9,000 year-old settlement found in Israel

Len

Well-Known Member
9,000 year-old settlement found in Israel

Thousands of pieces of tools, jewellery, figurines, seeds and other objects have been found at the site of a huge 9,000-year-old settlement from the Neolithic period uncovered in Israel. Archaeologists believe that the site, located near Motza Junction, 5km (3 miles) west of Jerusalem, was once a city housing as many as 3,000 residents. Excavators found the remains of large buildings, with rooms that were once used for living, as well as public facilities, places of ritual and alleyways.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49002046
Linked page has a number of interesting photos to look at

Israel's Antiquities Authority says the discoveries have changed historians understanding of the Neolithic period in the region, having previously believed that the Judea area was uninhabited during that era.
 

athenasius

Well-Known Member
What a shock. Apart from the dating methods which have some problems, it lines up with the Bible. Those so called Stone Age (neolithics) people weren't sitting around their campfires whacking rocks to make flint spears. They also had the time and inclination to build cities.
 

TrustinHim

Well-Known Member
What a shock. Apart from the dating methods which have some problems, it lines up with the Bible. Those so called Stone Age (neolithics) people weren't sitting around their campfires whacking rocks to make flint spears. They also had the time and inclination to build cities.
A few problems with the dating of the site, ie; older than the biblical age of the world and would not be so intact unless it was post flood. I think the post flood civilization starting from scratch had to make do with stone tools, arrow heads and such for a generation or more. Just me speculating.
 

athenasius

Well-Known Member
The various Creation Science groups from Ken Ham to William Henry Morris's group have various scientists who speak to the dating problems. Carbon dating, the method most archeologists use is full of problems. There have been things that were made a year earlier, testing out at thousands of years old. Carbon dating and the other dating methods have flaws that are well documented.

And this town site is likely post flood for the reason Trust in Him mentioned. It is well preserved, without the evidence of being underwater and having water erode it. The Great Pyramid is supposed to have evidence of water damage, being submerged for a period of time but I'm not sure if that is so, I'm just remembering something I heard, and I might be wrong.

About stone tools -- like flint arrowheads and spear tips ---these were very necessary in that post flood rebuilding of civilization. If people were not able to create bronze or iron or they had lost the knowledge, they would HAVE to use stone, but the typical textbooks show Neolithic tribes as not capable of building a town with streets when in fact they were. This didn't mean that some preferred a nomadic life in tents, hunting game because obviously many tribes of people have done so from the start, right down to the native North American Indian tribes on the Great Plains.

I just object to the National Geographic style of pictures showing Neolithics as too primitive to want to live in towns or too unorganized to be able to farm. Native Indians on the Great Plains were a highly sophisticated set of tribes, that preferred a nomadic hunting lifestyle by choice, not because they hadn't "evolved" which is the usual explanation given by school books and National Geographic.

So you can have flint tools, alongside organized townsites. Just depends on the needs and the abilities. I've often thought that the Bronze Age maps, showing metallurgy starting around the Middle East matches up with Noah's descendants. Looking at the Tower of Babel, and at that point, the knowledge of metallurgy might have only remained in one or two languages as God divided the languages. If metal working was a skill known by only a few, those few would only be able to teach others if they shared the language.

Creationists look to the Bible and see evidence all around. Where the evidence seems to contradict the Bible, there are flaws like the dating system.
 

Endangered

Well-Known Member
After the Mt St Helens eruption died down some scientists collected lava rocks for study. The scientific agreement is that the melting down of these rocks and reforming into lava rocks should have reset their age clock to zero years old. So several of these newly formed rocks were sent to a lab for dating and SURPRISE.
The dates with were all over the place with the newest a few years old and the oldest at 50,000 years old.
The difference between the oldest and newest was a factor of 25,000 times different.
In another case different mastodon bones from the same skeleton were dated. The results were from 4000 years old to 34,000 years old. Same skeleton, different bones, widely different ages.
It is common practise now to send several samples out for dating. Then the date that best fits what the archeologists believe to be accurate is used. The conflicting dates are NOT reported.
I dont accept "scientific" dating any more.
 

Amity

Well-Known Member
After the Mt St Helens eruption died down some scientists collected lava rocks for study. The scientific agreement is that the melting down of these rocks and reforming into lava rocks should have reset their age clock to zero years old. So several of these newly formed rocks were sent to a lab for dating and SURPRISE.
The dates with were all over the place with the newest a few years old and the oldest at 50,000 years old.
The difference between the oldest and newest was a factor of 25,000 times different.
In another case different mastodon bones from the same skeleton were dated. The results were from 4000 years old to 34,000 years old. Same skeleton, different bones, widely different ages.
It is common practise now to send several samples out for dating. Then the date that best fits what the archeologists believe to be accurate is used. The conflicting dates are NOT reported.
I dont accept "scientific" dating any more.
Exactly. But the public never hears about this.
 

Endangered

Well-Known Member
One dating method involves circular reasoning. The artifact is dated by the depth of the strata in which it is found. Then the next artifact is dated in the lab and the depth of the strata is assumed to be the same as the artifact. If you think about this carefully you will see the flaws in this reasoning.
The artifact is dated based on the strata. Then the strata is dated based on the artifact.
Circular reasoning does not produce ANY reliable results. And "scientists" use it anyway they just dont tell you everything. Only the things that support their opinion.
 
Last edited:

JSTyler

Well-Known Member
I dont accept "scientific" dating any more.
:thumbup

And just being ornery; neither do I accept scientific dating. Calendars are scientific, I read them, they say I'm gett'n old or maybe I am old. My fee-fees say I'm younger than I look and the science of dating based on lunar cycles, thus I'm young. SEE! Science...phffftttt!

Seriously. I don't trust the large majority of what goes as science these days. Just like government, media and academics, they've been co-opted and are controlled by the plutocrat-luciferians.
 
Top