Those Sophisticated Cave Men....Page 1

These Pages Print Best In Landscape Mode

Ever notice how hard it is to find a real nice cave man picture these days? Take it from me--it's not as easy as it used to be. Those classic artist renderings from a single tooth, from small bone fragments or from skull pieces -and on occasion, entire skulls permitted artists to let their imaginations run wild and silmultaneously to support the idea that our ancestors were primitive.

Click and drag photo to resize.

This of course supported evolutionary theory and caused many who believed in the Biblical view of creation to perplexedly wonder where cave men fit in.

As time goes by, the truth of what our ancestors actually looked like became more and more evident--like us, pretty much. That's why it's becoming more difficult to find those old cave man characterizations, even most "knowledgeable" evolutionists have to admit that "Cro-Magnon" and "Neanderthal man" are fully human. (Photo:top left; recent computer and/or forensic recreations of "Neanderthal", right and "Cro-Magnon", left who is scowling, of course. Far right: Cro-Magnon steps out.)

So while, in the past evolutionists have been drawing them as ape-like and brutish to drive home the notion that we have "evolved"--we now both (Christians & evolutionists) know that they look like what a Christian or Bible believer would expect--us. Not only that, when " "they" drew themselves from life, (15,000 years ago according to evolutionary time) they tended to look more like this (Photo: Below, left "caveman" self portrait) (more on these self portraits on page 2).

Obviously, this kind of look is more like what Christians might have expected. When's the last time you saw a representation of our supposed evolutionary ancestors with a Supercuts like trim and hat at a jaunty angle?

In Genesis, Adam and Eve are created without dragging knuckles--they raise children and carry on conversations just like "normal" people. They tilled the soil. They spoke to God. Evolutionists, however are tied to the idea of very primitive beginnings--where for long periods, our ancestors were not even fully men.

We've even come to accept the idea that larger brows or thicker bodies necessarily suggests less sophistication--less advancement. I laughed when I read this morning that this particular evolutionist had to admit that "Neanderthal" looked a lot like us but--probably was short and had sloping shoulders.

(See Also the cosmetic surgery performed on Neanderthal,in Buried Alive, by Jack Cuozzo--See page 8 of this section)That's still supposed to suggest that he was less advanced than modern man--but when you really think about it, --even if it were true about the shortness and sloping shoulders--all that would really mean is that there was little chance he could make it as a runway model.

Shortness and sloping shoulders--even a prominent brow have nothing whatsoever to do with intelligence, survival or level of "advancement".

You yourself may be short, have sloping shoulders and/or a prominent forehead. Even so, the evidence is that our ancestors were smarter, faster, and larger--had better eyesight, better technology than we suppose and were as "handsome" as we are.

And by the way, a cave man is simply a man (or woman) who lives in a cave! If they stooped, it was because the roof was low. Why were they in there in the first place? Perhaps war, pestilence, Flood, tower of Babel or other hardships forced men into caves for protection in certain locales and from time to time.

One of the items we discuss here below is suppressed information (over 100 stone tablets) that "cave men" had an early written language--much, much earlier than science admits.

See also: Scientists: Neanderthal More Like "Modern Man" Than Previously Thought

Artifacts of Ancient Man

ANCIENT HUMAN CULTURES APPEAR IN SOPHISTICATED FORM

"...A more exact profile on ancient man can be derived from examination of actual artifacts which reveal his extensive sophistication. Rene Noorbergen writes that "for the past thirty years there has been a steadily increasing number of historical and archaeological discoveries made at various sites around the world, which, because of their mysterious and highly controversial nature, have been classified as 'out-of-place' artifacts.

....The reason for this designation is that they are found in geological strata where they shouldn't be, and their sudden appearance in these layers of ancient dirt has baffled the minds of many a trained scientific observer.

They emerge from among the remains of the treasured past sans evidence of any preceding period of culture or technological growth. In many cases, the technical sophistication of the (out-of-place artifacts) extends far beyond the inventive capabilities of the ancient peoples among whose remains they were discovered.''

Site Medzamor in Soviet Armenia is of intriguing interest. An international scientific report published in 1969 expressed the belief that these finds point to an unknown period of technological development.

"Medzamor was founded by the wise men of earlier civilizations. They possessed knowledge they had acquired during a remote age unknown to us that deserves to be called scientific and industrial.'

The preceding year Koriun Megurtchian of the Soviet Union unearthed the oldest large-scale metallurgical factory currently known. At this site over 4,500 years ago an unknown prehistoric people worked with over 200 furnaces, producing an assortment of vases, knives, spearheads, rings, bracelets, etc.

The Medzamor craftsmen wore mouth-filters and gloves while they labored and expertly fashioned their wares of copper, lead, zinc, iron, gold, tin, manganese, and fourteen kinds of bronze.

The smelters also produced an assortment of metallic paints, ceramics and glass. Scientific organizations from the Soviet Union, the United States, Britain, France and Germany verified that several pairs of tweezers made of exceptionally high grade steel were taken from layers predating the first millennium B.C.

