Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2009 09:07 pm
I've mentioned this before...

http://able2know.org/topic/80017-1

Aside from every other sort of problem which evolution has with basic logic, mathematics, the basic laws of probability, palaeontology (the lack of intermediate fossils), failed experiments (fruit flies) and everything else, there is a double time problem for evolutionism. The laws of population genetics say evolution would require quadrillions of years to create our present biosphere if that was possible at all (it isn't) while, at the same time, overwhelming evidence is turning up that they only have a few thousands or tens of thousands to work with and that the 70,000,000 years which you've read about all your life which supposedly separate our own age from that of the great dinosaurs, are basically a fiction, based on a perceived need to provide Darwinists with the time which was thought necessary rather than on any sort of evidence which could withstand close examination.

In past ages this new body of evidence involving dinosaurs would have been smothered and kept under wraps by a scientific establishment committed to Darwinism and a media too ignorant of scientific realities to challenge them. In our present internet age, this is no longer possible.

Aside from soft tissue which shouldn't be there inside tyrannosaur bones, aside from accurate images of known dinosaur types in Amerind petroglyphs and such diverse places as column stones at the temples at Angkor Cambodia, aside from detailed studies of Amerind oral traditions by experts like the late Vine DeLoria, there is the question of two or three categories of carved stones found in central and south America.

Darwinists will claim that these stones are all frauds. They HAVE to claim that; these stones are instantly fatal to their garbage theory.

The arguments against the stones are weak to nonexistent and you can even sense this looking at Wikipedia's entry on the topic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_stones

One claim is that the stones can be faked:

Quote:

In 1977, during the BBC documentary Pathway to the Gods, Uschuya produced a "genuine" Ica stone with a dentist's drill and claimed to have produced the patina by baking the stone in cow dung.[citation needed]


There are other claims that faux Ica stones have been created with dremel tools. Problem is, the originals turned up before Dremel tools existed and in places where the natives didn't even have electricity much less Dremel tools or dentist drills.

The other claim you see is that individual Peruvian artisans have admitted to faking the stones and even diehard skeptics now recognize the problem with that one. The artisans HAVE to say that; otherwise they'd be put in prison for selling off natural cultural treasures. One typical skeptic website offers the following lame explanation:

http://www.skeptics.ca/articles/bailey-icastones.html

Quote:

After a BBC report on the “artifacts”, the Peruvian government was under some understandable pressure to ascertain whether genuine antiquities were being hawked as souvenirs. An investigation was launched. The farmer, afraid of the severe penalties for such an offence, confessed to carving them himself, but as there were about 15,000 of them in existence by then it seems unlikely that he produced them all. There must have been a cottage industry at work in the area, with whole families feverishly scratching Andesite in between watering the yams and feeding the llamas.


But that pretty much gets to the main problem these stones present to the Darwinists. They are made of andesite, which is fairly hard and difficult to carve, and the original batches which ever turned up numbered in the thousands:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_stones

Quote:

The Ica stones were popularized by Javier Cabrera, a Peruvian doctor who received an engraved stone as a birthday gift in 1961. Cabrera identified the engraving on the stone as a stylized depiction of an "extinct fish" that lived millions of years before. Carlos and Pablo Soldi, two collectors of artifacts who had failed to interest the archaeological community with their findings, found an interested party in Cabrera, to whom they sold 341 similar stones. Cabrera soon found another supplier, a peasant named Basilio Uschuya, and from these and other sources, Cabrera collected over 15,000 engraved stones over the next thirty-five years.


Likewise a Fortean site notes that:

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/259/jurassic_library_the_ica_stones.html

Quote:

Dr Cabrera " who had a long-standing interest in the prehistory of the region " examined the design on the stone and identified it as a species of fish that had become extinct millions of years ago. News of his excitement reached the ears of Carlos and Pablo Soldi, brothers and well-known collectors of pre-Inca artifacts. They showed Cabrera thousands of similarly-marked stones found in the nearby Ocucaje region and told him that they had repeatedly failed to interest archæologists in investigating the area. Cabrera bought 341 stones from them for the equivalent of UK£30.


