidence of actual history beyond what you interpret from specific [local] tribal creation mythologies. You've got that right and that's fine. But it changes nothing about the anthropological evidence of various cultures, many of which are much, much older than 6,000 years and aren't from the Middle East. You're better off ignoring it rather than trying to discredit it based purely on assertions of your personal beliefs.
Shamanic animism was, IMO, a natural development of tribal socio-cultural 'evolution'. It continues because not all modern humans live in the modern world – these practices serve the tribal instincts and ways of life experienced by a good portion of the human race. Which, I suppose, means they must still experience some personal benefits in their lives from the traditional practices.
Exploration of extant and historical belief systems can be fun and informative. It doesn't mean any explorer has to believe-in the systems s/he explores.
Comment by Joy — December 2, 2006 @ 12:46 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 1:03 pm
Not quite. I reject ideas and beliefs which are clearly contradicted by the truth. In this instance, I reject the idea that there are or have been "various cultures, many of which are much, much older than 6000 years", because that idea is clearly contradicted by the Biblical chronologies regarding the beginning of mankind, which took place roughly around 6000 years ago, and which Jesus Himself acknowledged as an authoritative account (referencing Adam, and specifically Abel, as actual historical persons).
Comment by Douglas — December 2, 2006 @ 1:03 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 2:39 pm
Douglas:
We know your views, Douglas. And as I said, it's fine that you believe as you believe. I'm not looking to change your heart or your mind, I'm just talking about a history that interests me greatly (humanity). Thus the existence of this blog.
I figure Moses had a good reason for including slightly dissonant cultural mythologies of the collection of people he organized and led out of Egypt for the purpose of establishing a great nation – a task he was given by a unitary God he understood better (likely) from the Egyptian development than from the tribal history of a people he didn't know he belonged to until he was grown. Aaron had kept the histories in his role as priest to the community of slaves, and being Moses' brother, he is likely to have organized the scribes once in Midian to formalize the Hebraic script.
It was the beginning of a long and honored tradition. Moses of course knew all about writing (mundane record keeping vernacular and formal heiroglyphic) due to his position in the Egyptian court. He also must have highly valued the monotheistic conception of previous dynasties, even though the Rameses courts had reverted. The most ancient Hebrew script comes from the region of Midian (the copper/turquois mines), where Moses' father-in-law was high priest.
But don't forget these Hebrews also maintained a remnant of shamanistic form, including female oracles (Miriam, as a notable example). They kept reverting to calf worship and to baal worship (there were as many baals as tribes/families), and that human sacrifice was part of the traditions associated with Molech – they didn't give it up without complaint.
The monotheist religion of the Israelites had to be developed, and part of the development was to record the pre-monotheist tribal origin mythologies. You can choose to focus on interpretations of the history written in the books as if it all were written from a single point of view rather than by numbers of scribes representing various developmental stages over a couple thousand years. Yet those books do in fact record a developmental timeline – a sort of 'evolving' of the faith (and of the God concept associated with that faith). Doesn't make any of it less 'true', for the state of culture at its writing or its intended purpose over deep time. The Jews have demonstrated themselves a whole lot more honest about their history than any other ancient culture was. That's objectively valuable too.
The archetypes framed by any binding story (mythology) are of course 'real'. Even long after moderns had rejected all these archetypes as mythological fantasies, Jung established them as primal in humanity's psychological heritage even up to the here and now. Various cultures had different names and stations for them, but they originate from the same source. It was a development to move beyond them as a pantheon of gods/godlings, to the understanding of them as lesser beings from a singular emanation.
Jesus spoke truthfully of Adam and Abel because Adam and Abel (and Eve, and Cain, etc., etc.) were/are actual, and have been personified in history.
Just my interest speaking. You of course will believe as you will.
Comment by Joy — December 2, 2006 @ 2:39 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 4:34 pm
Joy wrote.
This is why the stories of any given religion are far more important than the theological propositions derived from them. It's also why the great preachers are always the best storytellers, not the best debaters. Through the stories the sacred writings and their orators reach into us and touch the archetypes central to our development as a species.
