Actually it's in Arizona.
London Bridge (Lake Havasu City) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But it does bring up an interesting point. What evidence would convince you of the theory of evolution being correct Jazer?
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.
Looking at the photo I do believe it. It's a scam. But you can believe what you want. You can even believe that the London Bridge is in Colorado if you want.
Based on the Bible School I attended.
Only according to Creationists. It has long been established that A. afarensis was bipedal, and indeed A. afarensis changed the previous belief that an increased brain size preceded bipedal locomotion - when, in fact, the reverse was true. Wikipedia has a list of skeletal features that point to bipedal motion.
Because Creationists have not painted themselves into a corner. Evolutionists try to make Lucy look human. They give her human hands, human feet, human skull, human pelvis, human shoulder blades. NONE of it is true. It is a misrepresentation. Lucy lived in the trees. No monkey under 4 foot would be able to live on the ground and survive. Watch the video and that will explain everything. No reason for me to repeat what is in the video.Only according to Creationists.
I accept bottleneck theory, genetic drift and things like that. It's really genetics, but they like to call those things evolution. I accept population genetics. Of course that is considered to be 99% accurate and can be used as evidence in court.But it does bring up an interesting point. What evidence would convince you of the theory of evolution being correct Jazer?
I do not think there is any need for you to be so insulting. It only cost $50 per class. Cost that much to pay the electric bill. They had a $32,000 utility bill one winter. They tried to get a hold of the guy who ran the utility company but he was in Flordia and could not be reached. Most likely out on his yacht. How about if we sue him?Have you considered suing them for a tuition refund and damages?
Because Creationists have not painted themselves into a corner. Evolutionists try to make Lucy look human. They give her human hands, human feet, human skull, human pelvis, human shoulder blades. NONE of it is true. It is a misrepresentation. Lucy lived in the trees. No monkey under 4 foot would be able to live on the ground and survive. Watch the video and that will explain everything. No reason for me to repeat what is in the video.
Lucy was not a monkey. She had intermediate features, not human. Intermediate jaws, feet, hands. Not human. She was certainly not a monkey, though could probably climb trees better than us. This ability hardly precludes bipedal locomotion. Its you creationists who claim there are no intermediates, yet Lucy is filled with them. So, you have to claim she is nothing but a monkey.
Lucy is not filled with them, the fake artwork is filled with them.Lucy is filled with them.
NNnno. Some scientists disagree heatedly before a consensus is reached, and during paradigm shifts. Mostly.Ok, science does not agree & you think I am not qualifed to determine who is right and who is wrong.
is meaningless.So that means evolutionary theory is worthless.
This is not about religion, Jazer. What we believe in terms of spirituality cannot and does not translate to science. You can't choose to believe that the world is cubic for example, and expect that to be treated with any respect. We operate with principles which are radically different from the religious ones.Because no one is qualified to know who to believe and who not to believe.
Science does not conflict with christianity. If it does that means reality and God's creation conflicts with it, rendering whatever flavor of christianity experiences the conflict worthless.I do not care anyways, because I am more interested to study the Bible and to attend Bible school.
It isn't. The bible is a spiritual book, not a religious one. So yeah. In that sense it translates as science and spirituality and religion are two different domains that do not cross over into one another. So, if your bible school starts mocking and acting derisively to areas where they do not have expertise: Leave immediately. That kind of placeBut using your standard most of science is not qualifed to comment on the Bible.
3rd grade level of understanding? I assume you meant to add "of the bible" or alternately "of religion/faith" there Jazer. I hope so anyway.Esp the ones that do not even have a 3 rd grade level of understanding and have had no training in the Bible at all. The door swings both ways, you can not have one without the other.
It is common courtesy to cite your sources (which, in this case, appears to be creation.com). In any case, the conclusion that Lucy was a knuckle-walker stems from a faulty analysis comparing her wrists to those of modern knuckle-walkers - instead, her locking wrists stem from her arboreal ancestry, not her knuckle-walking.she was a knuckle walker, according to this study done....
"A. anememsis and A. afarensis- the latter represented by the famous skeleton known as Lucy - had wrists capable of locking the hands in place during knuckle walking." - Science News April 8, 2000
It is common knowledge that lucy's hands and feet were also highly curved as to promote suspension from limbs, and not a foot of an upright walker. (Stern, J., and Susman, R., American Journal of Physical Anthropology 60(3):279317, 1983. )
distinctly quadrupedal specialization characteristic of some living apes and is quite different than walking upright. Richmond and Strait identify four skeletal features of the distal radius of the living knuckle-walking apes, chimpanzees and gorillas. They also identify similar morphological features on two early hominids, including Lucy:
A UPGMA clustering diagram illustrates the similarity between the radii of A. anamensis and A. afarensis and those of the knuckle-walking African apes, indicating that these hominids retain the derived wrist morphology of knuckle-walkers....
Richmond, B.G. and Strait, D.S., Evidence that humans evolved from a knuckle-walking ancestor, Nature 404(6776):382, 2000.
same book says "there is no evidence that any extant primate has long, curved heavily muscled hands and feet for any purponse other than to meet the demands of full or part time arboreal (tree) life."