If you want to believe these things are all fakes, and Darwinists want to believe that BAD... then there are two possible scenarios here involving the question of producing such items on pure speculation. One of those two scenarios is halfway believable, and the other is not:

Quote:
"Hey, Pancho, I hear them honkey gringos will pay for unusual archaelogical art-deco pieces; lets make up one or two of em and see if we can get some scientist to buy em and maybe sell em to the gringos and then, if we can, we can get some of the village women to make a couple dozen of em!!"


Quote:
"Hey Pancho, I hear them honkey gringos will pay for unusual archaelogical art-deco pieces; lets pay the villagers to make up about 20,000 of em, and then see if anybody will buy em!!!"


Nobody should need to be Albert Einstein to comprehend which scenario is believable. The basic reality is that nobody is going to go to the trouble to carve hundreds and thousands of intricate scenes on hard stone on pure speculation.

If all of that isn't bad enough, they also have to explain how anybody hoped to make money in such a fashion selling such stones to the conquistadors in 1562:

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:9GidPVmKnzkJ:www.dinosaursandman.com/research/Fortean_Times_Rebuttal.pdf+ica+stones+spaniards&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Quote:

The first mention of the stones is from a Spanish priest journeying to the region of Ica in 1535.2 Father Simon, a Jesuit missionary, accompanied Pizarro along the Peruvian coast and recorded his amazement upon viewing the stones. In 1562, Spanish explorers sent some of the stones back to Spain. The Indian chronicler, Juan de Santa Cruz Pachacuti Llamqui, wrote at the time of the Inca Pachacutec many carved stones were found in the kingdom of Chincha in Chimchayunga which was called Manco.3 Chinchayunga was known as the low country of the central coast of Peru where Ica is located today


I won't even go into the myriad problems the Darwinists would have trying to claim that these things were faked for the benefit of the Spaniards and then the idea occurred to somebody else independently in 1962.

Again, Darwinists HAVE to try to claim these things are fakes; if real, they kill the theory of evolution stone dead.

http://members.cox.net/icastones/home.htm
http://members.cox.net/icastones/exerpt_index.htm
http://members.cox.net/icastones/02a-book-chapter-1.htm
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:9GidPVmKnzkJ:www.dinosaursandman.com/research/Fortean_Times_Rebuttal.pdf+ica+stones+spaniards&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a
http://www.xenophilia.com/zb0021.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/ica-stones
http://www.st-owners.com/forums/showthread.php?p=617452
http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/259/jurassic_library_the_ica_stones.html

http://www.tccsa.tc/images/ica_stone.jpg

http://z.about.com/d/paranormal/1/0/v/F/ica_stone_lg.jpg

http://members.cox.net/ancient-sites/inca/03Ica_stones_we_examined.JPG

http://www.bibleandscience.com/otherviews/images/ica2.jpg

http://cryptoarchaeology.com/ica2.jpg

http://www.omniology.com/IcaPeruBurialStones3.jpg

  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 6 • Views: 16,132 • Replies: 119
No top replies

 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2009 10:24 pm
I remember seeing a film debunking Erich von Däniken's book The Chariots of the Gods?, where Däniken claimed he had acquired artifacts showing advanced medical procedures like open heart surgery, and organ transplants. It turned out that the artifacts that he had acquired, stones from Ica carved with illustrations, he had acquired from Dr. Javier Cabrera who had purchased thousands of these stones from a Peruvian farmer, Basilo Uschuya, who had carved the stones using a dentist's drill, and baked them in cow manure.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2009 10:25 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
Aside from every other sort of problem which evolution has with basic logic, mathematics, the basic laws of probability...

aside from the obvious problem gunga has with basic reasoning and judgement...
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2009 10:30 pm
What about it, Farmerman? You up to turning out 341 of these art-deco stones for UK£30 ( about forty four dollars and seventy six cents ) this week?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2009 10:33 pm
@InfraBlue,
That's doing a really good job of getting stories mixed up.

