HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Scientists rediscover &qu...

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:33 PM

Scientists rediscover "noah" 6500-year-old-skeleton

Scientists at the Penn Museum in Philadelphia have re-discovered a rare and important find in their storage rooms – a complete human skeleton who lived around 6,500 years ago in the Sumerian city-state of Ur. The aptly named ‘Noah’ was originally found within a layer of deep silt, indicating that he lived after an epic flood. The first known recorded story of a great flood comes from Sumer, now southern Iraq, and it is generally believed to be the historic precursor of the Biblical flood story written millennia later.

.............. According to a news report in Past Horizons, the skeleton was originally found by British archaeologist Sir Leonard Woolley around 1929/1930 during a joint Penn Museum/British Museum excavation of the ancient city of Ur, near modern-day Nasiriyah in Iraq.

The skeleton was located at an incredible depth of 50 feet, in a deep silt layer beneath the city’s 4,500-year-old royal cemetery. Testing revealed that the layer was 2,000 years older than the cemetery, dating back to the Ubaid period (c. 5,500 to 4,000 BC). A total of 48 human remains were found in the layer, but ‘Noah’ was the only skeleton in good enough condition to be removed. In fact, Noah is the only complete skeleton ever recovered from this region and era.

....................... Some also believe it was the Sumerian account that later inspired the Biblical story of Noah’s Ark.

http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/scientists-rediscover-noah-6500-year-old-skeleton-who-survived-great-flood

27 replies, 2289 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 27 replies Author Time Post
Reply Scientists rediscover "noah" 6500-year-old-skeleton (Original post)
PumpkinAle Aug 2014 OP
MineralMan Aug 2014 #1
PeoViejo Aug 2014 #2
gtar100 Aug 2014 #5
Cleita Aug 2014 #8
PumpkinAle Aug 2014 #19
malaise Aug 2014 #23
hifiguy Aug 2014 #24
malaise Aug 2014 #25
Autumn Aug 2014 #3
Cleita Aug 2014 #9
Autumn Aug 2014 #12
csziggy Aug 2014 #21
Autumn Aug 2014 #22
aint_no_life_nowhere Aug 2014 #26
yortsed snacilbuper Aug 2014 #4
linuxman Aug 2014 #7
Cleita Aug 2014 #6
Dirty Socialist Aug 2014 #10
Cleita Aug 2014 #13
cemaphonic Aug 2014 #16
Shrike47 Aug 2014 #27
hifiguy Aug 2014 #18
BlueJazz Aug 2014 #11
lunatica Aug 2014 #14
randome Aug 2014 #15
hifiguy Aug 2014 #17
Cleita Aug 2014 #20

Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:41 PM

1. If the skeleton was found IN a layer of deep silt,

he probably died duringthe flood, rather than "lived after an epic flood." The Biblical Noah was described as living long after the flood. Bodies in deep layers of silt probably succumbed to the flood itself.

It is interesting, though, to find a 6500 year old skeleton, though.

Major flooding was not that uncommon in Sumeria.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #1)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:44 PM

2. "Deep Silt"

 

It just begs....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #1)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:49 PM

5. Yes, not really a well named skeleton. I think we can safely conclude this was *not* Noah.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #1)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:56 PM

8. Archaeologists often name a find after literary or historical

references fully knowing that's not them. For instance:

King Minos' palace.
Agamemnon's tomb
Helen's jewels

I could go on. They seriously know it wasn't Noah.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #8)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 03:18 PM

19. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #1)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 04:17 PM

23. But did they find any dinosaurs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #23)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 04:19 PM

24. Or dinosaur saddles??

 

Inquiring minds want to know!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #24)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 04:20 PM

25. Choking with laughter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:46 PM

3. Interesting. The article says he was buried in the silt after the flood.

I wonder what it is about his remains being buried in the silt layer makes them so sure that he lived through it. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #3)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:59 PM

9. See my post #8.

It's nothing more than a label for reference only. I'm pretty sure they knew the skeletons were buried in a flood or bog of some sort. It would require more study of that layer with our modern tools and methods, something not possible today in that war torn area and lack of funding for such expeditions these days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #9)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:06 PM

12. Yeah we know it's not Noah but they seem sure he lived through that particular flood

and was buried in the silt. I was just wondering what made his gravesite different enough from others found in that layer to be sure he was buried. It is a shame that with all out technology we can't investigate these fascinating finds beacuse of wars that never seem to end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #3)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 04:09 PM

21. Could be Noah - he could have hopped out of the boat

Once it ran ashore and he sunk to his death in the silt! Could have happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to csziggy (Reply #21)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 04:13 PM

22. It makes sense. The boat was rather tall I imagine. If he jumped out

I can see how the fall in that soft mud could have buried him deep in that 10 foot layer. It stands to reason that a man would skip out on cleaning up the mess in that boat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to csziggy (Reply #21)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 04:44 PM

26. He could no longer outrun the Tyrannosaurus Rex on board

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:48 PM

4. "a complete human skeleton who lived around 6,500 years ago"

Is this proof that the earth is only six thousand years old?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yortsed snacilbuper (Reply #4)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:53 PM

7. At no point

 

Did the article come even close to asserting that. Naming skeletons is tradition. The name fit, based off if a biblical story. Nobody is asserting it was actually THE Noah.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 01:51 PM

6. Thank you for an interesting article.

I wonder if that was the same dig that a young "Lawrence of Arabia", T.E. Lawrence, participated in?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:00 PM

10. Shouldn't he be called Gilgamesh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dirty Socialist (Reply #10)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:13 PM

13. That would be closer to the legend.

I think those archaeologists of that era wanted to appeal to the Anglican aristocracy who were probably funding their expedition. Gilgamesh would have been of little interest to those Lords.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dirty Socialist (Reply #10)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:32 PM

16. Close, but the name you're looking for is Utnapishtim.

He was the flood survivor, Gilgamesh just heard the story (or part of it, anyway).

You're right that that version seems more appropriate, given the site location.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cemaphonic (Reply #16)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 05:35 PM

27. It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing, and Utnapishtim's got no swing. Noah is better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dirty Socialist (Reply #10)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:49 PM

18. Gil for short.

 

Or maybe his name was Bob or Harry. Mysteries endure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:02 PM

11. I'll be expecting "Scientists PROVE Noah lived !!" "They Find his body perfectly preserved "

 

Top Atheist admits> "How could we have been so wrong?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:17 PM

14. That makes him 500 years older than the world and creation itself.

LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:32 PM

15. That's irony for you. Noah saved all of God's creatures from the flood. Then died from drowning.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PumpkinAle (Original post)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 02:47 PM

17. They sent the poor sap out for beer

 

and he got washed away in the flood. Bum luck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #17)

Sat Aug 23, 2014, 04:06 PM

20. Maybe he was the original brewmaster.

Beer is believed by some to have originated in Sumeria.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread