Creationists

[daws101]

how does amino acid show the need for a creator?

religious nuts just cling on to whatever science hasn't proven yet in order to justify their illogical belief in god.

First it was the rain & sun god, then the crop god, and on and on all the while science disproved their nonsense.

What will the nutbags do when science has proven everything and their creationist garbage is finally put to rest for good?

Here in case you missed it.

Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins which are the main substances of living cells. Amino acids couldn't link to form proteins in the beginning.

It would be like claiming that if bricks could form in nature they would get together to build houses.

Proteins are so hard to form that in all of nature they never form except in already existing cells. This scientific fact stands in direct contrast to what you students are taught.

Oh but it gets better. We know that proteins do not form outside of living cells,the amino acids from which proteins are built,there are two kinds. half are left handed and right handed, proteins containing all left handed amino acids will work in living things because proteins which contain any right handed amino acids have the wrong shape and will not connect properly to the proteins around them.

Here:

Uncommon Descent | For non-biologists: Why proteins are not easily recombined

and of course your sources are far from objective!

 

[UltimateReality]

Here in case you missed it.

Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins which are the main substances of living cells. Amino acids couldn't link to form proteins in the beginning.

It would be like claiming that if bricks could form in nature they would get together to build houses.

Proteins are so hard to form that in all of nature they never form except in already existing cells. This scientific fact stands in direct contrast to what you students are taught.

Oh but it gets better. We know that proteins do not form outside of living cells,the amino acids from which proteins are built,there are two kinds. half are left handed and right handed, proteins containing all left handed amino acids will work in living things because proteins which contain any right handed amino acids have the wrong shape and will not connect properly to the proteins around them.

Here:

Uncommon Descent | For non-biologists: Why proteins are not easily recombined

and of course your sources are far from objective!

Might want to get the beam out of your eye before you go after the spec in someone else's. So you're saying you are objective???? That is the funniest thing I have heard all day.

 

[UltimateReality]

"Recently, the notion that most of the universe is composed of dark matter took an evidential hit. Live Science said, “A sprawling collection of galaxies and star clusters surrounding our own Milky Way is challenging long-standing theories on the existence of dark matter, the mysterious substance thought to pervade the universe.” According to a survey of satellite galaxies of the Milky Way conducted at the University of Bonn, dark matter theories fail to account for the arrangement of matter in a region spanning 10 times our galaxy’s diameter. The astronomers extended the impact of their findings to the entire universe:"

Uncommon Descent | If you have been an ardent believer in dark matter, revise your expectations, maybe

 

[Youwerecreated]

Here:

Uncommon Descent | For non-biologists: Why proteins are not easily recombined

and of course your sources are far from objective!

Might want to get the beam out of your eye before you go after the spec in someone else's. So you're saying you are objective???? That is the funniest thing I have heard all day.

Now that was funny but he just does not get which theory this evidence supports. How much harder this makes it for evolutionist to come up with a way for life to just start with no direction from a designer.

 

[Montrovant]

and of course your sources are far from objective!

Might want to get the beam out of your eye before you go after the spec in someone else's. So you're saying you are objective???? That is the funniest thing I have heard all day.

Now that was funny but he just does not get which theory this evidence supports. How much harder this makes it for evolutionist to come up with a way for life to just start with no direction from a designer.

Are you STILL connecting evolution and the beginning of life? Separate issues!

 

[HUGGY]

Here in case you missed it.

Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins which are the main substances of living cells. Amino acids couldn't link to form proteins in the beginning.

It would be like claiming that if bricks could form in nature they would get together to build houses.

Proteins are so hard to form that in all of nature they never form except in already existing cells. This scientific fact stands in direct contrast to what you students are taught.

Oh but it gets better. We know that proteins do not form outside of living cells,the amino acids from which proteins are built,there are two kinds. half are left handed and right handed, proteins containing all left handed amino acids will work in living things because proteins which contain any right handed amino acids have the wrong shape and will not connect properly to the proteins around them.

