Jump to content


Photo

Creation Predictions.


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
25 replies to this topic

#1 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 March 2009 - 03:35 PM

If God created with aged matter (aged on the very day of creation), then we should find young and old evidence mixed together, right? Because if you bury something that is not as old as the matter around it is. Then the dating markers of that matter will cross contaminate "all" the evidence buried in it because cross contamination is a fact, not a myth. But is ignored because it is direct evidence that proves why the fossils date the layers, and the layers date the fossils.

So when we dig up a T-Rex fossil, it dates as old as the layer (millions of years) because the "aged" layer cross contaminated it. That is the old evidence. Now when the bone is broken open and examined. We find T-Rex blood cells, veins and soft tissue.

Posted Image

That is the old and young evidence mixed proving how God created.

I also predict that because science is mostly finding truth minus "any" supernatural event. That a temporal excuse will be made to explain away this evidence instead of testing it against both theories of young and old earth. Which by the way is how science is supposed to work, by looking at "all" possibilities. Not just the ones that the majority view "wants" to be true because they prefer an origins minus a Creator.

I Also predict that they will not accept the creation explanation for finding what they did, and use it until a better theory comes along. Because proving "anything' supernatural, whether true of not, is considered "intellectually cheating". Which by the way is a bias way of thinking because it automatically makes the scientists look in certain directions, but always avoid the one that would tag them with a subject that will destroy all of their credibility. So science is no longer about allowing the evidence to guide it to a conclusion, but making that evidence support the conclusion already made.

This is because every excuse made about this find cannot be confirmed, supported, and goes against all known laws of decay. And most important, it goes against the old earth theory which is a major foundation in which all theories concerning origins are based upon. But all is just ignored because the it's Taboo to challenge the major theory in which all of science evolves around, less one wants to be cast to the wolves of credibility destruction.

If this is not so, then name one person that has ever challenged evolution in favor of creation that did not have his credibility destroyed? Just one person.

What this shows is that the theory of evolution does not remain top dog by it's own merits, but by straight forward intimidation that if a person does not conform to the views set before him. He will not make it in any scientific field. Unless he keeps his ideas and beliefs about creation to himself. It's like one evolutionist said:

Science, is fundamentally, a game with one over riding and defining rule:

Let's see how far, and to what extent we can explain the behavior of the physical and material universe in terms of  purely physical and material causes without "EVER" invoking the supernatural. [Involving God] in the explanation constitutes a form of intellectual cheating. A chess player is perfectly capable of smashing his opponents king on the floor during a tournament, but this does not make him a champion because the rules were not followed. Evolution is not promoted because of overwhelming evidence in it's favor, nor is creation rejected for lack of evidence. The biblical creation model is simply ignored because scientists are trained to ignore this possibility. They would be accused of "cheating" if they did accept the evidence for creation.

Richard Dickerson  (Biochemist-evolutionist) Member of National Academy of science . February 1, a closer look at the evidence.


I also predict that if God created with age, we would also find biblical verses to support this as well as evidence.

Psalms 102:25 Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands.

How does one lay an old foundation? He finds aged material.

Then I predict that God will make a direct reference to the foundations of the earth not being parallel with the actual time passage.

Psalms 82:5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

Course = a direction of time. Much like you take a half or full semester course.
So the foundations of the earth are out of time (course)

I also predict that the word of God will speak of a passage of time that cannot be accounted for, in the attempt to explain creation with age.

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

In the Biblical time-line. No generations had passed yet. But notice the reference is not pointing to any "live matter" (animals or humans). But is a reference to space (our universe) and the Earth (dead matter).

In the Bible, actual time passage is referred to has the begats. Which shows the tree of ancestors of man (live matter). In the Bible, the reference to aged creation is always a reference to dead matter. So the question needs to be asked, when looking at Biblical time-lines is:
1) Is the Bible referring to dead matter (aged creation)?
2) Or live matter (man's ancestry or actual time passage)?

Categorizing "all" references to time as actual time is the reason the Bible seems confusing. Because the age of the earth is not the same as the age of life. so for one to better understand the difference, the categorization has to be separated like this:

1) Time-line of life, or the living (all living matter). Which is not only measured by life and death, but 24 hour days.
2) The aged creation. Or all dead matter.

