Debunking these pro-evolution arguments.

[Alithis]

Many creationists will simply try to say God used a similar blueprint for neanderthals compared too humans, thus explaining the 90-something percent similarity.

Its not my view however. For all i know, God could have used evolution, or he could have not.

in case you didn't notice...
God is a creationist.

 

[Alithis]

Humans are homo sapiens (also known as modern humans)

Homo sapiens - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Though sometimes the word "human" can also refer to creatures that existed before the rise of homosapiens

(Archaic humans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

but are still apart of our same genus.

(Homo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

but according to the bible...they are "mankind"

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Why would somebody inspired by the holy spirit not be historically/scientifically accurate? the writers of the bible were inspired by the holy spirit.

Why do you believe the writers had to always try/be historically/scientifically accurate simply because God inspired them?

The writers of the bible sure had no knowledge of modern scientific findings (they did not know the earth was a sphere or that it rotated around the sun), so just in the regard of science, why do they have to go beyond their context/time period/knowledge, and be accurate to what we know about from modern science simply because they are inspired by God? Do you think insipiration from God revealed to them all the answers to the universe/earth/past, so somehow they knew all truths when it comes to science and the past of the earth and mankind?

 

[AmericanChristian91]

but according to the bible...they are "mankind"

Yes we are "Mankind", we are also "humankind", "Man", "humans", "modern humans", and yes even "homo sapiens", we are also called "people".

Many names for the same thing

 

[New Legacy]

The argument that neanderthals are a different species from humans is not valid, because it goes against what the bible says.

They are human. Most humans today descended from them. They make up about 3-4% of non-African ancestry.

 

[Sammy-San]

They are human. Most humans today descended from them. They make up about 3-4% of non-African ancestry.

They did not have rickets. What explains their skeletons looking totally different from human skeletons?

 

[New Legacy]

[Staff Deletion of Quoted Post]

Why is evolution anti-God to you?

 

[AmericanChristian91]

their skeletons looking totally different from human skeletons?

There skeletons are not completely different, there are many similarities, and some differences.

from

Neanderthal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Alithis]

Why is evolution anti-God to you?

mans infintisimal blind reasoning vs God...

you choose ,i Chose God.

let God be true....

 

[Alithis]

There skeletons are not completely different, there are many similarities, and some differences.

from

Neanderthal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and a misrepresentation ,i saw this guy with skin on in a park drinking whiskey.he was japanese and a bit bowlegged

 

[dysert]

That comparison comes up short though because you're trying to apply an organic process to inorganic objects.

Not really. Non-creationists say that in the beginning there was this inorganic singularity, and that after it exploded at the Big Bang, there was all this inorganic matter & energy from which all life sprang. Rocks spawning life is as likely as watches spawning other watches.

 

[Armoured]

and a misrepresentation ,i saw this guy with skin on in a park drinking whiskey.he was japanese and a bit bowlegged

Are you a skeletal forensics expert?

 

[Armoured]

Not really. Non-creationists say that in the beginning there was this inorganic singularity, and that after it exploded at the Big Bang, there was all this inorganic matter & energy from which all life sprang. Rocks spawning life is as likely as watches spawning other watches.

Where is the oft ridiculed "rocks spawning life" claim actually made in the scientific literature, please?

 

[dysert]

Where is the oft ridiculed "rocks spawning life" claim actually made in the scientific literature, please?

I am not familiar with the scientific literature. What other conclusion can be drawn, though? If there was a Big Bang which resulted in all of the matter in the universe; and if some of this matter eventually coalesced into earth; and if life on earth began from this matter; then it follows that life sprang from the inorganic matter that existed in the pre-Big-Bang singularity. Or, reducing the many billions of years down by a factor of 1000, you have rocks spawning life. Does the scientific literature have an explanation of how life got started?

 

[Alithis]

Are you a skeletal forensics expert?

No..
Are you in the habit of believing man over God?

 

[Alithis]

What is a spirit made out of?

 

[RobFranco]

Guys, evolution is a fact. Do we like to hear this Truth? Sadly, no. We rather believe in a bearded man who came down from space into this planet, and tooks some dirt to create the man and stuck his pinky up the female to create the woman. Instead of seeing the mystery of evolution, how God's INVISIBLE hands creates all living things through a biological process, that takes billions of years (God has no such thing as time) to see the changes.

 

[Armoured]

I am not familiar with the scientific literature.

Do you think familiarising yourself with it before making claims about it would be an idea?

What other conclusion can be drawn, though?

How much do you know about organic chemistry?

If there was a Big Bang which resulted in all of the matter in the universe; and if some of this matter eventually coalesced into earth; and if life on earth began from this matter; then it follows that life sprang from the inorganic matter that existed in the pre-Big-Bang singularity. Or, reducing the many billions of years down by a factor of 1000, you have rocks spawning life. Does the scientific literature have an explanation of how life got started?

Um... no, that's not how it works. It seems you don't actually understand what the term organic means in a scientific context. Seriously, rocks aren't involved at all.

 

[New Legacy]

mans infintisimal blind reasoning vs God...

you choose ,i Chose God.

let God be true....

You are using circular logic. It's against God to do because it is against God.

 

[New Legacy]

Not really. Non-creationists say that in the beginning there was this inorganic singularity, and that after it exploded at the Big Bang, there was all this inorganic matter & energy from which all life sprang. Rocks spawning life is as likely as watches spawning other watches.

Life did not come from rocks, they came from chemicals.

RNA is produced naturally and it can mechanisms to self replicate.