Here:

Uncommon Descent | For non-biologists: Why proteins are not easily recombined

and of course your sources are far from objective!

Gods words as defined by goat herders don't need to be objective. His game...his rules. If you don't like it find yourself some godless planet to live on.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Might want to get the beam out of your eye before you go after the spec in someone else's. So you're saying you are objective???? That is the funniest thing I have heard all day.

Now that was funny but he just does not get which theory this evidence supports. How much harder this makes it for evolutionist to come up with a way for life to just start with no direction from a designer.

Are you STILL connecting evolution and the beginning of life? Separate issues!

You can believe as you wish and that is what you have been taught but it's not the case.

For life to begin if what you believe is true the amino acids, the proteins,and other things to form the cell had to evolve to form life. The reason why you are taught that they are two separate issue is because they have no answer for the origins question and like to avoid the question.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Here:

Uncommon Descent | For non-biologists: Why proteins are not easily recombined

and of course your sources are far from objective!

Gods words as defined by goat herders don't need to be objective. His game...his rules. If you don't like it find yourself some godless planet to live on.

It shows your ignorance to suggest early man were just ignorant goat herders. Modern day scientist have no clue how early man could build temples and the pyramids without modern day technology.

 

[daws101]

and of course your sources are far from objective!

Gods words as defined by goat herders don't need to be objective. His game...his rules. If you don't like it find yourself some godless planet to live on.

It shows your ignorance to suggest early man were just ignorant goat herders. Modern day scientist have no clue how early man could build temples and the pyramids without modern day technology.

Egyptologists Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass have been trying to solve the puzzle of where the 20,000 or 30,000 laborers who are thought to have built the Pyramids lived. Ultimately, they hope to learn more about the workforce, their daily lives, and perhaps where they came from. In the meantime, Lehner has been excavating the bakeries that presumably fed this army of workers, while Hawass has been unearthing the cemetery for this grand labor force.

The two scholars believe that Giza housed a skeleton crew of workers who labored on the Pyramids year-round. But during the late summer and early autumn months, when the Nile flooded surrounding fields, a large labor force would appear at Giza to put in time on the Pyramids. These farmers and local villagers gathered at Giza to work for their god-kings, to build their monuments to the hereafter. This would ensure their own afterlife and would also benefit the future and prosperity of Egypt as a whole. They may well have been willing workers, a labor force working for ample rations, for the benefit of man, king, and country.

In the following interviews, Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass address the long-standing question of who actually built the Pyramids at Giza:


"Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it," Mark Lehner, here standing atop the Khufu Pyramid, says of the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids. Enlarge
Photo credit: © WGBH Educational Foundation


INTERVIEW WITH MARK LEHNER, Archeologist, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and Harvard Semitic Museum

People power
NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?
Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

And you see there's this curious reversal where sometimes New Age theorists say that Egyptologists and archeologists are denigrating the ancient culture. They sometimes put up a scarecrow argument that we say they were primitive. And the New Agers sometimes want to say these were very technologically sophisticated people who built these things; they were not primitive. Well, actually there's a certain irony here, because they say they were very sophisticated technological civilizations and societies that built the Pyramids and the Sphinx, and yet they weren't the ones that we find. So to me, it's these suggestions that are really denigrating the people whose names, bodies, family relationships, tools, and bakeries we actually find.

Everything that I have found convinces me more and more that indeed it is this society that built the Sphinx and the Pyramids. Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it. You see, to me it's even more fascinating that they did this. And that by doing this they contributed something to the human career and its overall development. Rather than just copping out and saying, "There's no way they could have done this." I think that denigrates the people whose evidence we actually find.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/who-built-the-pyramids.html

 

[Montrovant]

Now that was funny but he just does not get which theory this evidence supports. How much harder this makes it for evolutionist to come up with a way for life to just start with no direction from a designer.

Are you STILL connecting evolution and the beginning of life? Separate issues!

You can believe as you wish and that is what you have been taught but it's not the case.

For life to begin if what you believe is true the amino acids, the proteins,and other things to form the cell had to evolve to form life. The reason why you are taught that they are two separate issue is because they have no answer for the origins question and like to avoid the question.

First, you don't know what I believe. You are, as usual, assuming you do.

Second, evolution is about how life forms change over time. It doesn't matter if they were placed here by a god, or aliens, or formed spontaneously; evolution is still going to describe the changes they undergo.

I think you have things backwards. I think the reason you want to combine the two issues is because there is no sure answer for how life began. If evolution and the origins of life are two separate issues, you can't try to discredit one by pointing out flaws or lack of explanation in the other.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Gods words as defined by goat herders don't need to be objective. His game...his rules. If you don't like it find yourself some godless planet to live on.

It shows your ignorance to suggest early man were just ignorant goat herders. Modern day scientist have no clue how early man could build temples and the pyramids without modern day technology.

Egyptologists Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass have been trying to solve the puzzle of where the 20,000 or 30,000 laborers who are thought to have built the Pyramids lived. Ultimately, they hope to learn more about the workforce, their daily lives, and perhaps where they came from. In the meantime, Lehner has been excavating the bakeries that presumably fed this army of workers, while Hawass has been unearthing the cemetery for this grand labor force.

The two scholars believe that Giza housed a skeleton crew of workers who labored on the Pyramids year-round. But during the late summer and early autumn months, when the Nile flooded surrounding fields, a large labor force would appear at Giza to put in time on the Pyramids. These farmers and local villagers gathered at Giza to work for their god-kings, to build their monuments to the hereafter. This would ensure their own afterlife and would also benefit the future and prosperity of Egypt as a whole. They may well have been willing workers, a labor force working for ample rations, for the benefit of man, king, and country.

In the following interviews, Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass address the long-standing question of who actually built the Pyramids at Giza:


"Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it," Mark Lehner, here standing atop the Khufu Pyramid, says of the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids. Enlarge
Photo credit: © WGBH Educational Foundation


INTERVIEW WITH MARK LEHNER, Archeologist, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and Harvard Semitic Museum

People power
NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?
Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

And you see there's this curious reversal where sometimes New Age theorists say that Egyptologists and archeologists are denigrating the ancient culture. They sometimes put up a scarecrow argument that we say they were primitive. And the New Agers sometimes want to say these were very technologically sophisticated people who built these things; they were not primitive. Well, actually there's a certain irony here, because they say they were very sophisticated technological civilizations and societies that built the Pyramids and the Sphinx, and yet they weren't the ones that we find. So to me, it's these suggestions that are really denigrating the people whose names, bodies, family relationships, tools, and bakeries we actually find.

Everything that I have found convinces me more and more that indeed it is this society that built the Sphinx and the Pyramids. Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it. You see, to me it's even more fascinating that they did this. And that by doing this they contributed something to the human career and its overall development. Rather than just copping out and saying, "There's no way they could have done this." I think that denigrates the people whose evidence we actually find.


NOVA | Who Built the Pyramids?

B.S. is your name. Do you realize how many different theories there are on how they got built ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Are you STILL connecting evolution and the beginning of life? Separate issues!

You can believe as you wish and that is what you have been taught but it's not the case.

For life to begin if what you believe is true the amino acids, the proteins,and other things to form the cell had to evolve to form life. The reason why you are taught that they are two separate issue is because they have no answer for the origins question and like to avoid the question.

First, you don't know what I believe. You are, as usual, assuming you do.

Second, evolution is about how life forms change over time. It doesn't matter if they were placed here by a god, or aliens, or formed spontaneously; evolution is still going to describe the changes they undergo.

I think you have things backwards. I think the reason you want to combine the two issues is because there is no sure answer for how life began. If evolution and the origins of life are two separate issues, you can't try to discredit one by pointing out flaws or lack of explanation in the other.