In Scientific American (June 1951, Vol. 7, p. 298) a report was given concerning a metallic vase that had been dynamited out of solid rock on Meeting Horse Hill in Dorchester, Massachusetts. The report read, "On putting the two parts together it formed a bell-shaped vessel, 4 1/2 inches high, 6 l/2 inches at the base, 2 1/2 inches at the top and about an eighth of an inch in thickness.

The body of the vessel resembles zinc in color, or a composition metal in which there is a considerable portion of silver. On the sides there are six figures of a flower, a bouquet, beautifully inlaid with pure silver, and around the lower part of the vessel, a vine, or wreath, inlaid also with silver.

The chasing, carving and inlaying are exquisitely done by the art of some cunning craftsman. This curious and unknown vessel was blown out of the solid pudding stone, fifteen feet below the surface."

The scientific journals Nature (London,1886) and L'Astronomie (Paris,1887) published confirmation that in 1886, in the foundry of the Austrian Isador Braun of Vocklabruck, a block of coal dating from the Tertiary period was broken open.

A small metal cube was discovered inside. Tests indicated that the cube was composed of a steel-nickel alloy. It measured 2.64 by 2.64 by 1.85 inches, weighed 1.73 pounds, and had a specific gravity of 7.75.

The edges of this ancient cube were perfectly straight and sharp; four of its sides were flat, while the two remaining opposite sides were convex. A deep groove had been cut all the way around the cube. It appeared that the cube had been machine made and was part of a larger mechanism.

It was perhaps with uncanny insight that historian Will Durant wrote, "Immense volumes have been written to expound our knowledge, and conceal our ignorance, of primitive man...primitive cultures were not necessarily the ancestors of our own; for all we know they may be the degenerate remnants of higher cultures..."

Prehistorian Robert Silverberg describes the sophistication of Paleolithic art in terms which equate with the thesis of this dissertation: "The cave paintings are upsetting to those who prefer to think of Quaternary man as little more than an ape.

Not only do they indicate great craftsmanship, but they point to a whole constellation of conclusions: That primitive man had an organized society with continuity and shape, religion and art.

It was so dismaying to learn that the earliest inhabitants of Western Europe...had scaled heights of artistic achievement that would not be reached again until late in the Christian era. That exploded the theory [that] man's rise from barbarism had been steady and always upward.'' From the facts at hand there is warrant for the concept that barbarism occurred after the great heights of achievement were manifest.

The great archaeologist, William F. Albright, in From The Stone Age To Christianity, gave his expert impressions about Paleolithic art: "...though the number of motifs, techniques and media available to him now is, of course, immeasurably greater, it is very doubtful whether man's artistic capabilities are actually any higher today than they were in late prehistoric times."

Research has supported the concept that Stone Age man lived in well-constructed houses. The Magdalenian paintings have been admired for their originality and profusion. Yet, in these Lascaux Caverns one can still see the holes in the rock that supported wooden crossbeams.

These crossbeams held scaffolding that enabled Cro-Magnon artists to execute their works on the cave ceilings ten to twelve feet above the cavern floor, much like Michelangelo constructed many millennia later.

Rene Noorbergen sheds revealing light on this subject of Stone Age sophistication:

What are perhaps the most disturbing prehistoric construction and civilization finds were uncovered in 1965 by archaeologist Dragoslav Srejovic at a site now called Starveco, on the Danube River, on the Yugoslavian and Rumanian border.

Digging into the Yugoslavian bank, Srejovic first encountered traces of a Roman road; beneath this were fragments of proto-Greek pottery, and below these were Neolithic remnants and traces of Mesolithic cultural artifacts.

Deeper still, Srejovic came upon something totally out of place: the remains of a cement floor. More specifically, the material was an amalgam of local limestone, sand and water, considered a feat of chemistry and construction several millennia ahead of its time. The cement surfaces were not placed haphazardly, but were carefully laid out in large slabs to form the foundations of houses.

Several foundations were built one on top of another, indicating that buildings had been constructed and reconstructed over an indeterminate period. Yet there was also remarkable uniformity. (Photo:some of the Starveco foundations) The layout of the houses in the later periods was the same as that in the earlier periods - there was no evidence of a gradual development from a simple to a complex pattern.

Rather, the Starveco village suddenly appeared, fully mature, flourished, then decayed and was abandoned in the same advanced state. In addition to the foundations, the individual Starveco buildings also showed a high order of architectural sophistication. They all had one side larger in size than the other three, with proportions of either 3:1 or 4:1. The larger side was shaped like a 60-degree segment of a circle.

This larger side always faced toward the river, providing the occupants with the maximum view of the Danube and the surrounding hilly country. Inside each house, the shape of the dwelling was repeated in the hearth or oven, which was bounded by carefully shaped stone slabs and always located in the eastern or sunny end of the house.

Srejovic noted that the position of the hearth was significant, as it was situated in the exact center of an equilateral triangle if the lines of the house were extended....The implications of the mathematical and geometrical knowledge cannot be ignored.

The same precision and order evident in the architecture is also found in the arrangement of the dwellings at the Starveco site. The structures were laid out in what appears to have been a planned fan shape, opening toward the riverbank.