Comment by bj — December 2, 2006 @ 4:34 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I think you get it, bj. The theologies change as the culture 'evolves', but the truth always resides in that which remains most primal to the shared experience over time. And that – if you look past interpretations and ritual practices at any given point in time – really does all spring from the same deep well.
Of course the frozen timeframes of single generations are very seldom amenable to broader understandings than those which are dictated from the priesthood of that generation. And it's only been since our world has become so small with regards to the many subcultures independently developed in ages past that we begin to see the depth of the common wellspring. We could descend into wanton barbarism one subculture against another (as is apparently so easy for human nature to engage), or we could take the opportunity of a broader historical vision offered by a small world to begin seeking the "philosopher's stone" at the bottom of that well.
None of us individually lives long enough to know more than what our cultures hold and pass on to us, plus the tiny scraps that we may as individuals seek out for ourselves. Yet the broader view all cultures assign to that order which is eternal and knows the shape of all things past, present and future can also allow us to approach our own ends without fear. What is true always remains true. What is false is inevitably revealed to be false.
Our individual psychologies – pinpoints of light in a dualistic universe of both light and shadow will allow only so much as they allow to us. This will be a spectrum, but very little of it deserves the scorn that self-worshippers heap upon it (and upon whom scorn is alternatively heaped by reality itself).
Douglas has the whole of the truth his psychology can handle, and that is fine and ultimately useful for him and those who seek from him the spark they need to begin their own journeys toward the the light-giver. Others hide in darkness, projecting like Balinese shadow-puppets a greatly exaggerated farce on the cave wall, a play which they mistake for the totality of reality.
It all works out in the end, true evil arising only when the journeys of all are subsumed beneath the limitations of transitory ego. Such is the 'other' perennial struggle for meaning in life… §;o)
Comment by Joy — December 2, 2006 @ 5:21 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 5:37 pm
"Personified in history" Jesus spoke truthfully about Adam and Abel because Adam and Abel were actual, literal, historical PERSONS, joy. If they weren't, joy, then Jesus was mistaken, and one cannot trust anything the Bible reports that He did or said, especially those claims/teachings He made which are far more difficult to believe, or more extreme, than merely that Adam and Abel were literal human beings. You really need to read your Bible more before attempting to tell others what it actually says, joy.
Comment by Douglas — December 2, 2006 @ 5:37 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 5:53 pm
joy,
Wow, you are impressive. Not only are you an expert in physics, you are adept at biology, an accomplished clown, and able to diagnose the psyches of Internet personas. However, joy, I'm afraid your attempt to cloud the issue by implying that the truth I proclaim is "limited" by what my "psychology" can "handle" merely reveals your own limited ability to deal with the truth. You are so afraid of the truth that the Bible clearly teaches (if you like, let's conduct a poll regarding several issues upon which we disagree regarding what the Bible teaches, and see if others are as willing as you to be self-deluded when it comes to Biblical teachings).
(To others: Note that my response here is simply "in kind" – joy has decided to engage in a bit of subtle condescending and put-down, and so I return her the favor.)
Ahem: "'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father but by Me.'" – (Jesus, from the New Testament.) And:
"There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world." (John 1:5-9)
Also:
"'And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.'" (Jesus, from John 3:19-20 .)
Further:
"'I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.'" (Jesus, from John 8:12 .)
And also:
"'As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.'" (Jesus, from John 9:5 .)
I suppose it's kind of fun in some ways to think up creative alternatives to the truth which the Bible teaches, especially while claiming to follow Jesus and His teachings.
Comment by Douglas — December 2, 2006 @ 5:53 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 6:12 pm
Douglas:
Um… that's what I said, Douglas. "Douglas" is also personified in history, as is "Joy."
I know what it says, thanks. I'm not telling you anything other than you're entitled to your interpretations. I presume you are aware of the fact that not all denominations, sects and cults interpret the words precisely as you do, so perhaps you should take your own advice.
Oh, I'm among the first to admit my limitations, Douglas. Though I am not blind to your inability to do the same. That's okay too.
Well, let me offer another favor then. This blog is not intended as yet another place for you to preach your version of religion. In fact, this website is not a place that encourages theistic debates over who's Truth is more True. There are literally hundreds of websites for that purpose, as I've told you before, so please take advantage of them.
