On Apr 30, 12:26=A0pm, Awais Nazir <waqas.fah...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Humans came on earth about ten-thousand years ago. I recommend to keep
> off the high-school education bias, and then read on.
>
> Earth is about 4.5-billion years old, as uranium-dating proves.
>
> Reason 1: Humans are clever, they don't take tens of thousands of
> years to develop scientifically/population-wise.
>
> Reason 2: a simple human intelligence can produce pottery, they should
> have been well a few hundred thousand years ago. But we do not find
> Pottery before ten-thousand years ago. Pottery came "suddenly" in
> archeologist records.
>
> Reason 3: Archeology record suggests agriculture to come into scene
> "suddenly" about ten-thousand years, (Is human as dumb that for tens
> of thousands of years they were just hunting?). Intuition says that if
> there would be a first society, then it would be both hunters/farmers.
> If Archeology says that agriculture started about ten-thousand years
> ago, then humanity should have come about ten-thousand years ago, on
> Earth.
>
> Reason 4: Archeologists find that organised housing "suddenly"
> appeared about ten thousand years ago, (Are humans dumb enough, that
> they lived for tens of thousands of years just roaming the earth,
> without proper place to settle).
>
> Reason 5: First chinese writing came in about 1500 BC, and that first
> American writing came in about 800 BC by the Zapotec people, first
> Egypt writing came in about 3100 BC, (Are humans that dumb, that they
> never wrote the previous socalled many tens of thousands of years).
> These dates show that, the first humans should come about 10-thousand
> years ago, so that they gain enough population/experience to
> effectively run the commerce/government through writing.
>
> Reason 6: GENETICISTS HAD MATHEMATICALLY PROVED THAT, THE HUMAN GENE
> IS STABLE FOR 20-MILLION YEARS INTO FUTURE!WITH CURRENT MUTATION
> RATES. NOW THE QUESTION IS: HOW CAN A SOCALLED SERIES OF EVOLUTION
> FROM LAST COUPLE OF HUNDRED OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS, FROM APE TO MAN
> HALT ABRUPTLY FOR THE NEXT 20-MILLION YEARS? (MONKEY TO MAN IS A GREAT
> SOCALLED LEAP FORWARD IN GENES. GENES ARE SO SO SO STABLE THAT WE CAN
> FIND EVEN TODAY THE SPECIES WHICH ALSO EXISTED BILLIONS OF YEARS OLD
> IN FOSSIL RECORDS; WE ARE MAKING A VERY BIG STATEMENT WHEN WE SAY THAT
> MONKEY GENE BECAME HUMAN GENE IN A COUPLE OF TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
> YEARS.).
>
> Reason 7: The mesopotamian scientific trend occurred about twenty-
> seventh century BC, of Greece about third century BC, of Muslim about
> tenth century AD, of European about Sixteenth Century BC. What rule
> joins them? Every next trend occurred after a previous one, nearly
> after half the time period between previous two trends. For example,
> Meso-Greece period in 25 centuries, Greece-Muslim period is twelve and
> half centuries, muslim-european period is about six centuries, and so
> next trend should occur at about three centuries latter from sixteenth
> centures, ie ninteenth century (which is the American Science Period).
> If I call the first Science Period as Adamic, then Adamic SP should
> occur about 7700 BC (approx. 8000 BC), i.e. about ten-thousand years
> ago. Conclusion: The first Science Period was Adamic and it occurred
> about 8000 BC. (Anthropologists suggest that the current humans, i.e.
> homo-sapians, were existant on earth for atleast 200 thousand years,
> according to their calculations; thus, the intelligence which humans
> currently possess, was with humans for atleast 200 thousand years.
> But, humanity would be colonizing other galaxies, had it been of the
> age of 200 thousand years.). Humans are not dumb that they take many
> tens of thousands of years to develop population/scientifically.
>
> Reason 8: Summerian and Egyptian Civilizations started about 3500 BC;
> Indus and Minoan and Akkadian and Andes Cvilisations started about
> 2500 BC; Chinese Civilization started about 2200 BC; doesn't it all
> hint: if it took 5000-years for human to develop from past Egyptian
> civilization to the development that is now, then about 5000-thousand
> years should have took from a first human pair to develop into
> Egyptian civilization, totalling 10-thousand years of human existence
> on earth, (It is as evident as is sun).
