An atheists world (2)

[Subduction Zone]

It costs to much. And you will have to put it all underground just in case you recreate it. Why not do testing in a regular environment that the God particle started in. All you need is billions of years and when that's done you can wait some more.

What are you talking about?

That is not how it is tested.

 

[Subduction Zone]

sorry, my mistake.

everything in homo line is human-like

that is not a changing goal post, just how the taxonomy lies out.

And you said it yourself; "Human-like". Lucy was 'human-like" too, just a bit less so. Look at her hips. Her hips are closer to ours than they are to chimps. Each step is a bit different from the other.

 

[nuttypiglet]

What do you mean? In the last half million years we can show all sorts of evolution. In the case of man we went from homo erectus to homo sapiens during that time period.

You do realize that the "missing link" has not been missing for many years, don't you?

I see. So, how long are you saying that modern man has been around?

 

[createdtoworship]

This is the verse. Now some interpret that to mean that Jesus was crucified on Wednesday, I know there are problems with that too. Some use ridiculous apologetics to explain how he was in the city and that counted. Few ever admit the obvious.

well it was friday before the sabbath, so that doesn't work

but I just take the three day and three night as a summarization. That it was over teh span of three days. Thats only one day and one night short.

 

[createdtoworship]

And you said it yourself; "Human-like". Lucy was 'human-like" too, just a bit less so. Look at her hips. Her hips are closer to ours than they are to chimps. Each step is a bit different from the other.

lucy was ape like, not human like. That is the controversy.

Lucy She's No Lady, 1 of 3 - Dr. David Menton - YouTube

 

[createdtoworship]

In the past other creationists had the line at homo erectus. In fact some put the line just before and some put it just after making h. e. a perfect transitional species.

It is impossible to test right now, but odds are that Homo erectus and Australopithecus could interbreed. It is always possible to put the bar so high that it cannot be passed.

Sooner or later you have to trust the experts in any field. When well over 99% of the experts in a field agree on something you can be very sure that they are correct. In fact you would be hard pressed to find a case where that high of a percentage of experts has ever been wrong.

There are higher percentages in their relative fields that believe there was no holocaust, that man never landed on the Moon, that 9/11 was an inside job, and that someone else besides Oswald shot Kennedy. They all share one thing in common, they are all wrong.

well I see human like characteristics in all the homo line

it's the astralopethicus line that is not human like.

and they are different genus' so it would fit my view as well

 

[Subduction Zone]

well it was friday before the sabbath, so that doesn't work

but I just take the three day and three night as a summarization. That it was over teh span of three days. Thats only one day and one night short.

That definitely does not square with the Jesus' own prophesy.

Three days could be a summarization, if you really stretch it, of a night a day and a night, there is no way that "three days and three nights" could be a summerization of two nights and a day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

well I see human like characteristics in all the homo line

it's the astralopethicus line that is not human like.

and they are different genus' so it would fit my view as well

How so? It is less "human like" which is what is expected. It is still more human like than chimp like. Which is also what the theory of evolution predicts.

 

[nuttypiglet]

And you said it yourself; "Human-like". Lucy was 'human-like" too, just a bit less so. Look at her hips. Her hips are closer to ours than they are to chimps. Each step is a bit different from the other.

You need to stop quoting old information and fraudulent information at that. Many experts have shown Lucy to be nothing like a link to humans.
Dr Charles Oxnard, Professor of Anatomy and Human Biology at the University of Western Australia said Lucy is more different from Humans and Apes, than we are from Apes. This is not a link but a different life form altogether.
You are reading reports from biased scientists, ones that WANT it to be a missing link even though it isn't. This proves that most evolution scientists are fraudulent and are therefore not scientists at all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

gradyll, the theory of evolution predicts that our close relatives would look more like us than our more distant ones. So does a human look more like a chimp than a dog? Yes, more like a dog than a lizard? Yes. More like a lizard than like a fish? Yes. More like a fish than a squid? Again yes. We could go all the way back the nested hierarchy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You need to stop quoting old information and fraudulent information at that. Many experts have shown Lucy to be nothing like a link to humans.
Dr Charles Oxnard, Professor of Anatomy and Human Biology at the University of Western Australia said Lucy is more different from Humans and Apes, than we are from Apes. This is not a link but a different life form altogether.
You are reading reports from biased scientists, ones that WANT it to be a missing link even though it isn't. This proves that most evolution scientists are fraudulent and are therefore not scientists at all.

And he lost that debate more than FIFTY YEARS AGO!!:



Creationist Arguments: Australopithecines

 

[toolmanjantzi]

And you said it yourself; "Human-like". Lucy was 'human-like" too, just a bit less so. Look at her hips. Her hips are closer to ours than they are to chimps. Each step is a bit different from the other.

It's a bad case of Osteoporosis.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's a bad case of Osteoporosis.

LOL, wrong.

Do you think that "Lucy" is the only Australopithecus that has ever been found?

 

[Subduction Zone]

By the way, lying creationists said the same sort of thing about Neanderthal. It is rather difficult to maintain that after thousands of skeletons have been found.

I always warn creationists not to depend upon lying creationist sites. They never seem to learn.

 

[Skaloop]

It's a bad case of Osteoporosis.

Can you show one person with a bad case of osteoporosis who has a skeleton that is even close to looking like Lucy?

 

[createdtoworship]

That definitely does not square with the Jesus' own prophesy.

Three days could be a summarization, if you really stretch it, of a night a day and a night, there is no way that "three days and three nights" could be a summerization of two nights and a day.

well Here is a book on it,

christ rose on sunday (Matt28:1), but He stated that He would be "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." If Christ was crucified on Friday, how could He have been three days and three nights in the earth and rise on Sunday only two days later?"

Solution 1: crucified wednesday
Solution 2: Most Bible Scholars believe that Jesus was crucified on Friday. They take the phrase "three days and nights" to be a Hebrew figure of speech referring to any part of three days and nights.

Norman Geisler - when critics ask

there is more too it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

well Here is a book on it,

christ rose on sunday (Matt28:1), but He stated that He would be "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." If Christ was crucified on Friday, how could He have been three days and three nights in the earth and rise on Sunday only two days later?"

Solution 1: crucified wednesday
Solution 2: Most Bible Scholars believe that Jesus was crucified on Friday. They take the phrase "three days and nights" to be a Hebrew figure of speech referring to any part of three days and nights.

Norman Geisler - when critics ask

there is more too it.

Third possibility: Jesus was a man who never rose from the grave.

Just another of the 400 plus self contradictions in the Bible that not even the experts can agree about.

 

[Subduction Zone]

At any rate where the theory of evolution is concerned I really don't care about whether or not the resurrection of Jesus was real or a myth. I just wanted to point out the Jesus did preach in allegories quite often.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

LOL, wrong.

Do you think that "Lucy" is the only Australopithecus that has ever been found?

Yes.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

By the way, lying creationists said the same sort of thing about Neanderthal. It is rather difficult to maintain that after thousands of skeletons have been found.

I always warn creationists not to depend upon lying creationist sites. They never seem to learn.

I had an interesting thought. All the dinosaur bones, & fossils are just rocks that formed frame like structures that look like a living creature. But in fact are just bones that evolved without the tissue and organs.

Has science ruled this out, and if so what was the experiment that proved all dinosaur bones actually were apart of something that lived?