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.
So much for he validity of your source; Orangutans are NOT monkeys! They are APES! BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!recent analysis says she was a knuckle walker. Arboreal ancestry doesn't create locking wrists but the opposite as it pulls not compresses. However her wrist flexors are very similar to arboreal type monkeys.
Richmond, B.G. and Strait, D.S., Evidence that humans evolved from a knuckle-walking ancestor, Nature 404(6776):382-385, 2000. Monkeys that climb trees (ie: orangutans and spider monkeys etc.) also have an angled knee joint like humans.
Chimps are vastly superior to humans when it comes to photographic memory! So what's your point?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.
They had a fund raiser once. They got people to pledge $1 for every verse that the student was able to memorize. People did not realize how much it was going to cost them. Perhaps they thought the most a third grader could memorize was 20 or 30 passages, with the reference number. It was more like two or three hundred. The people paid up though.
What is the point of your images?
lucy's jaw bone is the wrong shape...Lucy is more like a human then a gorilla...
...and she is way too short...Lucy is more like a human then a gorilla...
...and her brain too small to be human.Lucy is more like a human then a gorilla...
The problem with analysing Lucy's wrists is that she wasn't found with any, so such analyses are inherently sketchy. Moreover, her pelvis, torso, and legs, are still indicators of bipedal locomotion. And when we look at a more complete fossil of A. afarensis (i.e., one with wrists):recent analysis says she was a knuckle walker. Arboreal ancestry doesn't create locking wrists but the opposite as it pulls not compresses. However her wrist flexors are very similar to arboreal type monkeys.
Richmond, B.G. and Strait, D.S., Evidence that humans evolved from a knuckle-walking ancestor, Nature 404(6776):382-385, 2000. Monkeys that climb trees (ie: orangutans and spider monkeys etc.) also have an angled knee joint like humans.
Here (en français; you may need to find the English version), here (where it is used in an extensive kinematic meta-analysis of A. afarensis), and here (where it is again used in an extensive overview of both A. afarensis and A. africanus, the conclusion of which is that both share all the hallmarks of bipedal motion, and that A. africanus was likely more arboreal than A. afarensis).You have provided no sources for this information
Indeed. However, we have many other instances of A. afarensis, allowing us to judge Lucy's pelvis.There is a chance of error in reconstructing the original pelvis for one.
Undoubtedly. However, the fact remains that she was bipedal. Whether she was bipedal because her ancestors walked upright in trees (like orangutangs) before descending permanently (like chimps), or because she simply walked upright in the Savannah, is a source of some speculation. The fact remains, however, that A. afarensis was bipedal.Secondly, there are tree dwelling chimps that have a similar angled knee joints so even if she was a biped, no more that a tree dwelling chimp. Also the Blades of her hip were oriented as in chimpanzee (Stern and Susman 1983, p.292.) Features of afarensis hip therefore "enable proficient climbing" (Stern and Susman 1983, p. 290).
So, from the dinosaurs point of view, they lived for years. From X's point of view, they lived for seconds or minutes. Who, then, is 'X', and how do we know he/she/it/they observed dinosaurs to live and die in a matter of seconds?Yeah it's subjective. I came up with it after interpreting the quotes I provided.
By acceleration, I actually meant everything in those days experienced change in time in real time. Dinosaurs would have died and lived in seconds, minutes, or hours rather than years and to them, it would have been seconds, minutes, or hours.
It will not occur for several billion years, and by that point the human race will likely be long extinct. Our species may well survive in the guise of an ancestral taxon, but it's unlikely humanity will have any descendants that resemble modern humans. Besides, what do you mean by "they'll experience the orbit in real time"? What other way is there?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.
The Bible may well say that they rotted "while still standing on their feet", but science doesn't corroborate that event.Bible merely reveals them. Science elaborates on such things.
The plague in Zech. 14:12, by the sound of it, it sounds like rapid decay.
Decomposition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But there's no indication of the heart stopping. It says this rotting is the plague. Instant death.
It doesn't have an effect on entropy. Like a piston being drawn out, it would only increase entropy, if anything.Interesting.
What about the universe expanding?
How many Bible verses can a Chimp memorize with the referance number?Chimps are vastly superior to humans when it comes to photographic memory!
