Re: Vedic Indo-Aryans North of the Black Sea ~2000 BC!

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
> 
> Day Brown wrote:
> >
> > it is unfortunate that those who disagree cannot be adult and must
> > denigrate those who do not conform. It is also unfortunate that we have
> > the controversy over dating systems which only obfuscate the matter. but
> > the fact is, that it hardly matters whether the crisis occurred in 5600
> > BCE or any time 500 or even a thousand years later. But if the best
> 
> The hydrogeologists agree it was much _earlier_.
I didnt see that agreement in the websites which I saw last year when
some
of these questions arose. Nor, do I see where the National Geo has quit
giving attention to people who are diving in the Black Sea. If *they*
thought
that the flood was preceramic, they would not be interested in people,
who
they report on, on their own website, that are looking for ceramics. 

I dont see the evidence of *agreement* that you cite.
> 
> > guestimate is 5150 (corrected c-14 by dendochronology) then:
> > http://www.sumerian.org/map.htm
> > might prove interesting. we see here the chalcolithic era sites, the
> > Kermanshah, all six of them, which seem to predate the stipulated great
> > flood. And, we see the sites which were founded just after, 24 Samarra
> > and 7 early Ubiad. Looks like some kind of cultural revolution took
> > place. Noah's Flood reports that George Smith, the first to find early
> > cunieform,
> 
> And where did you get that weird description of George Smith?
I dont think it matters. You dont like his data anyway, as below.
> 
> > calculated that the original kingdoms were established in
> > 5150 BCE. consisten with the above map. and with the best guestimated
> > date of the flood.
> 
> That date is about 2,500 years too early.
Since we all know that the Semites and those who have followed a 
Levantine scriptural tradition have lots of different theories on what
happened when, do you, perhaps, have a Chinese or Japanese archaeologist
who has looked at the data from a less biased perspective?

> > And indeed, if there was a great flood, the peoples who lived on the
> > Anatolian coast would be driven upland, and some would go over the
> > Taurus mountains and end up where we see these settlements abruptly
> > appear.
> 
> Except they don't "abruptly" appear.
I posted the link above. Argue with the Iranians if you think they are 
wrong about their own history. I can only go by what I see. Despite
being
Islamic, Iranians are not creationists, and dont seem to have an axe to
grind in dating the tels they have found. the dates of the tels are 
consistent with Smith's dating.

Nevertheless, I find it curious that nobody involved in any of this
has posted a sonar map of the bottom of the Black sea, and indicated at
which points beach sand was found. If, as has been suggested, there were
several different floods and several different levels, then there'd be
several different bands of beach. I only know of the one cited by Ryan.

However, I dont really expect them to find timber frame structures. If
the flood happned over two years, then people would have seen what it
would do, and torn down the houses to make rafts and canoes. Woodwork, 
in the stone age, was way to valuable to leave behind.


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---