So living matter has one time-line, while dead matter has another. So if you combine the two into one through such stuff as the flood. Then they look as if they are combined in time because of cross contamination. A process science cannot deny happens.

So if live matter has one time-line, and dead matter has another time-line. The older aged creation of dead matter will always be older than the live matter. Which is what we observed all because age was added to the creation on the very day it was created

I also predict that God will also give us the formula from which eternity exists, and His powers over time come from.

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I also predict that some Biblical verse will support some theories.

I believe that 2 Peter 3:8 is a explanation of time dilation, and what it takes for time to become so dilated that it becomes eternal.

I also predict that evidence will be found that will show that the amount of time based upon the old earth theory would put the theory into question.

Human and dinosaur foot prints together:
Attached File  enhanced_footprint3.jpg   46.01KB   36 downloads
Human artifacts found in coal:
Attached File  doorknobs_clump.jpg   33.46KB   61 downloadsAttached File  brunette_slider_coal.jpg   87.29KB   63 downloads
Evidence of eye witness accounts of humans seeing dinosaurs:
Attached File  dino_skin_compare1.jpg   29.42KB   66 downloads

I predict that because the evidence cannot be scientifically disproved, that other methods will be used. Such as altering pictures of evidence:

Attached File  image001.jpg   8.29KB   4 downloads.............................. Attached File  dino.jpg   18.24KB   4 downloads
.............................Attached File  print.jpg   5.25KB   4 downloads

Attached File  meister_box1b_small.jpg   23.3KB   58 downloadsAttached File  meister1.jpg   32.94KB   4 downloads

Pics were not only altered, but accusations were made about fraud (carving evidence) in which no witness could ever be produced:
Attached File  burdick_r1s_small.jpg   30.23KB   53 downloadsAttached File  burdick1.jpg   19.14KB   24 downloads

So if evolution is so true, why all the deceptions and false accusation?

1) Does truth require altering of the opposing evidence so that it will be debunked under false misconceptions?
2) Does truth require destruction of one's credibility to silence the opposition?
3) Does truth require removal of the opposition from the educational system because it cannot stand on it's own merits?
4) Does truth require one to ignore opposing evidence so that a preferred conclusion can dominate?

Only a untruth requires so much deception.

Note: This is less that half of the examples I could have put up.

Attached Files

  • Attached File  dino.jpg   18.24KB   4 downloads


#2 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 March 2009 - 03:52 PM

I also predict that if God is the Creator, that He would know what is required for his creation that no human would know at the time of the printing of the Bible.

To create a universe, you need three basics things.
1) Time.
2) Space.
3) Matter.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

1) In the beginning = time.
2) heaven = space.
3) Earth = matter.

God would also have knowledge about His creation that man did not know at that time the Bible was written. The Antichrist is supposed to have a number 666. All of the things that exist in the universe are made up of three basic elements. Protons, neutrons, and electrons. Man, who is carbon based is made up of: 6 protons, 6 neutrons, and 6 electrons (666).

I predict that God would have knowledge about space and how the planets moved, when man had not even peered into space yet to see these things.

Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

1) Light in space (firmament) to divide light from day is basically saying that the sun produces the light. And the rotation of the earth determines night and day.
2) Seasons = The earth's tilt.
3) Years = the earth's orbit around the sun + seasons = the earth's orbit + tilt.

I predict that the Creator would know if there are other dimensions (realms or parallel universes) that exist that we cannot even see.

2 Corinthians 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

The three dimensions are:

1) Evil = Dimension of total darkness (spiritual dimension).
2) Good and evil = Dimension of both darkness and light (temporal dimension). The one where we are,
3) Good = Dimension of eternal light (spiritual dimension).

I predict that science would discover things that would match some of these places we cannot see.

Black hole vs Hell or lake of fire.

1) Hell has a fire that gives no light. A black hole holds light in so it cannot escape. So therefore it is always dark.
2) Hell has a fire that is so hot, it's hard to comprehend. A black hole compresses matter to such an extreme, the heat from the friction cannot be comprehended.
3) The Lake of Fire will eventually have everything cast into it. A huge black hole will consume anything that comes near it.