Perhaps, but Lucy was more than capable of walking as humans do (kinematic analysis here).ape feet are hardly able to make a left right stride as humans have
Lucy's dating has never really been in question: she is 3.18-3.22 million years old. And there is good evidence that AL 129-1 (the knee joint found near Lucy) is indeed from a member of Australopithecus afarensis (including its condyle and femoral shaft) Both Lucy and the knee, as well as future A. afarensis fossils, indicate bipedality.secondly,
Lucys entire skeleton was found about two and a half kilometers from the site in which the bipedal knee joint was found. The conclusion that both fossils originate from the same species is questionable, and might have been influenced by Johansons pre-existing biases. To this day the argument continues about the validity of the dating of Lucys bones, as well as the other scattered bones found in the same vicinity. This argument does not add credibility to the claim that the knee joint Johanson found previously belongs to the same species as Lucy, or even that they are from the same period of time.
Regardless of this man's opinion, he needs to cite some evidence to support his conjecture. The rest of the academic community have noted that Lucy's pelvis is virtually identical to humans in all but size, further supporting the case her bipedal locomotion. Her pelvis most certainly did allow for bipedal motion - perhaps he is mistaking the original, misshapen pelvis?..from the same essay
When Lucys bones were examined, they didnt add up to her being a biped. The pelvis was the biggest problem, as it didnt seem to allow for Lucy to walk upright.
Critically analyzing the discovery of Lucy (Australopithicus Afarensis) >> SmarterThanThat
Because Creationists have not painted themselves into a corner. Evolutionists try to make Lucy look human. They give her human hands, human feet, human skull, human pelvis, human shoulder blades. NONE of it is true. It is a misrepresentation.
No, she lived on the ground.Lucy lived in the trees.
Which video?No monkey under 4 foot would be able to live on the ground and survive. Watch the video and that will explain everything. No reason for me to repeat what is in the video.
It is common courtesy to cite your sources (which, in this case, appears to be creation.com). In any case, the conclusion that Lucy was a knuckle-walker stems from a faulty analysis comparing her wrists to those of modern knuckle-walkers - instead, her locking wrists stem from her arboreal ancestry, not her knuckle-walking.
And there is good evidence that AL 129-1 (the knee joint found near Lucy) is indeed from a member of Australopithecus afarensis
Her pelvis most certainly did allow for bipedal motion - perhaps he is mistaking the original, misshapen pelvis?
I am talking about a contest between a Phd and a third grade Sunday School Bible Student. They have a program on TV are you smarter then a 5th grader. I am talking about Are You Smarter then a Third Grader when it comes to knowing your Bible.3rd grade level of understanding? I assume you meant to add "of the bible"
I didn't quote 2 Peter 3:8 because it would be out of context. I use Psalm 90:3 instead but I didn't convey what I actually meant.Why? We can't see any indications of it, and time for God is not like time for us. Why would He need to speed something up as seen from our perspective when we are told time for Him is not at all like time for us. So speeding time up like that would not give much meaning to be honest. Not since time doesn't matter to God AND nothing appears to support the notion.
Time is not as easy as all that. Study a wee bit of relativity and you'll see just how far from the popular perception time actually is - even in our universe/reality. And to quote the bible: 2 Peter 3:8–9 reads:
‘But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.’
(My emphasis). This is made clear several places in the bible. So why insist on God altering time as seen from our perspective when nothing appears to support that notion?
Yeah it's subjective. I came up with it after interpreting the quotes I provided.That's something of a subjective interpretation of both science and the Bible, isn't it? Is there anything in science that suggests there was any acceleration of time? Are you referring to relativistic time dilation? Even then, what exactly do you mean by God "accelerated the 13 billion years to 6 days"?
During that time, if there are still people and animals, they'll experience the orbit in real time. At least that's what I think.That's a pretty loose interpretation. As the article you cite mentioned:
"They created the most detailed model to date of the Sun's transition to a red giant, based on observations of six nearby red giant stars. Sure enough, they found that Earth's orbit will widen at first. But Earth will also induce a "tidal bulge" on the Sun's surface, with its own gravitational pull. The bulge will lag just behind the Earth in its orbit, slowing it down enough to drag it to a fiery demise."
The Earth's orbit may indeed be widened, but it will not widen enough.
Bible merely reveals them. Science elaborates on such things.If God is going to intervene and end the Earth in seconds, then why look to science? Surely science will reveal no portent about God's future action - the Sun's natural life will end the Earth over millions of years, not seconds.
Interesting.According to science, the universe has only ever got more chaotic. Local decreases in entropy are offset by a universal increase.
I'm searching. What about the earth's rotation?What you think has little relevance especially when you have absolutely no scientific basis to base you ideas on.
This world will become a very dangerous place to live in if we are to allow superstition to rule our lives!
God help us all if religious fundamentalism overrules science!
At least your willing to admit the deception.Yep, she totally has human hands
What is the point of your images?At least your willing to admit the deception.
Will the REAL Lucy Please Stand Up?
What is the point of your images?
Different apes are different? Not really controversial.
Lucy is more like a human then a gorilla, which is more similar to a human then a monkey?
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?