The larger buildings, presumably those belonging to members of a higher class or governing body, were located toward the center, surrounding a paved plaza...

The Starveco site has yielded a number of other cultural characteristics previously thought to have been developed thousands of years later, in the Middle East. Behind the hearth in each house, laborers unearthed the remains of altars, indicating religious beliefs and practices.

Each altar was composed of a flat stone, with a cup impression for burning a sacriffce, which faced two or more upright stones of reddish sandstone. This sandstone has been excavated from an outcrop, located in a ravine several miles away, and many of the stones had carved wavy lines or chevrons in low relief, considered the oldest examples of architectural decoration. Even more significant was the discovery of twenty sculpted life-size human faces of stone....

An interesting aspect of the site was the evidence of very good health among the Starveco population. There was a striking absence of deformed or diseased bones, and the women were so robustly built that it was difficult to tell their skeletal remains from those of the men.'

In spite of his absence from Western culture and history "Stone Age" man is seen to equal or, in some cases, to surpass our own modern accomplishments."...

Source:Rene Noorbergen

Ancient Atomic Knowledge Part 5

Evidence of Ancient Atomic Knowledge?: Solution to Ancient Nuclear Power Plant Analogous to Materialist Solution for the Origin of Man;
Mysterious Process Begun Billions of Years Ago. (Evolution)....Page 5

Oklo Mine at Gabon.
Click and drag photo to resize.

"Thirteen nuclear reactors existed in "prehistoric" periods along the 200-metre mine bed at Oklo --it was discovered in 1972, and they were comparable to the modern nuclear reactor in power and heat combustion. This mine had the capability of enabling self-sustained nuclear chain reactions". This discovery shocked the entire scientific community back in 1972…….

...Perrin and the other French scientists concluded that the only other uranium samples with similar levels of the isotopes found at Oklo could be found in the used nuclear fuel produced by modern reactors. They found that the percentages of many isotopes at Oklo strongly resembled those in the spent fuel generated by nuclear power plants..

Romans Chapter 1 speaks of the wise men of this world worshipping the created rather than the creator. Science is a big believer in the creative power of “nature” which is a creation of God rather than a creator. So when faced with the desperate need for an explanation for an ancient nuclear power generator, science renewed its faith in created things. It’s difficult to remember this now, but back when the natural explanation was first offered, not everyone was on board.

PRIOR ARTICLES ON THIS TOPIC Ancient Atomic Knowledge? Ancient Atomic Knowledge Part 2 Tut's Gem Hints at Space Impact  Does Oklo Falsify Young Earth Creationism?-A Conversation

Previously on this site we’ve looked at an apparently ancient nuclear power plant at Oklo in Gabon, in four articles. These nuclear reactors were estimated to have produced on the order 0f 1,000 megawatts, comparable to a large modern plant.

The radioactive byproducts of the reaction are still conserved in the area around the reactors leading some to call the reactor “well designed”. Natural uranium is made up primarily of uranium 238 (99%). In order to make this natural uranium fissionable, the 99% uranium 238 must be converted into uranium 235 (enrichment).

There are a variety of ways to do this, however as pointed out in the New York Times of June 21, 1976, all of them require advanced technology.

In 1972, a French analyst named Bougzigues working at the Pierrelatte nuclear fuel processing plant detected a small but significant change in an important ratio between Uranium 235 and Uranium 238. The proper ratio is well known and well established in that field so that the change indicated that something way out of the ordinary was going on.

Click and drag photo to resize.

The initial suspicion was that someone had included spent fuel in with the recently mined ore. This was quickly ruled out because there was no radiation signature associated with the mystery uranium.

The mystery uranium was eventually traced back to the Gabon mine at Oklo. You need to understand that what was so incredible to all was that a nuclear reaction had occurred such that plutonium was created and that the nuclear reaction itself had been “moderated”, what had been a long term atomic science "holy grail"!

The abilty to moderate the reaction means that once a reaction was initiated, one was able to harness the power output in a controlled manner, including having the ablity to keep it from exploding and releasing all the energy at once.

One thing we think is/was missing from our prior articles on this topic is the scientific panic this discovery caused back in 1972. Once a solution was conceived and settled upon, however, it immediately became the gospel although, again, there are few who remember the objections many scientists initially raised.

These two articles printed in the New York Times in 1972 and 1976, at the very least provide possible reasons to be skeptical of a naturalstic explanation for the phenomena and a way to recall initial scientific resistance.

From the start, the alternatives explanations weren’t very palatable. Aliens? Advanced ancient civilizations? Unknown Russian technology? Who in the world had the technology to build a breeder reactor (creates its own fuel) in the distant past?

One thing was certain, ancient high technology does not fit in with the theory of evolution and the whole- cave man to modern man chronology. Certainly aliens and secret Russian technology were preferable choices for science.

Richard Dawkins is famously quoted as saying that the theory of evolution permitted him to be an “intellectually fulfilled” Atheist. He had a framework for attaching his unbelief. Simlarly, the explanation that French scientists eventually arrived at also spoke of mysterious processes occurring millions or billions of years ago that don’t appear to be occurring today and—-its one that permits physicists and evolutionists alike to be intellectually fulfilled.

