Monday, January 3, 2022

A Year Ago I Answered on Nephelim and Stonehenge


Here is a post published Epiphany 2021 : More on Babel (and generally from Flood to Abraham). If you go down to Q IX, you'll see this is what I start out as republishing, to make room for a debate under it.

Q IX
Did the Nephilim help create Stonehenge and its designs?
https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Nephilim-help-create-Stonehenge-and-its-designs/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1


Hans-Georg Lundahl
none/ apprx Masters Latin & Greek, Lund University
Answered Jan 6, 2021
Not the pre-Flood nephelim, since Stonehenge, if my identification is correct, is after Babel (I take this as Göbekli Tepe).

Whether one should call the post-Flood giants nephelim or not and whether such were involved in Stonehenge, I don’t know, and I think Stonehenge is inferior to the previous Göbekli Tepe, so as to design, it was very well within human possibilities.

Jason Shearin
30.XII.2021
Nephilem never existed, neither did a global flood.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
31.XII.2021
yadda, yadda ….

The guy who posed the question was some kind of Christian, so am I.

An atheist obviously has to bump in …

Y E S …. I know this is your position, are you going to defend them with some kind of arguments?

The world’s first world history, written by Moses and put before his other four books, doesn’t agree with you, you know!

Jason Shearin
1.I.2022
Prove nephilem and a global flood. FYI the bible doesn't count as proof .ps I reccomend reporting me for religious persecution via the harassment tab, as I CONFESS I'm persecuting you and violating the 1st amendment

Hans-Georg Lundahl
1.I.2022
I recommend myself using you as comedy gold.

“Prove nephilem and a global flood.”

Well, that would be a matter of the historical sources …

“FYI the bible doesn't count as proof”

And you just discounted the best historical source for the beginning of human history …

  • a more detailed but less reliable one for pre-Flood events (in or around Henoch in the land of Nod, probably), Mahabharata, says there were giants on both sides, Bhima on Pandava side, forget the name on the Kaurava side
  • Norse myth places giants before the Flood, but only gets wrong that men and earth itself were supposedly created after it (however, Odin could have been a Hebrew, making Norse myth an inaccurate retelling of Genesis on these matters, rather than an independent source for the events)
  • Greek myths place giants and more specially Titans before the Flood (Prometheus and Epimetheus being relatives of Deucalion and Pyrrha and being born of the Titan Iapetus).


Jason Shearin
1.I.2022
Best historical source for the beginning of human history? Humans evolved… ps. Listing more myths doesn't count as evidence.

Yes this is more religious persecution.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
1.I.2022
Yes, best historical source.

Neither Greeks nor Hindoos have any coherent explanation for language diversity after the Flood, and neither Greeks nor Hindoos have any continuous genealogy from the very first men to times that need to be assessed as historic. Also, neither of them even knows (mythological traditions) of Mesopotamia.

“Listing more myths doesn't count as evidence.”

When and why is a “myth” not history? This counts as persecution of halflearned ignorance!

“Humans evolved”

What historic source said “the last neanderthal” (or word with possibly equal meaning) “died yesterday, though some half breeds (including the closest mourners) are still around?”

In what historic source by Homo erectus soloensis did you find “the first Heidelbergian went unnoticed ten generations ago, but we must give those guys, they do have better ears?”

Jason Shearin
1.I.2022
There was no flood and humans evolved. Lmfao

Hans-Georg Lundahl
1.I.2022
Laugh … you might need it.

Jason Shearin
2.I.2022
You're delusional and brainwashed, as well as uneducated.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
3.I.2022
  • 1. ad hominem
  • 2. ad hominem
  • 3. ad hominem


Seems you need other things to a debate than just laughing. Too bad … laughing is actually healthy, unlike what you just produced.

Jason Shearin
3.I.2022
Present evidence for Adam and eve and a global global. The bible does not count.

