New proto-mammal fossil

Cheeky Monkey · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
Behold! Hesperopithecus haroldcookii!

A picture is worth a thousand words, isn't it?

Heh, the lessons of history. Still there's way more to go off here than a pig's tooth. I still don't see the issue, it's just a squirrelly looking thing based on a nearly complete skeleton with lots of preserved detail. If one mistake means every other instance is no good then all the mistaken religions in the world must mean yours is no good as well.

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

Cheeky Monkey said:
Heh, the lessons of history. Still there's way more to go off here than a pig's tooth. I still don't see the issue, it's just a squirrelly looking thing based on a nearly complete skeleton with lots of preserved detail. If one mistake means every other instance is no good then all the mistaken religions in the world must mean yours is no good as well.

What these are, Hispid,* are artists' conceptions; which have the effect of duping the common people into assuming authenticity.

Show just those fossils in Post 10 to the public, and they'll just say, "Meh."

But show that picture in Post 15 to the public, and it's a different story.

There's something called the Ten Icons of Evolution, and I believe they're designed to do just that -- dupe the public.

* Is "Hispid" okay, or do you prefer "Cheeky Monkey"?

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
What these are, Hispid,* are artists' conceptions; which have the effect of duping the common people into assuming authenticity.

Show just those fossils in Post 10 to the public, and they'll just say, "Meh."

But show that picture in Post 15 to the public, and it's a different story.

Do you want photographs? Here:

Go ahead and say "Meh" to that.

AV1611VET said:
There's something called the Ten Icons of Evolution, and I believe they're designed to do just that -- dupe the public.

I agree with you on that. The book is a complete fabrication. Just a detail, it is about intelligent design, not evolution.

Icons of Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
Go ahead and say "Meh" to that.

What is that?

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
What is that?

Homo neanderthalensis

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
Homo neanderthalensis

Okay.

And you are familir with my views on Neanderthal and Cro-magnon man; are you not?

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
Okay.

And you are familir with my views on Neanderthal and Cro-magnon man; are you not?

Not really, but I am sure you will say they were "Nephilim" or something like that (keep in mind that Neanderthals are smaller than modern men though). How about this one below? Homo erectus, same category?

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
Not really, but I am sure you will say they were "Nephilim" or something like that (keep in mind that Neanderthals are smaller than modern men though). How about this one below? Homo erectus, same category?

QV starting here:

AV1611VET said:
The link between apes and humans* is disease.

* As I understand it, we didn't come from the apes. I thought the question, "If we came from apes, why are apes still around?" was a PRATT? Despite the fact that our "ancestors" carry the name "pithecus" in their entries --

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
QV starting here:

Except that modern men are not found alongside the skeletons of primitive ones (except for some overlap with neanderthals).

But I have the feeling that you are not really interested in evidence.

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
Except that modern men are not found alongside the skeletons of primitive ones (except for some overlap with neanderthals).

This is correct.

These diseased guys (not modern vs. primitive) were ostracized from the population and lived in caves and other communal dwellings.

Subduction Zone · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
This is correct.

These diseased guys (not modern vs. primitive) were ostracized from the population and lived in caves and other communal dwellings.

Umm, no.

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
This is correct.

These diseased guys (not modern vs. primitive) were ostracized from the population and lived in caves and other communal dwellings.

And somehow, anatomically modern humans living at the same place and time died and left no skeletons behind... Go figure.

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
And somehow, anatomically modern humans living at the same place and time died and left no skeletons behind... Go figure.

Keep looking.

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
Keep looking.

Never stopped and never will. In the mean time, I will go with what the data tells me: with few exceptions, Homo sapiens and other species of Homo never overlapped.

Not to mention that no disease known to man could have produced such consistent patterns in skeletons. But I know, just "keep looking", right? Is that the answer to all Islamic prophecies also? If they haven't happened yet should we just "keep looking" or does that only work for your ideas?

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
Never stopped and never will. In the mean time, I will go with what the data tells me: with few exceptions, Homo sapiens and other species of Homo never overlapped.

Of course not.

They are all human beings.

CabVet said:
Not to mention that no disease known to man could have produced such consistent patterns in skeletons.

According to the 38th Psalm, King David died of such a bone-altering disease.

If his skeleton was found today, I would surmise he would be mistaken for Neanderthal or Cro-magnon.

Note especially verse 6.

Psalm 38:6a I am troubled; I am bowed down greatly;

Sounds like what you would call a "common ancestor."

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
Of course not.

They are all human beings.

You don't get it, do you? There are no normal skeletons from the same period when the primitive ones were found. Surely, if they overlapped both types of skeletons should be found.

AV1611VET said:
According to the 38th Psalm, King David died of such a bone-altering disease.

If his skeleton was found today, I would surmise he would be mistaken for Neanderthal or Cro-magnon.

Yet that Psalm describes neither skeletal deformations nor anything remotely similar to Neanderthal or Cro-magnon.

AV1611VET said:
Psalm 38:6a I am troubled; I am bowed down greatly;

Sounds like what you would call a "common ancestor."

Not even close.

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
You don't get it, do you? There are no normal skeletons from the same period when the primitive ones were found. Surely, if they overlapped both types of skeletons should be found.

And let me guess.

You graverobbers didn't find evidence of Jews in Egypt.

You graverobbers didn't find evidence of Jews in the Sinai.

Correct?

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
And let me guess.

You graverobbers didn't find evidence of Jews in Egypt.

You graverobbers didn't find evidence of Jews in the Sinai.

Correct?

Name calling, really? Did I make you that mad with so little? Here is something else. Your "bowed down" verse does not refer to anything permanent or not even a disease. Text from the same author:

Psalm 35:14 I behaved myself as though he had been my friend or brother: I bowed down heavily, as one that mourneth for his mother.

Psalm 38:6 I am troubled; I am bowed down greatly; I go mourning all the day long.

The "bowing down" clearly refers to mourning and reflection, not a disease. I find it interesting that you deleted the second part of the verse you posted though (bolded above).

AV1611VET · Aug 13, 2013

CabVet said:
Name calling, really? Did I make you that mad with so little? Here is something else. Your "bowed down" verse does not refer to anything permanent or not even a disease. Text from the same author:

Psalm 35:14 I behaved myself as though he had been my friend or brother: I bowed down heavily, as one that mourneth for his mother.

Psalm 38:6 I am troubled; I am bowed down greatly; I go mourning all the day long.

The "bowing down" clearly refers to mourning and reflection, not a disease. I find it interesting that you deleted the second part of the verse you posted though (bolded above).

X-ing that paragrab again, are we?

Do you know the difference between a penitent Psalm and an impreccatory Psalm?

CabVet · Aug 13, 2013

AV1611VET said:
X-ing that paragrab again, are we?

Do you know the difference between a penitent Psalm and an impreccatory Psalm?

Actually, what I am looking for is the difference between "bowing down in mourning" and "bowing down in mourning".

New proto-mammal fossil

Newbie

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Regular Member

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Question everything

Similar threads