Again the real version of the story:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_stones

Quote:

In 1977, during the BBC documentary Pathway to the Gods, Uschuya produced a "genuine" Ica stone with a dentist's drill and claimed to have produced the patina by baking the stone in cow dung.[citation needed]


One fake stone, not thousands of them.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2009 10:50 pm
http://yecheadquarters.org/images/evolution/hovind%20trip%20pictures%20014.jpg

http://www.crystalinks.com/icadinoeatman.jpg
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 01:32 am
Geez, this is from your own source:

The stones depict a wide variety of scenes: dinosaurs attacking or helping humans, advanced technology, advanced medical operations, maps, and sexual depictions.

. . .

In 1996, another BBC documentary was released with a skeptical analysis of the stones and the newfound attention to the phenomenon prompted the authorities of Peru to arrest Basilio Uschuya, as under Peruvian law it is illegal to sell archaeological discoveries. Uschuya recanted his claim that he had found them and instead admitted that they were hoaxes created by him and his wife. He was not punished, and continued to sell similar stones to tourists as trinkets.

These are some of the stones that Cabrera tried to pass off as artifacts of advanced medical procedures:
Caesarean operation
http://members.cox.net/icastones/figure_36.JPG
Heart transplant
http://members.cox.net/icastones/figure_40.JPG
brain surgery
http://members.cox.net/icastones/figure_42-A.JPG
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 05:41 am
@gungasnake,
MEntioning it before doesnt increase the chances of its accuracy.Steve Meyers has put together a small critique of the ICA stones.http://www.bibleandscience.com/otherviews/swift.htm
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 06:18 am
@gungasnake,
Your "much speaking" doesnt dampen anything about the accuracy of the science behind evolution.

IN A STATEMENT OF FALSIFIABILITY, I will agree that the Ica stones (IF REAL) would be a huge problem for science. Evolution states that we should not have megafaunal mammals and hominids coexisting with dinosaurs because the evidence of geology heavily is based upon the FACTUAL EVIDENCE of superposition and the concept of descent with modification as proposed by DArwin. SO FAR no piece of evidence in the geological record has refuted evolution.

1..System/series/ and stage sequences of sedimenatry and igneous rocks exist worldwide and it is so accurate that we have a Stable INternational Sequence of Geologic Time based upon several coalescing lines of evidence.

2. Fossil Intermdiates that span the evolution between major taxa (familes /orders etc) despite gungas screeching, exist from all over the world (birdlike reptiles and reptile like birds--mammal like lizards - fishlike amphibians and amphibian like reptiles/ land living whale like mammals and several intermediates of evolving whales, Homo like hominids, seed bearing gymnosperms and primitive flowered angiosperms. For gungas sake, Id like to suggest that he get some competent medical help to clear up that "blind spot" he appears to be suffering from

3 Egentic data , since the genome project began, has shown the clear relationships among major animal groups, clearly allowing accurate descent from early to recent forms.

These re only 3 of the most important issues that , to be falsified by the ICA stones, would have to be overcome.

The ICA stones are stream rounded chunks of Andesite (Andesite is the most common effusive rock in the Andes Cordillera, hence its name , so proposed in 1826) Andesite is a dark rock composed of quartz , sodic plagioclase (A feldspar) and a dark mineral like pyroxene. SO to use it as a ground state for arts n crafts isnt uncommon. The walls at Machu Pichu are diorite (the intrusive form of Andesite) so its not impossible to work with stone or early metal tools.
WE have an admitted forger of these stonesand several of them have been identified by forensic toolmark specialists. They seem to support that these stones were modern. Also the clay figurines found along side the stones were examined by several labs and also found to have been made as recently as 20 years prior to their discovery.

