Dr. Dino

Believe me, I have read more of AIG than you have. In particular, you might want to read their "arguments NOT to use" list, which I posted in another thread below. You might check it out.

Do better than what...3 whole skulls??? THAT is the best you can come up with?? They're not even found intact or in some cases even all the pieces found at the same time or the exact same area. Even to say that Creationists can't decide whether to call them apes or human does NOT prove they are candidates for the "missing link" or that man evolved!

Homo erectus is the bones of supposedly the oldest nearly human remains on earth. This classification is based on two fossil finds: "Peking Man" and "Java Man" Let's look at them. Peking Man will be first. "In 1921, two molar teeth were found in a limestone hill 25 miles from Peking, China. Six years later, a third tooth was found and given to Dr. David Black. Over the next several years dozens of pieces of broken up skulls were found. Some time after 1936, a man named Franz Weidenreich, who was in charge of the dig, fashioned a model of what "Peking Man" supposedly looked like."
World War Two comes along and all of the fragments were lost except for the two teeth. But before the war, "a French scientist, Marcellin Boule, examined the actual fragments of the skull and in 1937 published his findings. He said that the fragments were definitely monkey-like, that the model did not correspond objectively to the fossils. The date of Peking man was supposedly in the neighborhood of half a million years. Human fossils have been dug up from the same area."(2)
(2) Evolution: The Fossils Say No-- Dr. Duane Gish


Let's look at 'Java Man". This one will make you want to go out and get some 'Espresso'." In 1891 a Dutch physician named Eugene Dubois discovered 'Java Man.' Well, want he really found was an ape-like skullcap.
A few years later he returned to the site along the Solo River and found a human leg bone and two molar teeth 50 feet away from the first find. Like a good scientist, Dubois put the head bone together with the leg bone and called it 'Java Man.' Expert evolutionists have ingeniously estimated the age of the find to be 500,000 years old." (3)
(3) Unlocking the Mysteries Of Creation Vol. 1, p. 119-- Dennis R. Peterson, B.S. M.A.
Some concluding remarks on 'Java Man'. Dubois admitted before he died that he found two truly human skulls near the place that he found the other fragments. He also said that 'Java Man' was, in reality, a giant gibbon.


What man will do so that he doesn't have to show accountability, responsibility to a Creator. He chooses to believe that he came from a monkey even though the evidence is clearly against it. To show what depths that depraved, Godless men will go to fool the public, let's look at Cro-Magnon Man and Neanderthal Man. As we look at these we will see that they are as human as we are. Cro-Magnon Man(12,000 to 30,000 years ago) was found in a cave by some boys out running with their dog. He fell into a crack in the ground. The boys went into the cave, it was several hundred feet long. There were colorful pictures on the wall of deer, horses, and bison."The paintings are now famous as the skillful artwork of people we call Cro-Magnon. Some of their skeletons were found buried in another cave at Les Eyzies, France in 1868. Smithsonian magazine (October 1986) carried an article titled" " Cro-Magnon hunters were really us, working our strategies for survival ".(4)
(4) Unlocking the Mysteries Of Creation Vol. 1, p. 120-- Dennis R. Peterson, B.S. M.A.

See also evolutiondeceit.com/chapter10.php


There are even others not on your list that were proven to be FRAUDS long ago. At least Talkorigins isn't crazy enough to keep using them as examples.




Take your pick of the dinosaurs....T. Rex is fine with me

No there is not physical evidence that directly contradicts and falsifies a literal reading of the texts.

See answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/TJv15n2Geocentrism.asp

Please read the original post in my thread called "the Lesson of Geocentrism"

You are right, the Bible does not teach geocentrism. the point is that the Christian community at the time BELIEVED that it did, based on a literal reading of Scripture, just as YEC's now believe in a young earth based on a literal reading of Scripture. The Church was wrong then, and YEC's are wrong now.

I think you need to reread the entire article. It's explained there very well. And your response, from somone who has no problem with evolutionists changing their theories over and over Something is proving wrong- just change it. Dating method didn't "add up"? Just change it. A skull is proven to be a fraud? Who cares. Doesn't change anything. Until we have to change it.

This just shows your utter lack of understanding of how science works.

Go do some reading and come back when you can honestly say you have read both sides.

Oh wow.... it's easier than I thought. That didn't take you very long

Well, no, it does not take very long to tell you not to waste our time going back over the same discussions again and again. Why don't you read through the threads on this forum, see what arguments have been made back and forth on legitimately debated issues, and add something new to the discussion.

Otherwise, what is the point?

So there are doors in the firmament that let the rain in and storehouses of snow in the firmament?

Why don't you ask yourself the same question? I'm not the one who seems to have a problem with my "theory".