Science Forums 2

[HydrogenBond]

The way you resolve humans being created 10,000 years ago is to define what they, the ancients, meant by human. We or science assumes they meant the superficial looking humanoid based on modern definitions of anatomy that were not around at the time the bible claim was made. We are comparing apples to oranges.

The ancient thought in terms of soul and spirit and not anatomy, which can be translated to mean heart and mind of a human. The formation of civilization is about the time of the bible claim, when there was a major change in humanity into diverse cultural activities, such as math, science, religion, commerce, architecture, art, etc. This actually corresponds fairly well with the bible date. This required a boost to the human mind away from the pre-humans who only looked human. The latter were called beasts of the field and not considered fully human. There were anatomically correct but their minds or spirits were pre-human.

Here is how off base science is in terms of normalized definitions. The "Gay Nineties" of 1890's was not the time time homosexuals came out of the closet in large numbers. I am using the modern definition of gay and working under the assumption people of 1890's knew this modern definition. Based on the erroneous claim of 1890's the people of that time knew nothing about sex orientations. That is the debate in a nutshell. The problem is no normalized definition and no attempt by science to take the date and see is humans under went a major behavioral change.