Im willing to concede that we should find the true age of these stom=nes because it would be a hard thing to explain in light of evolutionary theory. ALso, if they are found to be fakes,it would be yet one more sword in the heart of "Creation SCience", because it refutes the assertion that humans lived with dinosaurs and that the earth is very young.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 06:28 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
Aside from every other sort of problem which evolution has with basic logic, mathematics, the basic laws of probability, palaeontology (the lack of intermediate fossils), failed experiments (fruit flies) and everything else, there is a double time problem for evolutionism. The laws of population genetics say evolution would require quadrillions of years to create our present biosphere if that was possible at all (it isn't) while, at the same time, overwhelming evidence is turning up that they only have a few thousands or tens of thousands to work with and that the 70,000,000 years which you've read about all your life which supposedly separate our own age from that of the great dinosaurs, are basically a fiction, based on a perceived need to provide Darwinists with the time which was thought necessary rather than on any sort of evidence which could withstand close examination.


PS, this is all unsupported Creationist crap that is seasonally brought up by gunga (We are in his "wintertime pledge period"). He has his head not in sciencebooks so I cannot comment how gullible he is to actually collect and believe the evidence free assertions contained herein. Gunga quickly accepts anything that is anti evolution but he fails to EVER provide evidence similar to that presented by science. He expects people to just buy his debunked web sites unchallenged. He , therefore , expects that people are as foolish as he.

Gunga was to provide solid evidence of the ICA stones, he has, instead, provided us with even more conjecture since several of his own sources recognize that a large bunch of these ICA stones are fake and have been forensically debunked. WHich ones arent fake?, thats the issue.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 06:43 am
To see this horseshit labelled in the tags as history or archaeology brings shame on the entire site. This crap constitutes and extra-ordinary claim. People who advance extra-ordinary claims have the burden of proof. None of this is proven. No one has ever revealed the site at which these stones were alleged to have been found, and therefore, they cannot be dated. Two people were prosecuted by the Peruvian government for selling antiquities, at which point they admitted that they had made the stone etchings themselves.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 06:47 am
Like I say, there is one gigantic problem which nobody amongst the skeptics wants to talk about:

Why would anybody create many thousands of these things before they could be sure that anybody would buy the first one of them?

There are other problems as well, one being that the entire idea of dinosaurs was unknown at the time of the Spanish conquest of central and south America. How did simple peasants manage to totally reconstruct numerous dinosaur types in 1650?? Did those peasant villages each have its own palaeontology department?
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 07:16 am
There is no evidence that thousands of these stones exist, apart from what has been sold to the suckers . . . i mean tourists . . . who fall for this ****. As no one has provided a site which can be examined, there is no reason to believe that any of these stones existed in 1650. As usual, Gunga's bullshit begs every question it raises.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 10:28 am
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

Like I say, there is one gigantic problem which nobody amongst the skeptics wants to talk about:

Why would anybody create many thousands of these things before they could be sure that anybody would buy the first one of them?

The only question then is, are there more ICA stones in existence than there are invalid assumptions by Gunga. It seems to be thousands versus thousands.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 10:29 am
That's a helluva conundrum, Boss.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 10:45 am
I know... Why don't I have "farmerman" on ignore along with Setanta and the three or four others who add nothing but noise to the signal/noise contest here? Basic answer, Farmerman is grandfathered in, no double entendre intended... In other words, I'm not really into arguing with people under 20.

rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 11:00 am
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
In other words, I'm not really into arguing with people under 20.

Bow hunter shoots.... misses by miles.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 11:01 am
Now there's an0ther sterling example of the sort of idiotic assumptions Gunga Dim makes. I ceased to be 20 years of age while Richard Nixon was President.

The truth of the matter is, Gunga Dim has me, Roswell, Parados, Cyclo and a few others on ignore because he can't deal with the criticism.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 11:29 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
The truth of the matter is, Gunga Dim has me, Roswell, Parados, Cyclo and a few others on ignore because he can't deal with the criticism.

It's odd that he doesn't put everyone on ignore and just spew his stuff. He must crave some level of attention. Our challenges are not that different from FM's except that our terminology is laced with fewer technical terms (though the core of the response is the same: Gunga has confused his ass with his elbow ) Wink
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 12:25 pm
Quote:

User ignored [view]

User ignored [view]

User ignored [view]


Seems to work fairly well...
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Ica Stones
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/15/2018 at 09:34:20