…tend to make me angry:
Ancient peoples had much shorter lives than people in western Europe and America today. The evidence from skeletons shows that few people in prehistoric times would have lived beyond the age of 40. (Prehistoric and Egyptian Medicine, by Ian Dawson, pg. 58)
If one studies anything about bones and skeletons they would find out that bones decay just like flesh does. It is hard to make such statements quoted above because, though we find more bone than soft tissue, skeletal remains are very hard to find.
Osteological material can survive the passage of time better than almost any other biological material, however, the integrity of a bone sample can be compromised by soil acidity, water damage, temperature and soil dwelling micro-organisms (Mays, 1998). Trabecular bone appears to decay faster than cortical bone in inhospitable soils, the compact bone of the shaft of long bones will survive whilst the trabecular bone of the condyles or head will not (Mays, 1998). Acidic soils and/or the acidic microenvironment, caused by micro-organisms living in the soil, contribute to either the degradation of hydroxyapatite (the main constituent of bone mineral) or its conversion to brushite. Brushite, another mineral, occupies more space than hydroxyapatite and tends to crack and splinter the bone. Water provides a medium for the transport of ions to and from bone and contributes in a major way to the chemical degradation of osteological materials. Higher temperatures facilitate all of these processes and also contribute to the destruction of collagen, which in turn can start to dissolve bone minerals (Price, 1989).In addition, post-mortem damage, either at the time of excavation or from subsequent poor storage and conservation, can lead to loss of bone. In certain instances this will either, affect the quantitative data obtained, as happened in the case of the ‘Maat’ specimen, or render the specimen unsuitable for density measurement.(http://www.assemblage.group.shef.ac.uk/5/haigh.html)
Bones may be thicker and harder than soft tissue but they do decay and disappear over time.
Bone decomposition can be rapid or decompose over great periods of time. It is all dependent on the environment that the bones are within. Many organism including rodents will consume the bone for calcium, acid soils will dissolve them quickly, some soils will not, preservation techniques will prolong their decomposition.(http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen06/gen06682.htm)
To take a few samples and declare a longevity rate for ancient people is unrealistic. That is like future archaeologists happening upon a small cemetery filled with the remains of young people and there declaring that it was rare for our present day people to live past the age of 40.
The evidence is just not there to make such determinations. We know that the ancients had excellent medical and dental care, even though a few quacks would have existed at the time, and we know that they had the same type of diet we have today, the grains, meat, dairy, etc., so to say that the ancients died out earlier than their modern counterparts just doesn’t make sense.
Like the peoples of Mesopotamia and India, the Egyptians had specialist doctors, took care over hygiene, used herbal remedies and believed that gods and evil spirits sent some diseases. However we know a great deal more about the medicine in Egypt than in these other civilizations because of the greater variety of sources that have survived…(Ian Dawson, pg. 39)
Medicine is not a modern invention and though some later civilizations started from scratch doesn’t mean that it developed at a later time period than the ancient world. But even with all the modern medical technology and ancient medical practices, the decay rate of bones is not affected and it is rare to find a full skeleton of anything.
This is why we do not believe anthropologists or paleontologists when they construct their supposed evolutionary creatures from millions of years ago. They usually start with only a toe bone or a jaw bone or a femur and then use their imaginations for the rest.
Read the book, The First Humans by Ann Gibbons to get a good idea of how little skeletal structure those researchers use to draw their conclusions and human ancestors. This is why we do not believe scientists when they make the claim that Neanderthals existed. There is not enough evidence to make such claims.
The Neanderthals were humans but not another species, another race or an offshoot of the family tree. They were humans who could have been pre-flood occupants of Earth or they were merely hunters in search of food, or simply buried in the same cave as a communal burial ground.
The Bible is very clear that all men and women descended from Adam And Eve thus the idea of different races is false. We all belong to one race. The Neanderthal myth is just another rant by secular scientists who do not want to believe the Bible; so they make up their own stories to make their lives easier.
Discovering much about the past via human remains is difficult. At best we get a snippet of early life which is enough to see that their lives were not much different from ours. They suffered from disease, injuries, botched surgeries. or had excellent work done and on it goes.
To say more than that would require a lot more evidence which is long gone thanks to decay.
theologyarchaeology 