>
> Reason 9: Now, Pyramids as in Egypt/Amerindian can exist for many ten-
> thousands of years. If humanity has an age of more than ten-thousand
> years, then it can safely be argued that there should exist similar
> more societies like Egyptian/Amerindian, and thus a multitude of
> pyramids covering the earth, each showing its history; but we can't
> find such sustaining structures as pyramids preceding the time about
> 3-4 thousand years ago. This all shows that, no bias: Egyptian/
> Amerindian were the first to make Pyramids, if humanity was more than
> ten-thousand years in age then similar pyramids should have been found
> but there exist none, thus humanity can't be more than ten-thousand
> years in age; no bias: God is needed to create the intelligent
> creature as a human. (It is not that Stone structures before 10-
> thousand years decayed, because stone/bone/fossils can date millions/
> billions of years).
>
> It may be argued that ice-age thawed about ten-thousand years ago, and
> that's why one saw agriculture/etc thriving after it, (but equator
> never faced the bitter of ice, so civilization should have continued
> at equator, nullifying the previous argument).
>
> God modified the mamal gene to make human. Proof? Appendix has no work
> in humans, but still exists, but is required in many other mammals.
> Also, sea-plant is almost 85% human gene.
>
> THE SKELATONS WE FIND TODAY OF SO-CALLED PREHUMANS ARE ACTUALLY
> MONKEYS. THERE ARE MANY KIND OF MONKEYS, SOME ARE SMALL, SOME ARE MORE
> MAN-LIKE E.G. GORILLAS IN PHYSIQUE/INTELLIGENCE; AND LUCY/ETC ARE JUST
> ONE OF THE SPECTRUM OF THE VARIED KINDS OF MONKEYS (IF ANYONE IS HURT
> BY THE PREVIOUS SENTENCE, I APOLOGIZE FOR IT.).
>
> The rate of the human population growth has not been constant, the
> rate is much higher now because of advanced medical facilities. So, if
> we take this rate as constant, then this is not the right approach.
>
> Now, there are two things, wars and famines. Which of them puts an
> upper limit to the human population? Inconclusively, it is famine, not
> war. Reason: war was almost common throughout the world, but famine
> was more widespread in places where there is less vegetation; So,
> India/China are majors in population not because they faced less wars
> in past, but that they had less famines, compared to other
> countries.Conclusion: wars don't diminish the human population, if it
> does then it is immediately healed, but that food limits the human
> population. So, we can't say that it were cannibals in past that is
> why it took humanity many tens of thousands of years to develop
> population/scientifically.
>
> If ***** continues of 8 generations, then the people becomes
> different from eachother, as if they belong to different races. I will
> not say *****, but that different places shut people off from
> eachother, and they became different after some generations. The Black
> in Africa, and Blond is Sweden, occurred, because a Blond in Africa
> died an early death due to ultra-violet sun ray harm, and same for the
> Balck in Sweden where it died of lack of Vitamin-D.
>
> Anti-thesis: human beings can't be from this earth, because about ten-
> thousand years ago, sudden intelligence came on the surface of Earth.
> So, what if Aliens came to earth about ten-thousand years ago, now
> called as humans? It is very less probable, because why aliens came
> not in the 4-billion history of earth and only in last ten-thousand
> years? Also, Aliens most probably had to die because they are not
> immune to earthly bectarias/etc.
>
> Despite the fact that I had proved the landing of Adam on Earth, ten-
> thousand years ago, current mindset has difficulty accepting it,
> because, it then has to accept the existance of God.
>
> Atheists say that this world is by chance; Well, what if, god intended
> this world to appear as such, for some reason?
>
> Conclusion: Above argument only proves that God exists, (because God
> is required to create the first man, about 10-thousand years ago). But
> is that God really interested in us? Yes, God is indeed interested in
> us through Messenger****p (www.awais-nazir.biz).
well !
I am impresesd the way u advocated ur beliefs. My point is Why we
were
created by GOD? Is our presence in this world necessary to assert the
fact
the fact there is GOD?
Why GOD let those people to live who doesnot believe in him?
|