All you've done is make claims. Present evidence

Hans-Georg Lundahl
3.I.2022
= “present evidence for history, but historic narrative does not count”

Jason Shearin
3.I.2022
If a global flood occured there will be geologic evidence as well as evidence for a global genetic bottleneck in every species.

Present it

Is it possible that you can't because it doesn't exist?

Prove I'm wrong. Present scientific evidence of Adam and eve and a global flood. Shut me up

Hans-Georg Lundahl
3.I.2022
"If a global flood occured there will be geologic evidence" - "Present it"

Austria. "Late Jurassic" or Flood of Noah buried an Austrian pterosaur at Ankerschlag. "Oligocene" or Flood of Noah buried a whale at Linz. "Middle to Late Miocene" or Flood of Noah buried another whale in the Austrian part of Leitha Limestone formation. "Late Middle Miocene" or Flood of Noah buried a whale, a seal, and some other critters in Nussdorf, outside Vienna.

Austria

Interesting enough, whether you go to Austria or to Karoo, you won't find two layers on top of each other with different classifications both containing fossils.

"as well as evidence for a global genetic bottleneck in every species." - "Is it possible that you can't because it doesn't exist?"

Actually, if you mean "every species" in a Linnaean way, it doesn't exist. You need to take it to every kind, more probably the level of family. Hedgehogs and gymnures do have fossil forms that no longer exist = a dying out, a culling out. Man too (though here we deal with genus homo only) : Neanderthals, Denisovans, Homo erectus soloensis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo naledi, Homo dmanesi, Homo Heidelbergensis (who could be a Denisovan), Homo Antecessor in Atapuerca (shares genes with Denisovans and morphology with Heidelbergians) and let's not forget Homo floresienesis ... man is more homogenous after the Flood than before.

"Prove I'm wrong. Present scientific evidence of Adam and eve and a global flood. Shut me up"

Generally, what you want for historic things (persons, objects, communities, events) is historic evidence and not primarily scientific one. However, the kind of scientific evidence you are looking for is not for that reason totally lacking.

Jason Shearin
3.I.2022
Show me peer reviewed scientific journals with this info about the proof of magic

I am not asking for claims. Why can you not comprehend this? Is my brainwashing accusation accurate?

Prove it isn't. Show us the peer reviewed scientific articles.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
3.I.2022
"Show me peer reviewed scientific journals with this info about the proof of magic"

You are not only presuming all proof, of historic truth, needs to be scientific rather historic. You are also presuming that all scientific proof needs to come from a peer reviewed scientific journal. AND on top of that that the summing up of scientific evidence into a conclusion can ALSO come only from a scientific journal that is peer reviewed. That sounds like quite a lot of brainwashing done to you - unless you are a poe, a troll, don't care two cents about the evidence but only for having a crack-down on creationists.

HOWEVER what I gave about Late Jurassic at Ankerschlag and so on in Austria is from my back up to a google site which in its turn uses palaeontology from what you would term normal palaeontological publications.

Austria - Palaeocritti - a guide to prehistoric animals

You can ask Nobu Tamura if you want what scientific publications they were using, back up to 2016.

"I am not asking for claims."

You seem unable to comprehend when you get more than that - unless it comes in a very specific package, and that one on top of it defined so that you need not bother about peer reviewed Creation Science.

"Why can you not comprehend this? Is my brainwashing accusation accurate?"

It's very accurate if you point your finger to a mirror, not if you point it to me.

"Prove it isn't. Show us the peer reviewed scientific articles."

You are pushing the goal posts. No. I refuse.

Jason Shearin
3.I.2022
So you can't provide anything from a peer reviewed scientific article?

I understand. You're making a statement of faith. Thank you for clarifying for everyone. Enjoy your brainwashing

Hans-Georg Lundahl
3.I.2022
Thank you for clarifying for all of our upcoming readers that you are more than willing to twist what is being offered.


After this, I blocked and reported this barbarian enemy of Creationists.

No comments: