We have facts, not a Bible. I show you how hominids have changed through time, and you just ignore it. Go figure.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
From the evolutionist Bible I see. All this shows as my video pointed out was human and apes had variety of different skulls. We even have a case of human with very small skull size buried along with modern day humans.
You haven't show me nothing. All you show me in different skulls with most of them was glue together based on evolutionist assumptions.
I know this is false. Here is an example of evolutionist assumption were wrong.No assumptions were made in reconstructing those fossils, other than the assumption of bilateralism.
How did you determine that there is stasis in the fossil record? What would disprove stasis in the fossil record?
Previous artists’ conceptions based on reconstructions from broken, partial skulls have tended to give the alleged human ancestors weak, ape-like chins. Skull 5 looks more like Jay Leno. (That joke won’t mean much 14 years from now.)
I know this is false. Here is an example of evolutionist assumption were wrong.
http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v18i2f.htm#footnote6
That's what I've been saying. This is why it's forbidden in scripture. It's one of the ten commandments. Today Man tries to explain away his origins with a theory created by the image of his mind.
Because God is wired into man doesn't mean he going to worship his true Creator but instead believe everything under the sun but the true God.
That is very strange, considering the fact that Stabilizing Selection is a long supported part of the Theory of evolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stabilizing_selectionSomething like stasis in the fossil record.
I think it was rather presumptuous for someone who was clearly not interested in learning anything to fail to have a response when confronted with facts. It sure is beautiful up here in North Dakota. Don't you agree.That is very strange, considering the fact that Stabilizing Selection is a long supported part of the Theory of evolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stabilizing_selection
I think of North Dakota as Topologically Challenged, LOL!I think it was rather presumptuous for someone who was clearly not interested in learning anything to fail to have a response when confronted with facts. It sure is beautiful up here in North Dakota. Don't you agree.
I think of North Dakota as Topologically Challenged, LOL!
I don't find that surprising since everything under the sun support evolution which mean it explains absolutely nothing. Of course evolutionist has to explain away why the fossil record doesn't support the theory.That is very strange, considering the fact that Stabilizing Selection is a long supported part of the Theory of evolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stabilizing_selection
Why would you quote a software designer as an expert in the field?I know this is false. Here is an example of evolutionist assumption were wrong.
http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v18i2f.htm#footnote6
The exact same reason people post from Talkorigins and act as if it's the gospel.Why would you quote a software designer as an expert in the field?
From your linky:
"Do-While Jones writes and speaks about software development in general, and about the Ada programming language in particular."
I don't find that surprising since everything under the sun support evolution which mean it explains absolutely nothing.
Of course evolutionist has to explain away why the fossil record doesn't support the theory.
Gould claim up with "punctuated equilibrium" try to come up for an excuse why the fossil record didn't Darwin's theory.
The exact same reason people post from Talkorigins and act as if it's the gospel.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/06/do_all_life_for096771.htmlEvolution could not explain numerous and obvious violations of the nested hierarchy among complex eukaryotes. It couldn't explain a rabbit in Cambrian strata.
Of course. PE is just evolutionist trying to claim evidence that support creation and hoping no one notices.Punctuated equilibria is evolution.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/06/do_all_life_for096771.html
I think he done a good job pointed out a lot of violations of the nested hierarchy.
Of course. PE is just evolutionist trying to claim evidence that support creation.
I've already show a video that compared the evidence vs evolutionist assumption. The dotted line are based on evolutionist belief in their tree.You think? Why don't you pick one and let's see if it stands up to scrutiny.
Why would common ancestry not support creation?How does speciation and common ancestry support creation?
I've already show a video that compared the evidence vs evolutionist assumption. The dotted line are based on evolutionist belief in their tree.
Why would common ancestry not support creation?
No you haven't. Dolphins and bats shared genes that not doesn't fit the evolution myth.(not the result of common ancestry)I have already addressed your claims. Those lines represent shared characteristics and shared DNA, WHICH STILL EXIST.
You are referring to the Frankencell myth. Creationist believe in common ancestor as shown in my video ,stasis, vertical lines and not the imaginary lines evolutionist add in to make a tree.Are you saying that creationism is fine with humans and other mammals sharing a common ancestor?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?