Skepticism for Science, p. II

This new science news piece has been making the rounds:

“Ancient ‘Deep Skull’ from Borneo full of surprises” —

What follows¬†is most of the article, truncated a bit by me. The point I make here is only to highlight another example about how “conclusions” of “scientist” regarding the interpretations of ancient findings have once again been demonstrated to be false or at least highly questionable. As it should be. Science should always be an endeavor of continual learning, and therefore, as we learn more, older ideas will be overturned now and again. However, in that context, I wish to level criticism at those who constantly push contemporary scientific “belief” as “proof” against the Bible. As evidenced in this article, what scientists THINK the fossils are telling us is ALWAYS tentative, until new information becomes available to modify what we thought we knew. But when these two systems of knowledge conflict with one another, science does not checkmate the Bible. It’s just saying, “Maybe.” A person who wishes to hold on to their faith that the Bible remains true despite what appears to be evidence to the contrary is well within the bounds of reason in doing so.

“A new study of the 37,000-year old remains of the ‘Deep Skull’ – the oldest modern human discovered in island South-East Asia – has revealed this ancient person was not related to Indigenous Australians, as had been originally thought.

“The Deep Skull was also likely to have been an older woman, rather than a teenage boy.

“Our analysis overturns long-held views about the early history of this region,” says Associate Professor Curnoe, Director of the UNSW Palaeontology, Geobiology and Earth Archives Research Centre (PANGEA).

¬†“‘We’ve found that these very ancient remains most closely resemble some of the Indigenous people of Borneo today, with their delicately built features and small body size, rather than Indigenous people from Australia.’

“In 1960, Brothwell concluded the Deep Skull belonged to an adolescent male and represented a population of early modern humans closely related, or even ancestral, to Indigenous Australians, particularly Tasmanians.
“‘Brothwell’s ideas have been highly influential and stood largely untested, so we wanted to see whether they might be correct after almost six decades,’ says Curnoe.

“‘Our study challenges many of these old ideas. It shows the Deep Skull is from a middle-aged female rather than a teenage boy, and has few similarities to Indigenous Australians. Instead, it more closely resembles people today from more northerly parts of South-East Asia.'”

“The Deep Skull has also been a key fossil in the development of the so-called ‘two-layer’ hypothesis in which South-East Asia is thought to have been initially settled by people related to Indigenous Australians and New Guineans, who were then replaced by farmers from southern China a few thousand years ago.

“The new study challenges this view by showing that – in Borneo at least – the earliest people to inhabit the island were much more like Indigenous people living there today rather than Indigenous Australians, and suggests long continuity through time.

“It also suggests that at least some of the Indigenous people of Borneo were not replaced by migrating farmers, but instead adopted the new farming culture when it arrived around 3,000 years ago.

“‘Our work, coupled with recent genetic studies of people across South-East Asia, presents a serious challenge to the two-layer scenario for Borneo and islands further to the north,’ says Curnoe.

“‘We need to rethink our ideas about the region’s prehistory, which was far more complicated than we’ve appreciated until now.'”


One thought on “Skepticism for Science, p. II

  1. Within my lifetime, I have witnessed the pendulum of “scientific” thinking swing from one extreme to the other, and sometimes back once again. Various items in our diet, for example, have been labelled healthy, then unhealthy, then healthy, then unhealthy, then healthy. Examples: coffee, wine, liver, chocolate. Cholesterol was bad, then good, then bad, and lately – good. Sunshine was good for your health; now it is bad for your health. Science considered blood-letting a useful cure for illness (out with the bad blood); leeches were another approach. Now they don’t use these methods. There used to be only 7 planets; then 8; then 9; then 10; then 9; and now, 8. Saturn used to have a ring; then 3 rings; then 9 rings; now just orbiting debris. We used to worry about the impending return of the Ice Age; now global warming is the fashion of the day. The Universe used to be uniform and a lot smaller. Then it was expanding. We learned that it must have begun suddenly (“Big Bang”) out of nothing (ex-nihilo) and expanded at nearly the speed of light (because nothing can go faster than light). Now we learn that the early universe expanded faster than the speed of light. Science keeps changing its mind. The laws of thermodynamics state that entropy always increases — that is things move from an orderly state to a less orderly state. But the hypothesis of Evolution states that things go from random chaos to greater and greater complexity. We learned that nothing can escape from a Black Hole. Then they tell us that stuff CAN escape a Black Hole (Hawking radiation). I can go on and on. But I will conclude by quoting my friend Dr. Sud Karmaker, PHD, who stated “The Torah is the Truth; if it is in the Torah it is True. Therefore, we can say of any non-Torah source: if it is false, it is mischief; if it is true, it is redundant.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s