And, just like Darwin’s theory, the initial scientific skepticism has been replaced with religious adherence.

As a matter of fact, since the “solution” requires billions of years (and suspension of disbelief) materialists have tried to use the timeframe of over 2 billion years as proof that the earth is not young! So even though Christians may feel that they don’t care whether or not ancient man had nuclear technology the ramification of the materialists alternate theory is that earth is well over 2 billion years old and Oklo is a "proof". (Some creationists have countered by therizing that a natural reaction could have occurred in "recent" times based primarily on changing scientific "constants").

Materialists have also attacked intelligent design theories with Oklo by showing that what they now call a natural phenomenon has elements that indicate “intelligent design”, as described for instance in William Demski’s excellent book “The Design Inference”. What neither side of that argument considers is that the reactors may have in fact been designed!

Accepting the Most “Outrageous Idea” of All

From the 1976 New York Times article; “Under great secrecy, the investigators drew up and systematically explored a list of possible explanations. One was that the French standard of uranium percentage was wrong.

A group of scientists was sent to the National Bureau of Standards in the United States to make a comparison with the American Standard; it proved to be identical.

Another hypothesis was that nature, in some way, had been able to change the mix of uranium types, or isotopes without the high technology that physicists required. No one could think of a plausible process.

An Outrageous Idea

This left the possibility of theft (someone at the mine had stolen the uranium) or as Mr. Corbet put it “the most outrageous idea of all”—that nature itself depleted the uranium by producing a chain reaction similar to that finally achieved by physicists at the University of Chicago in 1942 after the most sophisticated calculations and preparations.”

Click and drag photo to resize.

Extrapolating backwards, the French scientists concluded that the ore would have been enriched enough 1.8 billion years ago to spontaneously produce a chain reaction. They further concluded that water had moderated the reaction much like modern reactors use graphite and cadmium rods to keep their reactors from going critical-and exploding.

What you talking ‘bout Willis?! Atomic Scientists Puzzled by Explanation

The 1972 article provides a glimmer of the resistance and implausibility of the natural reactor “explanation:.

“However, specialists in reactor engineering said yesterday that they were puzzled as to how this could have occurred in a deposit with only 3 per cent of fissionable uranium.

“Really Puzzling”

As Dr. Seaborg (head of the Atomic Energy Comm.) pointed out, in a reactor burning such fuel “you have to have things exactly right.” Water or some other “moderator” is needed to slow down the neutrons released as each atom is split so that they are not moving too fast for absorption by other atoms, to sustain the chain reaction.

Furthermore, the moderator and the fuel must be extremely pure. Even a few parts per million of contaminant, such as boron, will “poison” the reaction, bringing it to a halt.

How the necessary conditions could arise underground under natural circumstances, said Dr. Seaborg, is “really puzzling”".

Indeed!

"I haven't been able to think of any better explanation," admitted Seaborg, to Time Magazine in 1972.

"There are plenty of explanations I could give you," Caltech Geochemist Donald Burnett also told Time, "but none are less exotic."

Ancient Atomic Knowledge Part 4

Evidence of Ancient Atomic Knowledge?: Does Oklo Falsify Young Earth Creationism?....Page 4

Oklo Conversation

by Anthony C. James, 2006

William: “Ahhh. Look at what the wind blew in. How ya doin”?

Robert: “Must have been an ill wind, huh”?

William: “Nah, not at all. Good to see you! Pull up a chair. Everyone else has deserted me out here. How’s the wife?

Robert: Well, we're not married yet! We're still just at that ackward "stalking" stage. But I have to admit that it's going pretty well. Two months and still no restraining order!

William: Wow! Then it really is serious!

Robert: Someday I’m going to marry that girl and -I’ve got my eye on a coupla  kids I think she’s really going to like, too! Hey! What’re we having? Smoked turkey? I guess, you being a Christian and all will have to pass on it? I mean cannibalism is a sin, right”?

William: “That’s very droll, Rob. I suppose you’ll be very happy to hear for the exact same reasons that there will be two turkeys and no ham?, You know that when it gets hot out people around you always think they smell bacon”.

Robert: “Touche”!

William: “Not that I’m keeping track, but that’s actually “three  che”.

Robert: “Touche”!

William: “If you insist. Did you know Dad is coming by? That’s why I was surprised to see you here.”

Robert: “Yeah, he’s already here. That’s one of the reasons I’m out here in the cold with you. I wasn’t gearing up to have to see him until over at the house tomorrow”.

William: “You still haven’t forgiven him for turning his back on your religion, huh”?

Robert: “Atheism isn’t a religion and it’s not even about that”.

William: “Stop trying to convert me, then. You know Dad's coming to church with me these days”?

Robert: “Yeah. Uncle Mike must be turning over in his grave. I'm trying to smarten you up-not convert you, idiot.”

William: I don’t believe Uncle Mike is dead. As a matter of fact, he was upstairs stuffing his face when I came out here”. Besides, do Atheists believe in consciousness after death?