Further off-topic posts to this blog will be moved to the Hole where they belong. Thanks for your input.
Comment by Joy — December 2, 2006 @ 6:12 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 11:27 pm
Do as you wish, joy, with the power granted to you, but bear in mind that if you bring up topics which deal with religious issues, and Biblical teachings and implications, then you should expect, and respect, others to share their views on the matter, even if those views conflict with yours. And it would not be particularly fair-minded of you to single out for editing or erasing posts reflecting views which conform to Evangelical Christianity.
Comment by Douglas — December 2, 2006 @ 11:27 pm
December 3rd, 2006 at 11:14 am
Douglas:
Actually, the topic is an archaeological discovery in Botswana – a cleverly carved giant snake in a cave with a secret 'shaman room' and ritual artifacts dated to be ~70,000 years old. The only biblical implications are to those like yourself who buy Bishop Ussher's 1654 chronology, dating of creation to:
Sunday, October 23, 4004 BC. My Bible contains no such date. If yours does, it's not an authorized version.
You have shared your views in a total of five [5] posts to this blog. Not a single one of which scientifically refutes the news story that is the subject, all of which effectively express the fact that you don't believe it. Your 'job' here is done.
Phooey. I know some Evangelical Christians. Not a single one of 'em believes God created the world in 4004 BC.
Comment by Joy — December 3, 2006 @ 11:14 am
December 3rd, 2006 at 12:24 pm
Joy wrote:
Joy,
I would be interested in authors you know who attempt to bring our common experience together seeking the philosopher's stone at the bottom of the well.
thanks,
bj
Comment by bj — December 3, 2006 @ 12:24 pm
December 3rd, 2006 at 4:45 pm
bj:
Plato's Dialogues; Aristotle, St. Augustine.
Gottfried Leibniz, Discourse on Metaphysics and the Monadology.
Aldous Huxley, The Perennial Philosophy.
Frithjof Schuon, Transcendent Unity of Religions.
Huston Smith, Forgotten Truth: The Primordial Tradition.
Erich Neumann, Mystical Man.
There are many worthy sources, and I've got shelves full of other people's expounded thoughts I could pull this from or that from, including Jung's Eranos collection, The Mystic Vision and Neibuhr's The Nature and Destiny of Man. Heck, the Gospel of John is excellent, and the Song of Songs is probably the most beautiful exposition of the mysteries ever penned (or sung).
Direction markers on a road that one may travel if the spirit moves and the understanding comes. Or not. Shallow is "in" these days, it seems.
Comment by Joy — December 3, 2006 @ 4:45 pm
December 3rd, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Further along the Creation Story trail…
Iroquois
Long before the world was created there was an island in the sky where the sky people lived. One of the sky women informed her husband she was going to birth twins, and he flew into a rage. He tore up the tree in the center of the island that gave light to all. The woman peered through the hole and saw the waters that covered the earth. Her husband pushed her, so she fell into the sea.
The water animals saw Sky Woman fall and caught her on their backs. Little Toad brought mud in his mouth and put it on the back of Turtle. Turtle grew and grew, and became North America.
Sky Woman gave birth to twin sons. One she named sapling, who was kind and gentle, the other was named Flint. He worked against all that gentle Sapling created. A great war between the twins occurred, and Flint finally lost. He was forced to live on Big Turtle's back forever, and his anger is felt to this day as earthquake and volcano.
Australian Aborigine
There was a time when everything was stillness. All the spirits of Earth were sleeping, save for Father. Father awoke Mother Sun and said, "I have work for you. Go down unto the Earth and awaken the sleeping spirits – give them form."
First her light awakened the spirit of plants, then insects and fish, snakes, lizards and frogs, birds and animals burst forth upon the land.
At first the living creatures lived in peace, but envy crept in. Mother Sun was called down from the sky to mediate, so she gave to life the power to change their own forms to whatever they chose. This turned out badly as rats turned into bats and lizards grew into giants and fish grew tongues and feet. Then, as ultimate offense, an animal designed itself with a duck's bill and teeth for chewing and a beaver's tail and a serpent's sting, reproducing itself by laying eggs. Most Ridiculous.
Mother Sun despaired of the mess and decided to birth twins. They were the Moon and the Morning Star, who became the parents of humanity. They were superior to the animals because they shared Mother Sun's Mind, and would never wish to change their form.