Expansion of sun into a red giant vs the burning of the planet earth.

Before the City of God can come down from heaven for the 1000 year reign. The earth surface most be destroyed by fire (a purification process). When the sun expands into a red giant, which will be it's normal cycle. The first three planets closes to it (which includes the earth) shall be consumed or burned by the heat of it (set on fire).

I predict that because the sun will no longer be stable, and will not be able to support life on this planet after the red giant cycle. That God will have a replacement.

Revelation 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.

When the city of God comes from heaven to be upon the earth, after the red giant expansion. How would God know that the city would have to sustain life without a sun or moon?

It is because He is God.And being eternal gives Him such knowledge.

If you need to know more about eternity and how it works. Here is a page I did on the creation wiki: http://creationwiki...._about_eternity

#3 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 March 2009 - 04:59 PM

I also predict that any usual life form found that evolution cannot explain will be categorized and debunked through that categorization so that it would never have to be discussed in any length. And not only that, but every picture here also altered to make look fake so that the evidence is also debunked on misconceptions.

Posted Image

Does Basking sharks ring a bell? All of these in those pictures are considered by all the great minds of science as basking sharks. But yet that debunk was not good enough so altering the pics was just icing on the cake so that people would believe it.

#4 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 March 2009 - 05:19 PM

I predict that there will by lifeforms found that defy evolution beyond belief. That they will never have a evolution tree that fits the lifeform.

Attached File  clear_head_fish.jpg   10.9KB   75 downloads

A fish with a see through head? Where are the transitional fossils for this thing?

Then we would have earlier claims by evolutionists about coal and oil taking millions of years to form. This conclusion was made on the "assumption" that evolution and old earth without a Creator were true. And then unto this day, this lie is still being taught on our text books. Here is a picture of the coalification process started on a piece of wood in just a few weeks:

Attached File  3_0004_TheYoungAgeoftheEarthEnglish_214k.jpg   22.07KB   43 downloads

Here is a video where nature makes oil everyday.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.c...></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.c..._embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I also predict that it will be shown that the conditions of the flood made oil quickly.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.c...></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.c..._embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

#5 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 March 2009 - 05:25 PM

I predict that:

If evolution and old earth is true.

1) That the wear groove for the Grand Canyon top will be worn away and would not resemble the bottom wear groves in any way because of the weathering and time passage.
2) The wear grooves on the bottom will be much deeper and very apparent which is unlike the ones at the top.

If flood of Bible is true.

1) Only 4,400 hundred years have passed.
2) The wear grooves at the top and bottom of the Grand Canyon should be nearly the same.

Attached File  Compare_21.jpg   41.44KB   70 downloads

http://www.evolution...ype=post&id=301

That because of the flood. There will be places where the bodies of several kinds of dinosaurs were gathered into one place. And made dinosaur grave yards.

Posted Image

#6 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 March 2009 - 05:34 PM

I predict there will be another explanation as to why all life seems to be related.

Posted Image

And that is because DNA and RNA are a part the basic template for all life.

#7 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 March 2009 - 09:30 PM

I also predict that since it is taboo for science or scientist, to look in the direction of a Creator. That instead of looking into the evidence as a support for creation. They will use excuses as to why this does not support creation. And as to why it can "only" ever support evolution and old earth.

Not that science would ever look into the direction of creation or a Creator, since all who run the controlling parts of science do not believe in God.

I also predict that the main reason that science will never look in any direction but the one they are currently looking at, has nothing to do with evidence. But has everything to do with pride and having to admit to being wrong. Here is what would happen if science actually allowed creation to be a justifiable idea. And chance having evolution proven wrong by it.

1) Their funding is lost.
2) They would have to admit to being wrong.
3) They would have to find a way to tell the tax payers that they spent their money purposely supporting an untruth.
4) Lose credibility among the public in just about every field of science.
5) Lose their jobs.
6) Make their life's work worthless and useless.
Etc...

I mean can you imagine people who think like Dawkins ever having to admit to being wrong? I think they would rather die than do that. Especially that they were proven wrong by the very people they hate and despise.