What is the point of the program on TV: "Are you smarter then a 5th grader". The point is that the average person does not even have a third grade level of understanding of their Bible. Even if you base that on one hour a week from when they start sunday school. It is not unusual for them to start at the age of one. So that would be 52 weeks a year for one hour a week for seven years. So by the third grade a student should have had at least 364 hours of teaching.So what's your point?
You don't stand a chance against a chimp! Man Vs Chimp - memory test - YouTubeHow many Bible verses can a Chimp memorize with the referance number?
Oh yes of course Apes are much more people like.So much for he validity of your source; Orangutans are NOT monkeys! They are APES! BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!
How many Bible verses can a Chimp memorize with the referance number?
It would not surprise me if a LOT of people here have less then even one hour of Bible teaching.
What little tiny bit of Bible education they do get they tend to ignore or disregard.
So when it comes to the Bible most skeptics are uneducated. Very few of them have any substantial Bible knowledge.
Yet I have spent thousands of hours to study Science and the skeptics attack me for knowing so little.
Yet they have not even spent an hour to study the Bible. In fact I doubt if the people that attack me even have spent as much time as I have to study science. Because people really just judge themselves and try to project that out on others.
Perhaps you could rig a test that would show a slug to be "vastly superior" also. You may want to put a little bit of thought into what you just said.Chimps are vastly superior to humans when it comes to photographic memory! So what's your point?
The problem with analysing Lucy's wrists is that she wasn't found with any, so such analyses are inherently sketchy. Moreover, her pelvis, torso, and legs, are still indicators of bipedal locomotion. And when we look at a more complete fossil of A. afarensis (i.e., one with wrists):
There are also newly found fossils in Etheopia that show A. afarensis had foot arches, demonstrating that they were bipedal the the large majority of their lives:
"A complete fourth metatarsal of A. afarensis was recently discovered at Hadar, Ethiopia. " - Source.
Undoubtedly. However, the fact remains that she was bipedal. Whether she was bipedal because her ancestors walked upright in trees (like orangutangs) before descending permanently (like chimps), or because she simply walked upright in the Savannah, is a source of some speculation. The fact remains, however, that A. afarensis was bipedal.
Lucy is not filled with them, the fake artwork is filled with them.
They can not produce the evidence they they are looking for, so the fabricate it.
Do they make a kjv for chimps?At least as many as you -- it's your own fault for not being able to speak chimp.
What is the agenda? We teach the Bible and we teach Bible truth. The "agenda" comes later when they are old enough to go into the sanctuary to hear the pastor preach. It is interesting how with the Amish and Mennonite every church has different standards they follow. They may allow a tractor but not a car. Some allow a car but the car has to be black. Many of them seem to allow cell phones. Then you have the Catholics with two standards. The so called old and the new.You mean an hour of someone such as yourself drilling specific, agenda-driven interpretations of the Bible into children's heads since before they were capable of critical thinking?
It is still far fetched to say lucy gave up living in the trees to become a human transition. I am unsure where you are going with all of this. The 4th metatarsal looks human to me but I am no expert.
Because there have been reproductions made, you conclude that the evidence is frabricated??? huh??
The evidence is on the left, I see no connection between that and the human looking creation on the right.
So your point is that it is ok to lie to people if it serves your agenda? I am looking for the truth, not fabricated misrepresentations of the evidence.And so what Jazer?
I'm dispelling the myths you seem to adhere to. Lucy was bipedal, despite what you may have been told. Your arguments up till now were aimed at demonstrating she was "just an ape".It is still far fetched to say lucy gave up living in the trees to become a human transition. I am unsure where you are going with all of this.
Indeed, and neither am I. People who actually are experts, however, say that the fourth metatarsal is that of a biped, not a quadruped (as per your claim in #629).The 4th metatarsal looks human to me but I am no expert.
Yet another example of "I'm not an expert, BUT...." You really are dedicated to proving my point in my most recent thread.. aren't you? Thanks.The evidence is on the left, I see no connection between that and the human looking creation on the right.
The hands do look a bit off in that model. Here is one that looks more accurate:For one thing look at the hands, you could play a piano with hands like that. It's an outright scam.
Although it is wonderful art. I just wish they did not try to misrepresent the evidence.
The hands and feet are more accurate,The hands do look a bit off in that model.
Here is one that looks more accurate:
3d model lucy australopithecus
So, is that one also an "outright scam?"
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?