Evolution is the explanation it is linked with the origins question.

So you don't believe as miller and urey who believed in prebiotic evolution ?

But anyhow this is solid evidence that a cell could not form without a designer.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Gods words as defined by goat herders don't need to be objective. His game...his rules. If you don't like it find yourself some godless planet to live on.

It shows your ignorance to suggest early man were just ignorant goat herders. Modern day scientist have no clue how early man could build temples and the pyramids without modern day technology.

Egyptologists Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass have been trying to solve the puzzle of where the 20,000 or 30,000 laborers who are thought to have built the Pyramids lived. Ultimately, they hope to learn more about the workforce, their daily lives, and perhaps where they came from. In the meantime, Lehner has been excavating the bakeries that presumably fed this army of workers, while Hawass has been unearthing the cemetery for this grand labor force.

The two scholars believe that Giza housed a skeleton crew of workers who labored on the Pyramids year-round. But during the late summer and early autumn months, when the Nile flooded surrounding fields, a large labor force would appear at Giza to put in time on the Pyramids. These farmers and local villagers gathered at Giza to work for their god-kings, to build their monuments to the hereafter. This would ensure their own afterlife and would also benefit the future and prosperity of Egypt as a whole. They may well have been willing workers, a labor force working for ample rations, for the benefit of man, king, and country.

In the following interviews, Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass address the long-standing question of who actually built the Pyramids at Giza:


"Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it," Mark Lehner, here standing atop the Khufu Pyramid, says of the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids. Enlarge
Photo credit: © WGBH Educational Foundation


INTERVIEW WITH MARK LEHNER, Archeologist, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and Harvard Semitic Museum

People power
NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?
Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

And you see there's this curious reversal where sometimes New Age theorists say that Egyptologists and archeologists are denigrating the ancient culture. They sometimes put up a scarecrow argument that we say they were primitive. And the New Agers sometimes want to say these were very technologically sophisticated people who built these things; they were not primitive. Well, actually there's a certain irony here, because they say they were very sophisticated technological civilizations and societies that built the Pyramids and the Sphinx, and yet they weren't the ones that we find. So to me, it's these suggestions that are really denigrating the people whose names, bodies, family relationships, tools, and bakeries we actually find.

Everything that I have found convinces me more and more that indeed it is this society that built the Sphinx and the Pyramids. Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it. You see, to me it's even more fascinating that they did this. And that by doing this they contributed something to the human career and its overall development. Rather than just copping out and saying, "There's no way they could have done this." I think that denigrates the people whose evidence we actually find.


NOVA | Who Built the Pyramids?

What tools were used in the construction of the pyramids ?did I make myself clear ?

Even though they did not have iron tools or modern instruments, the pyramids were constructed with amazing architectural accuracy. No other monument can inspire wonder like the pyramids, especially when you consider that they are over four and a half thousand years old.

These people were pretty intelligent no ?

The Pyramids of Egypt

 

[Montrovant]

You can believe as you wish and that is what you have been taught but it's not the case.

For life to begin if what you believe is true the amino acids, the proteins,and other things to form the cell had to evolve to form life. The reason why you are taught that they are two separate issue is because they have no answer for the origins question and like to avoid the question.

First, you don't know what I believe. You are, as usual, assuming you do.

Second, evolution is about how life forms change over time. It doesn't matter if they were placed here by a god, or aliens, or formed spontaneously; evolution is still going to describe the changes they undergo.

I think you have things backwards. I think the reason you want to combine the two issues is because there is no sure answer for how life began. If evolution and the origins of life are two separate issues, you can't try to discredit one by pointing out flaws or lack of explanation in the other.

Evolution is the explanation it is linked with the origins question.

So you don't believe as miller and urey who believed in prebiotic evolution ?

But anyhow this is solid evidence that a cell could not form without a designer.

Evolution is separate from the origin of life. How life forms change over time has nothing to do with what started them. If god put a bunch of life on the planet, that does nothing to confirm or deny evolution. If life came about through random action, that does nothing to confirm or deny evolution. Your desire to make them the same doesn't change this.

