According to evolutionists, modern man appeared 200,000 years ago, but civilization appeared only 8,000 years ago. We examine their explanations.An interesting question was asked on Quora and reproduced on Forbes.com: “Why Haven’t We Found Civilizations Older Than 7,000 – 8,000 years?” Taking the bat was Adam Wu, an evolutionary neurosurgeon from Saskatchewan. Here’s a synopsis of his answers:Civilization requires Edenic conditions with a large food surplus to get started, but there was no such place.Farming can only produce a food surplus in a very narrow range of environmental conditions.Civilization also requires a minimum population density.Early modern humans were coming out of an Ice Age 200,000 years ago, so few places for civilization existed.Early modern humans were tall and strong, making hunting and gathering preferable to farming in places of low population density.A genetic bottleneck occurred about 60,000 years ago, possibly due to the Toba supervolcano.The Ice Age didn’t end until about 20,000 to 12,000 years ago.As the weather warmed and population grew, conflict and famine created more pressures for humans to “think about” civilization.It’s not clear that anybody critiqued Wu’s answers, so we will.This list has all the makings of special pleading and confabulation. Where’s his evidence? The whole account is based on the absence of evidence. It’s a just-so story. He’s determined to preserve Darwin, so he makes things up out of his own head. What we do know is that civilization appears suddenly (see Gobekli Tepe, for instance, to say nothing of Ur), with intelligent people already making artwork, and soon keeping accounts with symbols on clay tablets. The timeline fits the Bible’s Table of Nations, not Darwinian evolution. Let’s reason why from the evidence we have about human capabilities.If modern humans lived 200,000 years ago, their brains and bodies were fully as capable as ours. Yet evolutionists expect us to believe that for over 20 times the time of all known human civilization, during which people went from simple villages to landing on the moon, these smart, strong, intelligent people did nothing but hunt and gather. Is that credible? Human beings are tremendously adaptable to handle any contingency. They can migrate (and indeed, they did—from Africa to Asia to Europe and beyond). They can build boats. They can make tools. They can skin animals and get comfortable at any temperature. They can invent things. They can look at a horse and think, “Hmmm; what happens if I hop on its back?” They can speak in abstract concepts, and communicate with semantic language (not just the hoots and hollers of apes).So let’s revisit Wu’s list with some critical thinking.Civilization does not require Edenic conditions. Humans today build villages in all kinds of habitats: Nepal, deserts, and remote islands.See #1. People farm in all kinds of conditions. Look at the farms of the southwest Native Americans in 1000 AD. Remember Mesa Verde? Chaco Canyon?Any family can civilize with a few individuals. Ever hear of the Pilgrims?Few places during Ice Age? Ridiculous. Africa was not affected, but that’s where Homo sapiens emerged, evolutionists say.Well, if they were tall and strong, they would have made great farmers. They were also sensible, remember?Population could recover fairly rapidly after a disaster, and it would not have affected people far from the volcano, e.g. in Africa or Asia. Why doesn’t he apply that excuse to animals and birds? The more reasonable human genetic bottleneck occurred at the Flood (8 people). Soon after, Noah’s descendants were building cities.Wu can’t keep blaming the Ice Age. Humans are smart enough to move to warmer areas. Egypt was pretty nice before the Sahara sands came.Conflict and famine has always been with mankind. That is not the motivation to civilize; it certainly is not the only one. There could be many peaceful motivations to civilize. People like to trade. People are inventive. They find new ways to do things and make their lives easier.Our responses are generous, considering only the time of “modern humans.” But evolutionists tell us that Neanderthals, Homo erectus and other upright large-brained humans were using tools, cooking food over controlled fire, and migrating long distances two million years ago. That’s close to 200 times the history of civilization! During all that time, nobody ever thought to settle down? There are even reports that Homo erectus crossed the ocean on watercraft. Certainly Homo sapiens without benefit of large civilizations made it to all the South Pacific islands in short order. If our ancestors were smart enough to do those things, they were smart enough to construct permanent dwellings, trade, cooperate and invent conveniences.Written records and artifacts show that civilization began in the Fertile Crescent—in multiple locations in that region almost simultaneously—about 6,000 years ago or less (8,000 years or more requires auxiliary assumptions and questionable dating methods). The tangible evidence fits the record in Genesis of the dispersion after the Tower of Babel, when language groups were motivated to move apart because they could no longer understand one another. They took their city-building skills with them. For more evidence, see the new film Is Genesis History? that airs again on March 2 and 7 in selected theaters.Quora and Forbes propagate and perpetuate Wu’s ridiculous answer, because no criticism of King Charles is allowed. That’s why we need sites like Creation-Evolution Headlines, to do the work that journalists should be doing. Help improve civilization: make us as influential as Forbes.(Visited 572 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