San
At one time people lived underneath the earth with Kaang, the Great Master and Lord of All Life. All the creatures lived together in peace and understood each other. It was always light in the earth, even though there was no sun. Kaang planned wonders to place on the world above, where the sun gave its own kind of light.
First Kaang created a wondrous tree with branches spreading over the entire world. At the base of the tree he dug a hole that reached all the way down to the world where animals and people lived. People climbed out of the hole, and creatures anxious to live in the world climbed up the roots and fell from the branches of the tree. Soon the entire world was full of life.
Kaang gathered all the people and animals to himself, and told them not to build a fire or great evil would befall them. But that night, when the sun disappeared (they had always known everlasting light), they became cold and afraid and could no longer see each other. Forgetting Kaang's warning in their fear, the people built a fire to warm themselves and to let them see each other in the darkness.
But the fire frightened the animals. They fled to the caves and mountains, and ever since that day people cannot speak with animals, and enmity exists between them.
Japan
In the beginning the elements were mixed together with the Germ of Life. In the mixture the heavy parts sank low, while the lighter parts rose. The mud sea covering Earth was created, in which a single green shoot rooted and grew. When it reached the heavens it transformed into a god. The got was lonely, so he created other gods. Of these, Izanagi and Izanami were the most remarkable.
One day while walking they looked down on the muddy ocean and wondered what might be beneath it. Clumps fell as they pulled it up, and these became the islands of Japan. The female children of the gods Izanagi and Izanami were the sun and the moon, and an unruly son [Sosano-wo] who was sentenced to creation of storms in the sea.
The first son of their first child [sun] became emperor of Japan, and all emperors since claim him as their ancestor.
________
Every culture on every continent has a creation mythology. Some are simple, some quite complex, all echo similar themes about spirits and creator-agents with intent… and, surprisingly often, miraculous trees. Moreover, most of them also have flood mythologies where an ancestor's family were sole survivors of a great flood, having floated it out in a raft or a boat (the Taraja of South Celebes still build their homes as upside-down boats on stilts, just in case).
One of my favorite creation myths is from the Pima people of the Southwestern US…
Man-Maker the Magician walked the earth one day and set about sculpting a human out of clay from the Great River's bend. He worked and worked, and when finally his sculpture was done he built a brick oven to fire it in. But he had no wood to stoke the fire. So he told his companion Coyote to stand guard over the sculpture until his return with fuel for the furnace.
Coyote meant well, but because he was Coyote, he grew easily bored. Coyote fiddled idly with the clay, passing time until Man-Maker returned. Which he did at dusk, loading his fuel into the oven to bake his creation through the night.
By morning the fire had died. Man-Maker pulled his sculpture from the kiln and breathed into it the breath of life. Whereupon the sculpture promptly sat up and barked a happy greeting, wagging its tail most friendly.
Comment by Joy — December 3, 2006 @ 4:52 pm
December 3rd, 2006 at 5:18 pm
Thanks so much Joy
I think I'll start with Huxley and Schuon
bj
Comment by bj — December 3, 2006 @ 5:18 pm
December 4th, 2006 at 11:40 am
Thanks for the interesting post, Joy. I am not surprised that the San might retain very ancient beliefs, as they are apparently descended from the original inhabitants of most of southern Africa. IIRC, the Bantu groups migrated south fairly recently — more or less at the same time that the Boers were migrating north. I suspect that migration might be associated with adoption of new beliefs, so long term residents might retain more ancient myths.
That said, I'm somewhat confused by the dating of the carved python to 70,000 years. Presumably, that's based on radiocarbon dating of the charred material found with the spearheads, rather than direct dating of the python. If so, an alternative hypothesis would be that the spearheads are ancient, but the python is a more recent addition. It's not unheard of for newer cults or religions to appropriate the sacred spaces of older religions. Since the interpretation of the spearheads as ritual objects depends on their proximity to the carved python, it would seem important to directly date the python.