I have no firm belief as to how life began. I haven't seen evidence of any particular answer I find compelling.

You may feel the evidence is solid that life could not form without a designer. Others disagree. I am in the disagree camp.

 

[Montrovant]

In the vein of building the pyramids, here's a little video of a man who moves around Stonehenge sized rocks by himself.

It's interesting, and shows how moving and placing pretty massive stones (as in the pyramids) does not require modern technology.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K7q20VzwVs]Simple building. Stonehenge Reloaded by only one white man!! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[daws101]

Are you STILL connecting evolution and the beginning of life? Separate issues!

You can believe as you wish and that is what you have been taught but it's not the case.

For life to begin if what you believe is true the amino acids, the proteins,and other things to form the cell had to evolve to form life. The reason why you are taught that they are two separate issue is because they have no answer for the origins question and like to avoid the question.

First, you don't know what I believe. You are, as usual, assuming you do.

Second, evolution is about how life forms change over time. It doesn't matter if they were placed here by a god, or aliens, or formed spontaneously; evolution is still going to describe the changes they undergo.

I think you have things backwards. I think the reason you want to combine the two issues is because there is no sure answer for how life began. If evolution and the origins of life are two separate issues, you can't try to discredit one by pointing out flaws or lack of explanation in the other.

bump

 

[daws101]

It shows your ignorance to suggest early man were just ignorant goat herders. Modern day scientist have no clue how early man could build temples and the pyramids without modern day technology.

Egyptologists Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass have been trying to solve the puzzle of where the 20,000 or 30,000 laborers who are thought to have built the Pyramids lived. Ultimately, they hope to learn more about the workforce, their daily lives, and perhaps where they came from. In the meantime, Lehner has been excavating the bakeries that presumably fed this army of workers, while Hawass has been unearthing the cemetery for this grand labor force.

The two scholars believe that Giza housed a skeleton crew of workers who labored on the Pyramids year-round. But during the late summer and early autumn months, when the Nile flooded surrounding fields, a large labor force would appear at Giza to put in time on the Pyramids. These farmers and local villagers gathered at Giza to work for their god-kings, to build their monuments to the hereafter. This would ensure their own afterlife and would also benefit the future and prosperity of Egypt as a whole. They may well have been willing workers, a labor force working for ample rations, for the benefit of man, king, and country.

In the following interviews, Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass address the long-standing question of who actually built the Pyramids at Giza:


"Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it," Mark Lehner, here standing atop the Khufu Pyramid, says of the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids. Enlarge
Photo credit: © WGBH Educational Foundation


INTERVIEW WITH MARK LEHNER, Archeologist, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and Harvard Semitic Museum

People power
NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?
Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

And you see there's this curious reversal where sometimes New Age theorists say that Egyptologists and archeologists are denigrating the ancient culture. They sometimes put up a scarecrow argument that we say they were primitive. And the New Agers sometimes want to say these were very technologically sophisticated people who built these things; they were not primitive. Well, actually there's a certain irony here, because they say they were very sophisticated technological civilizations and societies that built the Pyramids and the Sphinx, and yet they weren't the ones that we find. So to me, it's these suggestions that are really denigrating the people whose names, bodies, family relationships, tools, and bakeries we actually find.

Everything that I have found convinces me more and more that indeed it is this society that built the Sphinx and the Pyramids. Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it. You see, to me it's even more fascinating that they did this. And that by doing this they contributed something to the human career and its overall development. Rather than just copping out and saying, "There's no way they could have done this." I think that denigrates the people whose evidence we actually find.


NOVA | Who Built the Pyramids?

B.S. is your name. Do you realize how many different theories there are on how they got built ?

just copping out and saying, "There's no way they could have done this." I think that denigrates the people whose evidence we actually find.

