Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Adlach t1_j3tezzw wrote

Reply to comment by Makaneek in Deciphering ancient texts with modern tools, Michael Langlois challenges what we know about the Dead Sea Scrolls and biblical archaeology by MeatballDom

I've always thought this statement is ridiculous. I could claim anything with it. Russell's teapot.

8

PapaRacoon t1_j3ttwzx wrote

What’s ridiculous about it?

1

[deleted] t1_j3tu67p wrote

[deleted]

1

PapaRacoon t1_j3vkv79 wrote

In what way does it do that? Seems to say unless you’ve got evidence, you’ve got nothing?

1

Makaneek t1_j3tj6dn wrote

Be my guest, not sure why it should affect me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

0

[deleted] t1_j3tjxve wrote

[deleted]

2

Makaneek t1_j3tnjds wrote

Interesting theory but it doesn't follow the theorem, evidence of absence is evidence of absence. Going by language Hebrew is West Semitic, putting the ancestral culture of both Hebrews and Arabs solidly in Eurasia when they lost mutual intelligibility.

If you're talking genetics nothing is debatable, I agree that a prehistoric Inuit man once journeyed back out of Alaska and is an ancestor to everyone alive by virtue of his genes having so long to spread around the earth.

2