Comment by Nick — December 4, 2006 @ 11:40 am
December 4th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
Hi, Nick. I doubt it's possible to date the python directly as anything but rock, which is as old as rock. Far as I know (and if I'm wrong, please somebody correct me) rock is dated at formation, not carving. You can't date an arrowhead, for instance, beyond the strata level for how deep it was buried, and the style of the chipping per other anthropological knowledge of how various cultures knapped their weapons. Beyond that it's just flint or obsidian or whatever, as old as that rock/glass is old.
The python looks from this distance (considerable, for sure) to be something like an inclusion to the cave rather than of the very same material the cave rocks themselves are. That's for geologists to figure out, but it looks a bit like a lava tube, doesn't it? It may be that the San ancestors carved it whole, but it looks to be an outcrop into the cave rather than something carved out of the original rock walls. There are numerous caves in this area, and most have wall paintings – seems the area has been a holy ground for thousands of years. It's not surprising that ancestor shamen saw some real possibilities in this particular cave due to a vaguely serpent-shaped inclusion, then took advantage of it.
Anyway, you're right that it's the spearpoints that have been used to date the site. I'm just saying I doubt the snake was carved elsewhere and then moved into the cave – it's likely been there since a geologically active time well before there were any humans at all.
Comment by Joy — December 4, 2006 @ 12:16 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 7:49 am
Hang on… are you two flirting with each other?
Comment by Mesk — December 5, 2006 @ 7:49 am
December 5th, 2006 at 10:15 am
Hi Joy!
Floods like the recent tsunami which utterly devastate whole regions, leaving few survivors, would have left a lasting impression on any culture. I bet this tsunami generated more than one flood saga in the Mediterranean.
Comment by Aagcobb — December 5, 2006 @ 10:15 am
December 5th, 2006 at 11:10 am
Hi, Aagcobb. Is this the one that broke through the Aegean to the Black at the Istanbul bosporus? I heard that was the one associated with Noah's flood (since it's Turkey that got flooded, and that's where Ararat is). Of course, the description in Genesis talks about rain, but there are associated tectonic events that can contribute to something like that. Opening up the 'waters of the deep' does sound a lot like a massive amount of water that didn't fall from the sky.
Who knows about the Pacific – we do know they get some monster waves, and that these can wipe entire islands and island chains. The South Celebes event was probably one that overtopped most of the Malaysian and Indonesian chains and no doubt flooded much of Australia and New Zealand as well – contributing to the Polynesian, Maori and Aborigine legends.
Seems to me that things haven't been exactly uniformitarian throughout the rather short sojourn of humanity on planet earth. It's good that science has recently started to acknowledge that (of course, catastrophic events and comets smashing into Jupiter on live TV didn't leave 'em much choice). I've never seen any good reason to presuppose that the ancient legends are complete fictions, considering how widespread they are, as well as indications that there have been some serious bottlenecks in human evolution indicating a mass die-off of ancestors.
Comment by Joy — December 5, 2006 @ 11:10 am
December 5th, 2006 at 11:43 am
Hi Joy,
You are thinking of this theory that Ice Age melt-off caused the level of the Mediterranean to rise, which resulted in it breaking through Turkey to flood what had been a fresh water lake, what we now call the Black Sea. We certainly know that there have been many massive floods generated by a variety of causes over the course of time, among other natural disasters. We here in the US have been fortunate, though one can imagine the devastation that would accompany an earthquake of the power of the 1812 New Madrid quake if it occurred today, or imagine what if the Tunguska event had happened in a heavily populated area, instead of over Siberia.
Comment by Aagcobb — December 5, 2006 @ 11:43 am
December 5th, 2006 at 1:18 pm
Aagcobb:
Well, actually not. Ryan and Pitman date this breakthrough event at 7,000 years ago, and state that the water level rose by no more than 6 inches a day. They can pretend to themselves that human beings – who were actively farming at the time, they say – couldn't move out of the way of 6 inches of water, but I sure as heck don't buy it. The difference between low tide and high tide at any beach on the planet is much more than that, but you don't have great anthropological legends of mass numbers of humans getting wiped out (and causing actual genetic bottlenecks) due to pitching their communities where the next high tide will drown them all in their sleep or at their daily tasks.
Heck, even though hundreds of thousands of unfortunates have been known from history to drown in seasonal floods of the Ganges, Nile and Yellow rivers, most halfway intelligent humans would not automatically suppose they just stood there for weeks as the water rose so slowly around them. These are walls of water engulfing hundreds of square miles of land in mere moments when it hits, and that's just annual snow melt or the yearly rainy season. The Egyptians figured it out in not too many seasons.
Higher ground isn't that hard to find, or reach via a leisurely stroll at that rate of rise. I mean, don't you think that even the Swedish child sex tourists in Thailand could have run for higher ground when the '04 tsunami hit if they'd had just a few hours' warning (or if the water level were rising 6 inches a DAY)? Much less the people who lived there all their lives… People simply are not that suicidally stupid (unless you're talking about scientists and their WMDs, gifted to politicians).
Meanwhile, the Toba event in Sumatra is dated 71,000 years ago, and is estimated to have reduced the entire human population of the planet to 15,000 individuals. That's just one volcano. The Sicilian event you linked is dated 8,000 years ago. I'd guess there were lots of significant tectonic events causing serious population-wiping events about every thousand years or so ever since humans appeared. Unless there's some serious mountains on the island you happen to live on – and you are smart enough to live near the top of it – you'll get wiped when the wave covers the whole thing. Only takes a moment, and a boat isn't going to help you. Why, in your last link there's the story of Queen Cesair riding out a flood that drowned the entirety of Ireland for seven years! Did she start building that boat while the whole of the population of Ireland simply stood there as the water rose 6 inches a day until they finally drowned en masse? Ridiculous.
Also, in that link the authors claim that Gilgamesh is older than Genesis. While it might have been written down earlier (iffy if indeed the first two chapters of Genesis were originally put to papyrus/vellum 3,000 years ago), the NG site also claims they're talking about the same event. We may further presume the oral histories/mythologies were faithfully handed down from time immemorial, so may represent events even tens of thousands of years previous. Or any of the possibly once-a-millenium events (average) along the way.
Now, there's more quite interesting tidbits of scientific suppositions that happen to coincide with the dating of the Botswana cave. First, there's the sideways finding that Africa was free of ice (save one small spot next to Lake Victoria) even during the very worst of glaciation during the last great ice age. The dating also happens to coincide with the supposed second wave of migration out of Africa from the ~15,000 human beings said to have survived. They sure got to their widespread destinations quickly (along with their many racial differences), didn't they?
Perhaps you can tell me – does anybody claiming scientific authority in these things bother to check their hypotheses against the accumulated body of knowledge and suppositions to that point? Or ask themselves the simple question of how big-brained humans were too stupid to walk uphill or climb a tree? Honestly, it's enough to turn one seriously sour on the whole charade.
Comment by Joy — December 5, 2006 @ 1:18 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 2:40 pm
Hi Joy.
It would seem like some sudden inundation such as caused by a tsunami, typhoon or another severe weather event would make a better model for the Flood. The hypothesized Black Sea event would probably have caused a famine because of the loss of so much farmland, so if it were the basis of the Flood myths the stories would bear very little resemblance to the facts.
Comment by Aagcobb — December 5, 2006 @ 2:40 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 4:39 pm
The dating methods used are not reliable. Bear in mind that recently solidified lava from Mount St. Helens has been dated by those methods at hundreds of thousands, and in some cases millions, of years of age, when the theory behind the dating method says it should show an age of only tens of years, or at the most hundreds of years. With accuracy like that, it is hard to accept "70,000 years" as valid or unarguable.
Comment by Douglas — December 5, 2006 @ 4:39 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Just in case anyone is tempted to buy the Mt. St. Helens lava-dating canard:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD013_1.html
Comment by Andrea — December 5, 2006 @ 4:52 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
Douglas said
Another creationist misrepresentation.
Comment by Aagcobb — December 5, 2006 @ 4:54 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
Wow. Aagcobb, you and Andrea aren't married, or twins, are you?
Comment by Douglas — December 5, 2006 @ 5:00 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
Her post wasn't there when I started! She beat me to it!
Comment by Aagcobb — December 5, 2006 @ 5:28 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 5:58 pm
Douglas:
There is a significant difference between the dating of the rock that Nick asked about and the charred artifacts used to date human ritual use of the site (and presumably the rudimentary carving of the snake rock). The rock would likely be dated by Potassium-Argon, as the St. Helens lava samples you mention were.