#8 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 13 March 2009 - 11:20 PM

So when we dig up a T-Rex fossil, it dates as old as the layer (millions of years) because the "aged" layer cross contaminated it. That is the old evidence. Now when the bone is broken open and examined. We find T-Rex blood cells, veins and soft tissue.


DNA in dinosaur fossils is'nt just an isolated anomoly.I've recently found many more examples.

In view of the fact that DNA degrades on death of the animal (From - ancient bear DNA), and even if preserved should not last more than a few thousand years, it is interesting to note the survival of DNA below, which perhaps brings into question generally accepted dating techniques? It could be argued that such DNA is contamination, but it is likely that the laboratories concerned took great care to avoid contamination.

1. DNA has now been reported in magnolia, leaves that evolutionists claimed to be 17 million years old. [E.M.Golenberg 'Chloroplast DNA Sequence from a Miocene Magnolia Species' Nature vol.344 12April 1990 p.656-658.]

2. Fragments of DNA are also claimed to be in alleged 80 million-year-old dinosaur bones buried in a coal bed. [S.R. Woodward 'DNA Sequence from Cretaceous Period Bone Fragments' Science vol.266 18Nov.1994 p.1229-1232].

3. DNA found in the scales of a 200 million-year-old fossilized fish. [K.Hoppe 'Brushing the Dust off Ancient DNA' Science News vol.142 24Oct.1992 p.281].

4. DNA has also been reported in amber encased insects and plants that are supposedly 25-120 million years old. [H.N. Poinar 'DNA from an Extinct Plant' Nature vol.363 24June 1993 p.677].

5. And what about the protein preserved in dinosaur bones? As with DNA, no proteins should last 75-150 million years. [R. Monastersky 'Protein Identified in Dinosaur Fossils' Science News vol.142 3Oct.1992 p.871-874].



#9 RobotArchie

RobotArchie

    Junior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Age: 49
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • London, UK

Posted 14 March 2009 - 01:45 PM

Huskies fed flesh that's been dead for millenia.......

There's a project I read about wherein the rather well preserved Wooly Mammoth remainss may perhaps be 'revived' from their extinct state by artificially inseminating their closest living relatives the Elephants as a host incubator..... but leading to what? A new hybrid species?

It *is* quite interesting to me...... in a 'Jurassic Park' movie kind of way

#10 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2009 - 07:54 PM

A better question, what applications does creationism have???

#11 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Administrator

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6607 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 14 March 2009 - 08:09 PM

A better question, what applications does creationism have???

View Post

It applies to truth, reality, what it is... ;)

Besides ad hoc fairy tales, and the literature industry responsible for spinning the stories, what application does evolution have? If you want to answer this question let's do it in a different thread.

#12 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 14 March 2009 - 08:49 PM

The problem with evolution is that evolutionist really think it's an applied science. No it isn't. Evolutionist are applying evolution to things they need not apply it to... such as everything they try to apply it to, but actually have no reasons for doing.

Then evolutionist complain that if evolution is to be outdone, then we need a replacement that can be applied as well. Unfortunately evolution isn't a real applied science in the first place.

So, in conclusion evolutionist really have no reason to be complaining at all, because there is no replacement for truth. You don't have to apply creationism, because it's history, people... now think for a few moments about that, because that's what evolution is attempting to explain and be at the same time:

HISTORY Not only is this factually incorrect, but evolution has been being applied to the wrong things, ever since its birth. No, history doesn't belong to evolution... NO. It is HIS STORY. In other words... it is Gods.

#13 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 March 2009 - 11:23 AM

It applies to truth, reality, what it is... :angry:

Besides ad hoc fairy tales, and the literature industry responsible for spinning the stories, what application does evolution have? If you want to answer this question let's do it in a different thread.

View Post


Fair enough, I'm scared to start a thread. You do it. :huh:

#14 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 15 March 2009 - 06:55 PM

I also predict that since the Bible states that people lived for several hundreds of years before th flood, that if any skulls were found that they would be funny shaped because the brow bone of the human skull never stops growing.

Attached File  Big_skull.jpg   10.35KB   69 downloads

It would take several hundreds of years to get a forehead like that.

