Slashdot Mirror
Explorer Plans Hunt For Genghis Khan's Long-Lost Tomb
Velcroman1 writes "The tomb of brutal Mongolian emperor Genghis Khan — the one who created the world's most powerful empire by raiding and invading across Eurasia, not Kirk's nemesis — is a lost treasure archaeologists have sought for years. And one man thinks he knows where it is. Last fall Alan Nichols, the president of The Explorers Club, mapped out possible locations for the tomb of Khan (also known as Chinnggis Qa'an). His hypothesis: Khan's tomb is located in the Liupan Mountains in Northern China, where the emperor who was born in 1162 and is said to have perished from an arrow wound in August 1227. Next fall, Nichols plans the next phase of his research: pinpointing Khan's exact resting place. 'Ghengis Khan's tomb is my obsession,' Nichols, a noted authority on the emperor, said recently. 'I couldn't stop thinking about it. But I'm not happy just reading about it, or knowing about it. I need to have my feet on it.'"
Phillip of Macedon's tomb was found and identified. Science can do amazing things.
Probably because everything Indiana Jones seeks for has religious motives (and I include the aliens in the fourth one into religion) and magical powers. Gengis Khan instead is mainly a historical and political person. If there are any religious connotations around him, then they are without any real relevance to us. Gengis Khan might play a role in shamanistic rituals for mongolian tribes, but the main intended audience of Indiana Jones movies are not mongolians.
Joke all you want, but according to a Darwinian fitness perspective he was one of the most successful humans to have ever lived.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Your original point still stands, since it was Philip's son also named Philip. Positivly identified and older than Ghengis Khan to boot by about 1,500 years.
Let’s consider you point. What is your Epistemology in this situation?
Do you reject evolution? It’s got massive holes. There are bits that don’t (yet) make sense. Yet I still believe it because of the strong evidence. The holes take some extrapolation to move from point to point, but the logic to do so is consistent.
Or, let’s choose an example more on point. Should I disbelieve in Socrates? Like Jesus no primary source material exists. None of his writings exist. Should I take the position that he was just the figment of somebody’s imagination?