The artifacts in the python cave were dated by Carbon-Nitrogen if radiometric dating was used rather than spearhead knapping. C-N is reasonably accurate (40 year half life factor) from zero to 100,000 years. IOW, error would be 2,500 years at most in either direction at 100,000 years. Ideally, if the baseline calibrating assumptions are correct.
P-A is claimed accurate from 100,000 years to earth origin, but it's dealing with a half life factor of 1.277 billion years. Lots of room for very significant error, so they usually produce a series of tests and average the results. Still, all the heavy element radiometric dating methods are pretty shaky in their claims to accuracy for other reasons as well – we are no longer confident in our requisite assumptions of uniformitarianism over these time periods per the deposition of elements, or the particular isotopes deposited at given times from given sources (not to mention some questions about the constancy of alpha per decay). The only thing we're legitimately confident of are the chains of decay, as this can be physically calculated independent of observation.
Austin may not have been dishonest when he submitted the St. Helens lava to a lab for P-A dating, but as a geologist he would know as a matter of course that samples less than 100,000 years old would result in inaccurate dates. So nobody on the planet knowledgeable about such things would have been the least bit surprised by inaccurate dates.
This has nothing to do with the accuracy of the dating as it applies to human ritual use.
Comment by Joy — December 5, 2006 @ 5:58 pm
December 5th, 2006 at 7:00 pm
Douglas, I responded to that last post because 1. it contained no direct ad hominem, and 2. others had already responded and I've no wish to send everyone to the hole.
Now for the second time, please refrain from further posts to this thread asserting your religious beliefs. Krauze has started an open thread, please use that for further remarks on the subject. Thanks.
Comment by Joy — December 5, 2006 @ 7:00 pm
December 6th, 2006 at 12:05 am
Researcher Sheila Coulson has not yet published the body of her work on the cave, its artifacts or the dating of what she says was human ritual use, partly (she said) because the findings from the dating are so significantly upsetting of current theory about when humans had developed enough civilization to engage in group religious ritual practices.
Yet I find it strangely discordant that the dating coincides so closely with what geologists and geneticists have theorized about the Toba event. Douglas is correct that radiometric dating is not necessarily accurate, and geologists themselves admit there are sometimes unacceptably large margins of error due to a variety of causes. Considering that the charred spearpoints were most likely dated via radiocarbon [C-14 decay], it may be worthwhile to consider what specific fudge factors may have been present from the Toba eruption itself in the organic material forming the soot on the artifacts. Just to see if the dating is reasonably accurate, and what that may further mean for evolutionary assumptions.
I have a question about whether the catastrophic scenario attributed to the Toba eruption – 6 years of volcanic winter and a thousand years of intense mini-ice age – is independently evidenced by geographical clues (glaciation and its effects, mass extinctions of plant and animal life, etc.), or if it has been made out to be worse than it likely was due to evolutionary biologists trying to pinpoint cause for a near total extinction of just human beings. Which has been postulated to have occurred due to the glaring (and mysterious) lack of genetic variation in humans despite significant regional racial variation in features/traits.
Geneticists postulate a "bottleneck" ~70,000 years ago that reduced the human population to between just 5 to 15,000 individuals in the entire world. Even Wikipedia links the Toba event directly to the human evolutionary bottleneck. Why, one might get the impression that these scientific disciplines got together to support each other's theories on purpose! Did anybody ever suspect they might be wrong?
Are we to suppose that a hefty chunk of all human beings left on the planet 70,000 years ago lived within a couple hundred miles of the Tsodilo Hills and worshipped a stone python in this cave? Some of the artifacts come from this distance, thus can be presumed to represent different tribes of San ancestors (who by this theory are our ancestors too, just as distant from us as from modern Kalihari Bushmen).
But this isn't equatorial Africa – it's temperate South Africa, and arid to boot. Right there we've a challenge to the Volcanic Winter theory. Anthropologists maintain that the San have inhabited this region continuously for at least 40,000 years, and they themselves claim the Tsodilo Hills holy caves as their ancestral home (and site of creation by the python god in some misty prehistoric past). It doesn't appear that these humans were the ones evolutionary biologists tell us migrated to Austrasia southward or Europe and Asia proper northward in great waves. As if there were "great waves" of humans to do the migrating 70,000 years ago when there were no more than ~10 thousand human beings. Hmmm… Puzzle, puzzle, does any of this make sense?