#15 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 March 2009 - 07:24 PM

I also predict that since the Bible states that people lived for several hundreds of years before th flood, that if any skulls were found that they would be funny shaped because the brow bone of the human skull never stops growing.

Attached File  Big_skull.jpg   10.35KB   69 downloads

It would take several hundreds of years to get a forehead like that.

View Post


In which humans does any bone not stop growing as a rule???

Besides, that skull was found in South America. How did it get there, and why aren't they seen in larger numbers???

#16 assist24

assist24

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Age: 40
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • United States

Posted 15 March 2009 - 10:15 PM

I also predict that since the Bible states that people lived for several hundreds of years before th flood, that if any skulls were found that they would be funny shaped because the brow bone of the human skull never stops growing.

It would take several hundreds of years to get a forehead like that.

How do you know that skull is from before the Flood?

#17 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 16 March 2009 - 04:33 AM

In which humans does any bone not stop growing as a rule??? 


Why did I lose an inch in heigth in the past few years if my bones keep growing all over my body?

Besides, that skull was found in South America.  How did it get there, and why aren't they seen in larger numbers???

View Post


Pangea according to the Bible.

1) In the beginning the whole earth was covered with water. All land underneath was in one piece. Which makes sense because water was not always present on this earth because it was real hot at one time, right? So even OECs know this. So even YEC agree.

Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

2) The water had to go some where so land could appear. this was the first expansion which created the super-continent.

Genesis 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

3) Now because the barometric pressure back then was much higher, this kept it from raining.

gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Rain clouds cannot form when the barometric pressure is high. This is basic meteorology. This is why the weather man is always talking about highs and lows. It affects our weather. Double the pressure would make the atmosphere hold a much higher amount of water, and never release it.

So when the meteor struck the earth, the impact caused the barometric pressure to drop in that area which caused a chain reaction around the world as the atmosphere now released the water it once held. And it did this until the pressure even out to what we see today.

Now the water from the atmosphere had to be taken in by the earth's crust. Because it was more water than came from the fountains of the deep, this was the second expansion which caused the continents to tear apart.

So how it got there is answered because the continents were one at one time. And the reason there are not many skulls is because how many people were actually on the earth back then?

#18 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 16 March 2009 - 04:34 AM

How do you know that skull is from before the Flood?

View Post


Do you know of anyone alive today that has a skull like that?

#19 assist24

assist24

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Age: 40
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • United States

Posted 16 March 2009 - 09:09 AM

Do you know of anyone alive today that has a skull like that?

Yes, almost. Skull shaping by forced deformation of the soft skull bones while children was a known practice in many ancient cultures, most notably the Mayans. The example you posted is almost certainly one of the Mayan samples from Peru.

Posted Image
Figure 4. Ancient Maya ‘ upper class’ adult skull. Photograph: Colette M. Dowell
Courtesy: National Museum of Anthropology, Merida, Yucatan.


More info on Mayan body/skull shaping

The practice persisted until modern times in some African cultures. Here is a 1970 photo

Posted Image
Mangbetu woman with skull elongation, Medje village, Congo (Democratic Republic),

From the Smithsonian:

The photograph depicts old woman doing traditional hairstyle on Mbombio, Chief Mogendo's principal wife. "'Lipombo', the custom of skull elongation, which was a status symbol among the Mangbetu ruling classes at the beginning of the century and was later emulated by neighboring groups, evolved into a common ideal of beauty among the peoples of the northeastern Congo.According to schildkrout and Keim, the tradition survived until the middle of this century, when it was outlawed by the Belgian government. ." [Sieber R., Herreman F., 2000: Hair in African Art and Culture, Prestel]. During his trip to Congo (now Democratic Republic of Congo), Elisofon visited the Mangbetu people living in Medje village, southwest of Isiro. This photograph was taken when Eliot Elisofon was on assignment for National Geographic and traveled to Africa from March 17, 1970 to July 17, 1970.

source


So why do you think your example skull must be pre-Flood?

#20 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Administrator

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6607 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 16 March 2009 - 09:41 AM

Assist,

I think you're right. That skull looks artificially manipulated.

These eyebrow ridges are more what I understood as indicative of old age:

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users