 

[daws101]

It shows your ignorance to suggest early man were just ignorant goat herders. Modern day scientist have no clue how early man could build temples and the pyramids without modern day technology.

Egyptologists Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass have been trying to solve the puzzle of where the 20,000 or 30,000 laborers who are thought to have built the Pyramids lived. Ultimately, they hope to learn more about the workforce, their daily lives, and perhaps where they came from. In the meantime, Lehner has been excavating the bakeries that presumably fed this army of workers, while Hawass has been unearthing the cemetery for this grand labor force.

The two scholars believe that Giza housed a skeleton crew of workers who labored on the Pyramids year-round. But during the late summer and early autumn months, when the Nile flooded surrounding fields, a large labor force would appear at Giza to put in time on the Pyramids. These farmers and local villagers gathered at Giza to work for their god-kings, to build their monuments to the hereafter. This would ensure their own afterlife and would also benefit the future and prosperity of Egypt as a whole. They may well have been willing workers, a labor force working for ample rations, for the benefit of man, king, and country.

In the following interviews, Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass address the long-standing question of who actually built the Pyramids at Giza:


"Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it," Mark Lehner, here standing atop the Khufu Pyramid, says of the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids. Enlarge
Photo credit: © WGBH Educational Foundation


INTERVIEW WITH MARK LEHNER, Archeologist, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and Harvard Semitic Museum

People power
NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?
Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

And you see there's this curious reversal where sometimes New Age theorists say that Egyptologists and archeologists are denigrating the ancient culture. They sometimes put up a scarecrow argument that we say they were primitive. And the New Agers sometimes want to say these were very technologically sophisticated people who built these things; they were not primitive. Well, actually there's a certain irony here, because they say they were very sophisticated technological civilizations and societies that built the Pyramids and the Sphinx, and yet they weren't the ones that we find. So to me, it's these suggestions that are really denigrating the people whose names, bodies, family relationships, tools, and bakeries we actually find.

Everything that I have found convinces me more and more that indeed it is this society that built the Sphinx and the Pyramids. Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it. You see, to me it's even more fascinating that they did this. And that by doing this they contributed something to the human career and its overall development. Rather than just copping out and saying, "There's no way they could have done this." I think that denigrates the people whose evidence we actually find.


NOVA | Who Built the Pyramids?

What tools were used in the construction of the pyramids ?did I make myself clear ?

Even though they did not have iron tools or modern instruments, the pyramids were constructed with amazing architectural accuracy. No other monument can inspire wonder like the pyramids, especially when you consider that they are over four and a half thousand years old.

These people were pretty intelligent no ?

The Pyramids of Egypt

no but they did have bronze and other stones that were as tools.
they also used wedges and hot water to split stones.
you get accuracy by practice. the evidence proves a couple thousand of it (5500 bce to 30 bce)
you do realize that the pyramids at Giza are the newest pyramids not the oldest..


again you make a subjective declaration "No other monument can inspire wonder like the pyramids,"

have you ever been there? I have.
ever been to Angkor watt? I have and it's far more intricate.



These people were pretty intelligent no- ywc ...yes, what's your point ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Egyptologists Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass have been trying to solve the puzzle of where the 20,000 or 30,000 laborers who are thought to have built the Pyramids lived. Ultimately, they hope to learn more about the workforce, their daily lives, and perhaps where they came from. In the meantime, Lehner has been excavating the bakeries that presumably fed this army of workers, while Hawass has been unearthing the cemetery for this grand labor force.

The two scholars believe that Giza housed a skeleton crew of workers who labored on the Pyramids year-round. But during the late summer and early autumn months, when the Nile flooded surrounding fields, a large labor force would appear at Giza to put in time on the Pyramids. These farmers and local villagers gathered at Giza to work for their god-kings, to build their monuments to the hereafter. This would ensure their own afterlife and would also benefit the future and prosperity of Egypt as a whole. They may well have been willing workers, a labor force working for ample rations, for the benefit of man, king, and country.