Robert: “Yeah, well he’s not looking too good and he’s still drinking like a fish. You know he breaks out in hives if he just drives by a church- or, of course, if his blood alcohol drops below .08. Actually, I think he blames his falling out of recovery on your  becoming a Christian.”

William: “I think he drinks because he needs to in order to continue to be an “intellectually fulfilled Atheist”. You do remember that time as kids when we saw him praying over Mom when she was sick in the hospital”?

Robert: “That was no hospital, that was Kaiser. And he swears that he was- throwing up a rum and diet coke. If he knew you were still doubting his story he’d be turning over in his grave right now. Plus, if he was praying, it didn't do much good, did it"?

Robert: After a few minutes of companionable silence:  “So, did you get my e-mail?  The one about Oklo”?

William: “Oh, man! I should have known why you made a beeline out here! I thought maybe you were out here just to hang out. Please tell me that you don’t want to get involved in yet another evolution/creation debate”?

Robert: “No, not so much a debate. A discussion”.

William” Let’s save some time, why don’t you just stalk off”?

Robert:”I’ve got the goods, this time! Well, I always had the goods but this information I think you’ll find is very compelling evidence for an “old universe” and an “old earth”. He pulled some folded pages from his back pocket.

William: “For crying out loud! You brought the e-mail with you to a family celebration just so we could argue about it? Look I’m not sure that this is a good time for this, I’m frying a turkey, here”.

Robert: “Yeah well I’m trying to fry a turkey, too, bro. Would you be so kind as to pass me the peanut oil and close your eyes”?

He began to read:  “In the early 1970s, French scientists noticed something odd about samples of uranium recovered from the Oklo mine in Gabon, West Africa. All atoms of a specific chemical element have the same chemical properties, but may differ in weight; these different weights of an element are known as isotopes. Some uranium samples from Gabon had an abnormally low amount of the isotope U-235, which can sustain a chain reaction. This isotope is rare in nature, but in some places, the uranium found at Oklo contained only half the amount of the isotope that should have been there.

Scientists from other countries were skeptical when first hearing of these natural nuclear reactors. Some argued that the missing amounts of U-235 had been displaced over time, not split in nuclear fission reactions. "How," they asked, "could fission reactions happen in nature, when such a high degree of engineering, physics, and acute, detailed attention went into building a nuclear reactor?"

Perrin and the other French scientists concluded that the only other uranium samples with similar levels of the isotopes found at Oklo could be found in the used nuclear fuel produced by modern reactors. They found that the percentages of many isotopes at Oklo strongly resembled those in the spent fuel generated by nuclear power plants, and, therefore, reasoned that a similar natural process had occurred.^”

^…. The uranium in the Earth contains dominantly two uranium isotopes, U-238 and U-235, but also a very small percentage of U-234, and perhaps small, undetectable amounts of others. All of these isotopes undergo radioactive decay, but they do so at different rates. In particular, U-235 decays about six-and-a-third times faster than U-238. Thus, over time the proportion of U-235 to U-238 decreases. But this change is slow because of the small rates of decay.

Generally, uranium isotope ratios are the same in all uranium ores contained in nature, whether found in meteorites or in moon rocks. Therefore, scientists believe that the original proportions of these isotopes were the same throughout the solar system. At present, U-238 comprises about 99.3 percent of the total, and U-235 comprises about 0.7 percent.⁵ 5 Any change in this ratio indicates some process other than simple radioactive decay.

Calculating back to 1.7 billion years ago—the age of the deposits in Gabon—scientists realized that the U-235 there comprised about three percent of the total uranium. This is high enough to permit nuclear fissions to occur, providing other conditions are right.”

William tried to speak. Robert held up his hand.

Robert: “Hold on! That was from. A G.Cowan, in Scientific American.  Just a few more quotes and then let me place them in a context, and I’ll let you have the floor”. He continued: “

“Ultimately, the mystery was unraveled, when it was discovered that in the pockets of depleted uranium ore a characteristic spectrum of byproducts of nuclear fission were also present and in the distinctive ratio that might be anticipated if a natural fission reactor had produced them.

The U-235 from Oklo had been depleted partly because it had become the fuel of the reactor. It had also dwindled through time, simply by its own radioactive decay.

By calculating how long ago the U-235 had been sufficiently concentrated to fuel a chain reaction, the scientists were able to date the time it was operating to 2 billion years ago, about the age of rocks in which the uranium ore was found”.

“Next”, he said is this quote from Don Lindsay: “Another evidence is the natural nuclear reactor at Oklo, in Gabon. This reactor was actually just an unusually rich body of radioactive ore. So rich, in fact, that when it was formed, it approached critical mass. Studies of the unusual elements found there indicate that reactors acted the same two billion years ago as they do now. If the fine structure constant had been different by as little as one part in a million, the Oklo measurements should have detected that”.