Of course, we have also very recently come to find out that human populations are significantly more diverse genetically than was previously supposed when we were said to have only two copies of any given gene in our genomes. So it's now possible that there was no such drastic genetic bottleneck for humanity, and we don't need some catastrophic Volcanic Winter scenario to explain it.
Yet there is geological evidence of a gigantic eruption (I presume, since this is science). Surely they didn't make this all up out of whole cloth just to support a second out-of-Africa scenario. Such eruptions are known to release massive amounts of carbon dioxide as well as ash and other gases, which is what is supposed to cause volcanic winter. Thus we can further surmise that much of the carbon in the organic material used to burn offerings (artifacts) in the python cave was probably NOT carbon 14 caused by cosmic rays high in the atmosphere (particularly since organic material was so rare at the time, according to Volcanic Winter theory). This is one of those base assumptions critical to carbon dating that in this case could skew the results.
If Coulson's dates turn out to have been corrected for the carbon most probably present at the end of the volcanic mini-ice age – if there was one – more is wrong with current theories than just how many humans (and plants, and animals) were alive 70,000 years ago. And where they were alive, considering that European and Middle Eastern Neandertal populations made it through this supposed extinction event too. Their culture was no different from that of the modern humans they shared the regions with…
I'd say that if Coulson's dating is reasonably accurate, some serious revision in the whole human evolution/migration picture is due. The sooner the better.
Anybody want to start a betting pool on how long it takes for evolutionary biologists, geneticists, anthropologists, paleontologists, geologists, vulcanologists, etc. to get together and totally revise THEIR Creation Story?
Comment by Joy — December 6, 2006 @ 12:05 am
December 6th, 2006 at 5:31 am
joy,
Please point out to me exactly where and in what way my post dated December 5th, 2006 at 4:39 pm "assert[ed]" my "religious beliefs". And, I'm no geologist, but I spoke with Dr. Austin by phone yesterday, after having visited the links Andrea and Aagcobb gave (in stereo), and he said the first point at the link was a misrepresentation, because the lab to which he sent his samples did not claim, at the time he sent his samples, that their accuracy was limited to samples 2 million years old or older – he said that he specifically told the lab that he suspected/expected the samples would be much younger than 1-2 million years, and had to pay a surcharge for them to go ahead and test the samples, which they did. Regarding the second point at the Talk.origins link, Dr. Austin said that the whole dating method depends upon uniformitarian assumptions, and that they can't have it both ways – if they are going to use such dating methods, they have to assume they aren't contaminated, thus they would have to assume that what the dates they come up with aren't in actuality due to xenocrysts (or also xenoliths [spelling?]); if they are going to discredit the dates Dr. Austin's samples gave by appeals to "possibly contaminated by undetected xenocrysts", they thereby essentially discredit all dates arrived at by similar dating methods. (At least, this was my layperson's understanding of what Dr. Austin said – he did agree with me that this second point at the Talk.origins site could be compared to cutting off a branch one is standing on.)
Hope this post doesn't contain any religious preaching – I'm pretty sure I stuck to the science involved in dating methods.
Comment by Douglas — December 6, 2006 @ 5:31 am
December 6th, 2006 at 10:55 am
Hi Douglas,
Whether or not you agree with Joy, this is her thread, and if she wants you to stop posting in it, you should comply. As she mentioned, I have just started a new open thread, where comments on all subjects are welcome.
Comment by Krauze — December 6, 2006 @ 10:55 am
December 6th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Krauze,
Yes, this is her thread. She has never said she does not want me posting here, she has just said that she did not want me sharing my "religious beliefs" in this thread. My last two posts to her did not mention my, or any, religious beliefs at all. The reliability and validity of dating methods is directly relevant to this thread, though – particularly, to the issue of whether or not the serpent rock mentioned in the original post is potentially evidence of, or a reflection of, "the most ancient creation story".
Comment by Douglas — December 6, 2006 @ 5:42 pm