dan rowinski To get your head around the idea here, think of how computing works today. Developer typically write apps using a high-level (i.e., human-readable) computer language like Java, C++ or C#. For a smartphone or laptop to run that application, developers first run their code through a compiler (or a virtual machine) that translates it into machine code—the binary bits that the computer’s processor can understand.That’s how coders interact with digital computers. Writing apps that can be translated into some form of qubit-relatable code may require some very different approaches, since among other things, the underlying logic for digital programs may not translate precisely (or at all) to the quantum-computing realm. Exploring such issues is apparently what the QCP is all about.Here’s how the QCP page describes its own capabilities:The most basic operations performed on qubits are defined by quantum gates, similar to logical gates used in classic computers. Using quantum gates one can build complex algorithms, usually ending in a measurement operation, which obtains a classical value of qubits (either 0 or 1, but not a superposition). The state of a quantum computer, a set of qubits called quantum register, can be visualized in a number of ways, typically as a 2D or 3D graph, on which points or bars represent superpositions of qubits, while their color or bar height represent amplitude and phase of a given superposition.Culp briefly worked as a 3D software developer before going to Google. You can see why a developer with expertise in 3D representation of data might be interested in quantum computing and its capabilities. Wroblewski, meanwhile, describes himself on LinkedIn as a “privacy samurai” for Google and was previously a cloud-security researcher for Microsoft.If you take the QCP for a spin, let us know in comments how well it represents the future of computing. Related Posts Quantum computing has the potential to make of the smartphones, laptops and data centers we now consider so sophisticated look positively Cro-Magnon. The potential is enormous. Have you ever seen the diagram of how many Earths could fit into a planet the size of Jupiter? For comparison’s sake, that is a good place to start.But for the vast majority of people—including most computer engineers—what quantum computing actually does is basically a mystery. A few “real” quantum computers exist in the world (though some are controversial), and the art of actually programming them to perform useful work is still in its infancy.See also: How D-Wave Could Make Or Break Quantum ComputingA group of Google engineers are giving people the opportunity to play around with quantum programming. A project apparently spearheaded by engineers Greg Wroblewski and Laura Culp at Google’s campus in Kirkland, Wash., created a developer sandbox called the Quantum Computing Playground intended to give developers an opportunity to play around with the basics of quantum computing.The conceptual gulf between standard digital computers and quantum computers is pretty huge. Digital computers process binary bits, typically represented as ones and zeros. Quantum computers, by contrast, are based on “qubits,” which—thanks to some arcane science involving the physics of tiny particles and their probabilistic wave patterns—actually exist in an indeterminate state that only resolves into a one or a zero at the end of a calculation.It’s rocket science of the highest order, although it offers the potential of ultrafast computation, at least for certain types of problems.The QCP is essentially an integrated developer environment where curious engineers can fiddle with some quantum computing basics, such as running scripts and 3D quantum state visualizations. It’s not actually a quantum computer, of course; the QCP just simulates how one would operate in order to let coders start to get familiar with the very different way a quantum computer handles computation.It can simulate quantum registers up to 22 qubits while also running Grover and Shor algorithms. It comes with its own scripting language and debugging. Tags:#Future#Google#Quantum Computing#Quantum Mechanics What it Takes to Build a Highly Secure FinTech … Role of Mobile App Analytics In-App Engagement Why IoT Apps are Eating Device Interfaces The Rise and Rise of Mobile Payment Technology
The Isak-Muivah faction of National Socialist Council of Nagaland or NSCN(I-M), once the fountainhead of extremism in the Northeast, has appointed a chief almost three years after the death of its founder-chairman Isak Chishi Swu.The faction is named after Swu, who died at 86 in June 2016 after a prolonged illness, and its general secretary Thuingaleng Muivah.An NSCN(I-M) spokesperson said the collective leadership appointed Qhehezu Tuccu as the chairman and Tongmeth Konyak as vice-chairman during an assembly at Camp Hebron, the faction’s headquarters near Nagaland’s Dimapur town. Mr. Konyak fills the post vacated by Khole Konyak, who died in December last year.A close associateThe two were handed over charge in the presence of Mr. Muivah. Mr. Tuccu has been a close associate of Swu and Mr. Muivah for years. Like his predecessor, he belongs to the Sumi community that dominates Dimapur district. Most of the members of NSCN(I-M) are Manipur-based Tangkhuls, the community Mr. Muivah is from.The NSCN was formed in January 1980 by extremists who did not accept the Shillong Accord of 1975 between New Delhi and the Naga National Council that had been fighting a separatist war since the 1950s. But the NSCN split in 1988, one led by the Myanmar-based S.S. Khaplang and the other by Isak-Muivah.The NSCN(I-M) has been pursuing a peace process with the Indian government but a final settlement has been elusive. The Khaplang faction of the NSCN too joined the peace process in 2001 but walked out of it in March 2015.
It was Zaheer Khan’s dismissal of Windies opener Devon Smith that opened the gate for India’s win at the MA Chidambaram Stadium in Chennai on Sunday.Chasing 269, Ramnaresh Sarwan and Smith were batting with ease, rotating the strike at will and milking away at India’s bowling. But, Zaheer got the better of Smith on 81 with his slower ball in the 31st over bringing an end to their 63-run partnership.The opposition lost their third wicket on 154 and that’s where the slide actually began for the West Indies.Man-of-the-MatchEarlier, India posted 268 against the West Indies and it was Yuvraj Singh’s maiden World Cup ton that proved to the highlight of the batting.But that wasn’t all, he came back to deliver the goods with the ball taking two important scalps in the match.Yuvraj Singh earned the Man-of-the-Match award for his all-round performance.