Robert continued: “The point of all this is the following. To me, it’s not bad enough that you’re a creationist, but you are a young earth creationist! If this information does not make a dent with you in terms of creationism, at the very least it should either convince you or create some severe doubts in your mind about a young earth! I say this because the Oklo natural reactors are real, the nuclear reactions did occur, and could only have done so approximately 2 billion years ago when the uranium would have been sufficiently enriched. “

“Finally”, he concluded, “the mutagenic radiation from such natural reactors some 2 billion years ago could have been a major driving force in evolution!

Robert waited a moment but William hadn’t made a response. “Go on”, he said.

William: “Oh, I can speak now? Thanks, but I’m not even sure where to start”.

Robert: “Yeah, this is a tough one for creationists. I know of one guy who was formerly a young earth creationist who has become a “theistic” evolutionist” and “oldearther”, just because he couldn’t come up with a “young earth” explanation for Oklo. Not only that, I sent you a newsgroup item where it showed that they pretty well savaged Dembski’s intelligent design filter because Oklo meets many of the criteria for intelligent design even though obviously, it was a natural phenomenon.”

William: “Yeah, no. I’d heard about Oklo years ago. Plus I did read all the stuff in your e-mail. It’s just that this will be our 1,000^th discussion on these sort of topics and history tells me that even after hours of discussion, neither one of us is going to change his beliefs one bit. I don’t feel like I’ve got that kind of time, plus it’s cold, plus I’ve got to focus on frying this turkey and plus that other bird is going to freeze if I don’t get it in the house”.

Robert:”Okay, we’ll save the full discussion for e-mail. Just give me some of your initial thoughts because frankly, I don’t think there is an adequate young earth response to the Oklo phenomenon.. Wait one minute, and I’ll run your turkey inside. Get your thoughts together in the meantime”.

William: “You’re offering to help? You?  Ahh! You’ve had too many beers yourself huh? You’ve got to go potty!”

Robert: “Like its 1999. Get your little fundamentalist thoughts together, and I’ll be right back”!

When Robert came back he handed a tumbler to William. William: What’s this?”

Robert: “Some hot chocolate. You’re welcome”.

William: :Thanks! Umm. Do Atheists wash their hands? Cuz, you know, though its not in the Bible, they do say; cleanliness is next to ...Godliness. Oh, and tell me this? I've always wondered; what do I say if you sneeze again?!

Robert:"You simply apologize for forgetting about my allergy to cheap cologne."

William:"And it was so thoughtful of you to have given it to me for my birthday-even if it was only three quarters full. So, okay, back to the discussion; let me start with this. This whole science thing. This thing where we Christians try to approach the origin of ourselves and the universe in a “scientific” way is for your benefit only. We find it limiting, but because you claim that you can only see the universe through a particular lense, we try to accommodate you. We try to speak the language you say you can understand, while a more perfect language is set aside. We’re speaking baby talk here.”

Robert: “Gratuitous insult.” You’re simply saying that you don’t need evidence.

William:”We do need evidence, I’m just not limited to what you call evidence. Imagine if someone says that they could only understand love if they can put it into some kind of scientific formula, or measure it out to prove it experimentally?  “Science “can tell us little about the appreciation of a sunset, about the soul of man or so many other things. For that matter, science can tell us very little about the mind itself.

The thing is, science can only begin after the universe and the creation already exist. Science can tell us nothing about what happens before that. In fact, let me say this; science begins after creation. The first law of physics, conservation of matter and energy says matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. This tells you that science does not know how matter came into existence. It should also tell you that if matter cannot be created under the laws of this universe, that something outside the 1^st law created matter and energy. The most important law of science itself points to a “special creation” outside of science .”

Robert:”You are going to talk about Oklo, right?

William: “Special Creation” however, is something that happens “pre-science”. The fact of the matter is, if you were inclined  to stick exclusively to science, the 1^st law would turn you away-it tells you not to look here in science because all we can tell you is that all this matter you see..? It can’t be created! If you want to know about creation, you have to look outside of science”.

Robert:”Oklo”?

William:”Okay. For all the years we’ve been talking about this, I’ve been consistent about what I believe, Seven "actual" days, special creation, ie God did it, He is the creator ex-nihlio (from nothing), a global worldwide flood, a young earth. Right.” Now, consistent with that, the laws of the universe are now set. But consistent with my beliefs, when Adam and Eve were created there was no death. By the way, I've been consistent but whether you realize it or not, you've been nothing but. Whatever you assert confidently about evolution, or the universe or the "big bang" is likely to be changed the next time we speak. You will then assert the new "take" as arrogantly as you did the prior "take".

I saw an article yesterday-- that I didn't read, but that says the big bang needs to be moved back another 2 billion more years. Me, I'm sticking with created in seven days not many thousands of years ago. You know what dude, I'll tell you the same thing tommorrow.

To be more specific about the 1st and 2nd laws of physics, my assumption is that in the beginning, the 1^st law was set, but not the second, which is entropy…..systems over time will lose energy and become less organized. I believe entropy came into existence after the fall. That is, death was introduced into this world; the spiritual death of man, the physical death of man and animal, and the beginnings of the physical death of the universe. At the beginning death was not part of the plan, nor was the winding down of the creation.

I’ll come back to this point.