In the following interviews, Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass address the long-standing question of who actually built the Pyramids at Giza:


"Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it," Mark Lehner, here standing atop the Khufu Pyramid, says of the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids. Enlarge
Photo credit: © WGBH Educational Foundation


INTERVIEW WITH MARK LEHNER, Archeologist, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and Harvard Semitic Museum

People power
NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?
Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

And you see there's this curious reversal where sometimes New Age theorists say that Egyptologists and archeologists are denigrating the ancient culture. They sometimes put up a scarecrow argument that we say they were primitive. And the New Agers sometimes want to say these were very technologically sophisticated people who built these things; they were not primitive. Well, actually there's a certain irony here, because they say they were very sophisticated technological civilizations and societies that built the Pyramids and the Sphinx, and yet they weren't the ones that we find. So to me, it's these suggestions that are really denigrating the people whose names, bodies, family relationships, tools, and bakeries we actually find.

Everything that I have found convinces me more and more that indeed it is this society that built the Sphinx and the Pyramids. Every time I go back to Giza my respect increases for those people and that society, that they could do it. You see, to me it's even more fascinating that they did this. And that by doing this they contributed something to the human career and its overall development. Rather than just copping out and saying, "There's no way they could have done this." I think that denigrates the people whose evidence we actually find.


NOVA | Who Built the Pyramids?

What tools were used in the construction of the pyramids ?did I make myself clear ?

Even though they did not have iron tools or modern instruments, the pyramids were constructed with amazing architectural accuracy. No other monument can inspire wonder like the pyramids, especially when you consider that they are over four and a half thousand years old.

These people were pretty intelligent no ?

The Pyramids of Egypt

no but they did have bronze and other stones that were as tools.
they also used wedges and hot water to split stones.
you get accuracy by practice. the evidence proves a couple thousand of it (5500 bce to 30 bce)
you do realize that the pyramids at Giza are the newest pyramids not the oldest..


again you make a subjective declaration "No other monument can inspire wonder like the pyramids,"

have you ever been there? I have.
ever been to Angkor watt? I have and it's far more intricate.



These people were pretty intelligent no- ywc ...yes, what's your point ?

Some of you seem to think that early man were ignorant goat herders I was showing they were not. That was my point they and the ones who wrote the bible were not ignorant goat herders. You can read all the Wikipedia you want and you still will not know how they built the pyramids and the tools that were used.

 

[UltimateReality]

First, you don't know what I believe. You are, as usual, assuming you do.

Second, evolution is about how life forms change over time. It doesn't matter if they were placed here by a god, or aliens, or formed spontaneously; evolution is still going to describe the changes they undergo.

I think you have things backwards. I think the reason you want to combine the two issues is because there is no sure answer for how life began. If evolution and the origins of life are two separate issues, you can't try to discredit one by pointing out flaws or lack of explanation in the other.

Evolution is the explanation it is linked with the origins question.

So you don't believe as miller and urey who believed in prebiotic evolution ?

But anyhow this is solid evidence that a cell could not form without a designer.

Evolution is separate from the origin of life. How life forms change over time has nothing to do with what started them. If god put a bunch of life on the planet, that does nothing to confirm or deny evolution. If life came about through random action, that does nothing to confirm or deny evolution. Your desire to make them the same doesn't change this.

I have no firm belief as to how life began. I haven't seen evidence of any particular answer I find compelling.

You may feel the evidence is solid that life could not form without a designer. Others disagree. I am in the disagree camp.

I think we've already adressed this. Without an agreed upon definition of fitness that is more than mere speculation, the theory of evolution has absolutely no scientific basis whatsoever. So even with origin of life questions out of the picture, the lack of scientific evidence of natural selection is alarming. It makes for a nice fairy tale to support a materialistic world view though even if there isn't any scientific evidence to back it up. "We think the beaks got longer because..." or "We think the neck is longer because..." does not equate to scientific evidence, but is only mere speculation. There is not one single proof known of natural selection in action, no not one.