Now, Oklo, okay? Materialists have available to them only one solution for the Oklo phenomenon; a naturalistic one. Nothing else fits uniformism and gradualism. On the other hand, Christians certainly can’t accept a naturalistic explanation, particularly if it is one that takes 1.8 billion years to occur. Neither Christians nor evolutionists apparently considered the idea of sophisticated civilizations prior to the flood of Noah in relation to Oklo. Well, evolutionists wouldn't but even Christians who believe in the flood tend to think of the pre-flooders as nomadic herdsmen with no technology.

For that reason, the very first thing that should have occurred to both groups about Oklo did not. Occam’s Razor (when there are multiple explanations- choose the simplest one) should have led to the conclusion-or at least the consideration that this was a “designed system” and not a natural one! 

Even though materialists were “freaked out” by the discovery and even though as you read  the scientific world initially resisted the idea of a natural breeder reactor they never for a minute considered the idea that “cave men” (because of their view of earlier man) could have built a breeder reactor! Oh, and by the way, something else you will have to adjust as you confidently assert evolutionary theories; Neanderthal DNA turns out to match "human" DNA to 99.99%" OOPS!

But I digress, consider; the Oklo reactor produced energy comparable to a modern nuclear reactor, was moderated by water so that the reaction could be controlled, and to this day still contains (holds in)the waste products from the reactor. It was a special type of reactor, a breeder reactor, which for years was a "holy grail" for nuclear scientists. It creates its own fuel! In short, this system was “well designed”, whether by "nature" or by man!. I submit to you that to believe it was built by aliens makes more sense to me than the idea that somehow "nature" built it and I don’t believe  aliens exist.

To say that you accept the idea that it was a natural phenomenon rather than a designed reactor proves that you probably don’t know how much technology went into building a working breeder reactor.

As for Dembski’s design filter; Dembski himself probably never considered that the reason his filter might “select” the Oklo reactor as a product of intentional design is that it is in fact a product of design! Duh!

Robert:”You can’t be serious”!?

William:“Look! I’m not saying that the reactors "Were" designed and built by man as a certainty. Whether or not it was or wasn’t does not impact me as a Christian. I’m saying that this should have been the very first thing considered or that it should have at the very least been on the list. I can send you a link later re some creation scientists who accept the idea that it is natural reactor but who show that it could still have happened in the context of a young earth, but  A mistake being made here is the idea that technology will always look the same—that advanced technology had to take the form that it did in this present age.

Let me ask you this; if you had to direct a team and the resources to build; the great pyramid with the technological level and tools we say were available to the supposed builders  thereof, the Egyptians (and whatever you may think, there is no firm evidence in any way that connects the pyramids of the Giza plateau to the dynastic Egyptians),   —or you had to direct the team and resources to place a man on the moon with the technology we had in the sixties , which challenge would be more difficult?

Do not be so quick to choose landing a man on the moon with the technology available at that time. In order to build the pyramid, you would have had quarry and then move 2.3 million granite or limestone blocks weighing between 2.5 and 50 tons, 600 miles to the site of the pyramid. Keep in mind that the copper and bronze tools experts say the Egyptians used to precisely cut the stone blocks are softer than the limestone and granite blocks.  Keep in mind that you will need to lift and precisely place granite blocks, some again weighing nearly 50 tons, to a height of nearly 500 feet. That's 50 stories. These stones will need to be placed with such tolerances that a razor blade will not fit between them. Your pyramid will when finished line up with the four points of the compass with an accuracy of .06 degrees, supposedly, without a compass.

Your team will need to level the 13-acre limestone bedrock base to a degree of accuracy only recently achieved with laser technology using only the known technology of the Dynastic Egyptians. Among technological attributes to numerous to mention, your team will have to excavate  what’s known as the ‘Descending Passage’ some 350 feet into solid bedrock using copper and bronze tools, at a 26-degree angle-- all the while keeping the tunnel arrow-straight for its entire  length”!

Robert: (Feigning a yawn?) “Thanks! That’s fascinating! Not! Look, can you please tell me how you moved from the Oklo natural reactor to a man made triangle? I really want you to focus Billy if you can. How do you react to the information I provided about Oklo?

William: “My point is, that there is evidence of ancient high technology other than the ancient nuclear facility at Oklo”.

Robert:”Look, I’ll bite. The technology that built the great pyramid is in no way comparable to the technology or effort it took to put a man on the moon. I guess that means that I would take the pyramid. Give me enough slave labor and I’ll bring it in on time and under budget! The moon landing on the other hand required computers-much higher technology”!

William:"I don't think millions of unskilled slave laborers are going to help you build one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. How could you do it when experts are still arguing about how it was done in the first place? The point is, the choice is not a foregone conclusion. If you accept the dating of the current experts on the great pyramid, then for more than 5,000 years this precisely built yet huge structure was the tallest structure built by man. It’s been less than two hundred years since its height was surpassed. It’s almost 50 stories high and is built to a much higher precision that any modern highrise!”!

Robert: “Moving on to Oklo:…?

William:” What makes me laugh is the example we "creationists" use re: the tornado in the junkyard. The idea that the odds of evolution working to produce the diversity of life on earth would be like a tornado coming through a junkyard and completely assembling a 727. The problem is, we underestimate the gullibility of materialists! I mean, you’ll take those odds every time if it means that you don’t have to get down on your knees to worship God!

If you  and I could observe that junkyard and watch a billion years worth of tornados producing not so much as a ninety degree angle, I bet I know exactly what you’d say”…

Robert:: And that is…

William: :”Best two billion out of three”!?

Robert:””Rimshot”!

William:” Your faith is almost inspirational. Okay. How did they conclude that the “natural reactor” was active nearly 2 billion years ago? I’ll tell you how. By making the assumption that  the nuclear decay rate or half-life of U235 has always remained constant. In other words, if the present laws and constants of nature had extended throughout the past, the Oklo uranium deposit could have become critical close to 2 billion years ago. Additionally, the conditions for a moderated reaction do not exist today and must be assumed to have existed in the past. So, this si what happened re: Oklo. 1) Freak out. 2)Sweat. 3)Come up with a “natural” explanation which at first was met with a pronounced skepticism but which later would become  dogma, i.e.’ darwinism, the big bang theory, dark matter, continental drift and Cold Play”!

Robert:”Cold Play”!

William::4)Gradually rally around the natural explanation because really, what else have you got. 5)Dogma. 6) Verify that constants are “constant” by using constants to arrive at a date a “natural” reactor was in operation. 7)Turn around and use Oklo with your new assumption generated numbers to prove that constants have always been constant! 8)Try to taunt creationists with your proof”!

Christians on the other hand should know consistent with their belief in both the “fall” and the flood have accepted a view that is completely opposed to uniform assumptions. Our view has always been catastrophic. Who knows how submersion in water for up to a year or more is going to impact radiometric dating?  Logically, both the fall of man and the flood eliminate uniformism.

This last part is to address the idea that there are Christians who’ve been impacted by the Oklo phenomenon in terms of their faith. You said some of them have been cowed by it and I’m just saying that perhaps they haven’t fully thought out what the implications are of their belief in the Biblical teachings on the history of the planet and the creation of the universe”.

Robert:”To be honest, I feel like you’re weaseling out of the Oklo implications, here. The one thing you’ve said which I will need to go and research is the idea that to arrive at an Oklo date they assumed constants were constant. That doesn’t seem unreasonable to me because ; what else could they assume”. I will however agree that you can’t then go back and say Oklo proves that the constants were always constant. The idea that little green men built themselves a breeder reactor belongs on StargateSG-1, which I know you watch, by the way.”

William:”You do know that there has been research indicating that the speed of light and other constants have or are changing? One of those studies even focused onOklo, though they didn’t suggest a magnitude change in the constants.

Would you also agree that if today the fact that matter and energy are “conserved” indicates that there was a time before the present physical laws in this universe wereset that another law, permitting the creation of matter must have been in effect”?

Robert: The Big bang….

William:” The Big bang was invented by someone who believed in the creation theory. I believe he was a minister who thought the big bang evidence supported the idea that God created the universe. However, the big bang couldn’t have created matter, it was how matter was dispersed, wasn’t it”?

Robert:”I’ll get back to you on that”.

William:”Continuing to respond to your Oklo information. You mentioned mutation. The idea that radiation from the nuclear reactor sped up evolution. I suppose I can’t just say “that’s dumb” and go back to frying this turkey? It is you know.

Mutation is bad for organisms, not good. Mutation destroys information, it does not add new information. This means that entropy, not only is at work in the universe, it is also at work on the genome. Ironically the very thing that evolutionists believe is responsible for building on the genome and increasing information is doing the exact opposite.

In fact, mutation in humans is much more frequent as previously thought. The human genome is gradually being destroyed by mutation. A population geneticist named “Crow” (and he’s on your team) estimates that humans are experiencing an irrevocable net loss of genetic information such that the “fitness” is declining by  1% to 2% per generation. This means that eventually, the human genome will lose too much information for the human race to continue. Read Remine’s book on Haldane’s Dilemma or Sanford’s Genetic Entropy. This of course has implications for the future and the past. In 8 generations, or 200 years human fitness may decline as much as 16% from today. Now if you take these numbers the other way; how old could the human race be?

Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon were physically stronger, had better eyesight (based on paintings in dark caves with no evidence of soot) and had larger brains. Our descendants will be much less robust than ourselves-if the Lord hasn’t come by that time.”

Robert: ”I believe I will find your picture in the dictionary under digress”! Let’s eat turkey tonight and finish this discussion by e-mail. I’m going to get some more material and stay focused on Oklo.  I think I can make some progress with you on this because it is so conclusive”!

William: “At your current rate of “progress”, should it remain constant, you’ll accomplish nothing  in 2 billion years”.

See Also

Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (#301), by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D.
Speed of Light May have Changed Recently
THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE OKLO PHENOMENON ON THE CONSTANCY OF RADIOMETRIC DECAY RATES, C. L. Webster Geoscience Research Institute
The Great Pyramid of Egypt, by Martin Gray