Ignoring The Evidence : Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

[Gene2memE]

Lucy was an ape not a human

Lucy was neither an ape nor a human. Lucy was an Australopithecus afarensis, an extinct species of hominid that forms part of the long and complex lineage to our last common ancestor with Pan troglodytes.

sapien means wise

Correct. And Homo sapiens means 'wise man'. That doesn't answer the question about what homonid species your "caveman" is.

and science fails to clarify why the peking man was taken out of the text books, because they were abnormaly aged humans with diseases causing the ape like bone structure.They were modern human just as all other sub species of early man.

Peking man remains in the textbooks, so much so that this so 2013 exam cram guide includes it, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there.

I'd like a citation on that claim that they were abnormally aged humans, as there haven been any serious claims that Peking Man was a modern human since the late 1940s. Bones of 15 individuals have been cataloged and dated, showing fairly clearly that they were Homo erectus that lived about 500-680,000 years ago. In other words, they were an ancestor species.

The feet are the same, artist rendered the ape like skin but really they can only go by the bones. The frail density of the bones they use to determine the age is backwards. The frailness was caused by the old age of the human and not because the bones came from a far distant past but closer than previously considered. Imagine a human growing older than normal, the brows protrude and raise, the forehead flattens and pulls back due to constant tug, they had more brain capacity, larger ears and broad nostrils, usually found with a stick cane for support, and because of an early rich oxygen content healed quicker and prolonged life.

Evidence of such?

These bones are usually bigger than average suggesting amazing feet and strength considering ancient monuments.

Evidence of such?

Foot prints along side huge lizard tracks are often found to have the same modern shape of a barefoot human today implying that in a time when the beasts of the field walked along side man (eden) and have you seen the insects of that era?

If a dinosaur had nostrils the size of that of a horse yet grew so large, it was the amount of oxygen content but the richness that kept it living.

The evidence uncovered in the last 25 years suggests that oxygen levels of the mid-to-late Triassic, when the very largest dinosaurs like the Sauropods were alive, were in all likelihood between 15 and 20%, slightly lower that current oxygen level of 21%. Its counter intuitive, but as dinosaur evolution started favouring gigantism as a survival strategy, oxygen content was constantly in decline (from highs above 30% around 450 million years ago)

Reptiles continue to grow until death.

The are many reptile species continue to grow, albeit very, very slowly once reaching maturity. Same with amphibians, snakes, some fish and even a few birds and marsupials.

This is known as 'indeterminate' growth. This doesn't mean that they can reach unlimited size. Even if a leaf skink lives to 10,000 years, its never going to reach the size of a Brontosaurus.

Isiah also prophesied that a day will come again when man and beast can walk along side and a baby can dip his hand into a snake pit unharmed, lions will graze the field with the cattle. "I have given you the fruits and the seeds and trees for your meat. They extract the contents of the seed which causes aging in bread, thats how it became white, this was mans tampering with nature and altering our lifespan

Claims are claims and evidence is evidence. How about less of the former and more of the latter.

 

[eartheart]

the second part

 

[bhsmte]

the second part

Posting videos without any summary of the same is frowned upon.

Explain what this video claims in your own words.

 

[Gene2memE]

the second part

Oh, its a Ken Ham video. Its not so much that it needs debunking, as it is a wonder why you'd post it at all.

I've watched it before, in fact I've gone through the whole (painful) series. I'm not going to do a rebuttal on a two-hour plus video. Suffice to say though, Mr Ham is neither honest with his presentation and accurate in his interpretations. In fact, he's be shown to have alright falsified some of his claims.

Trolling with Logic has done some excellent step by step takedown videos of Mr Ham's presentations. I'll just leave this here, if you'd like to watch a quartet of PhDs and PhD candidates taking his arguments apart. Be warned though, it contains some moderately strong language, and plenty of alcohol.

 

[stevevw]

Do you not believe that God penned both the Word and the Works?

That by understanding the things made we come to an understanding of those invisible qualities of God?

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

There is nothing wrong with science - just that people have a tendency to twist the data to fit their beliefs - instead of fitting their beliefs to the data.

I dont think newhopeinHim is meaning to discard the science. It is more about not trying to prove a faith in God through a scientific method. It will never happen. If you could prove God through a scientific method then there would be no need for faith.
Hebrews 11:1
Faith means being sure of the things we hope for and knowing that something is real even if we do not see it.

The evidence for God is different for each person who believes in God. They may see him in a baby's face, they may see God in the form of a stranger who helps them. They may see God is nature or a sun rise. Whilst I agree that understanding nature and things like the universe gives us a better understanding of how God works for the believer it is different for each person. They may see that same confirmation in simple things as well. We just have to be careful we dont place to much importance of proving everything about God and being fixated on the evidence as well.

 

[stevevw]

Or that he is wrong. I was simply answering the question as asked.

Fair enough sorry my bad. I should have updated myself with the posts.

 

[stevevw]

For most of the history of Christianity (say to the end of the 15th century), knowledge of Jesus was largely confined to Europe.

That doesn't make sense. Europe was completely Christianized by the 5th century. It grew and became the religion of the Roman empire and when the empire came to an end Christianity spread quickly throughout Europe. It had reached Russia in the 1st century. It was in China in the 6th century as well. It must have reached the middle east fairly early as Mohammad acknowledges Jesus when he was around in the 6th century as well.

Christianity may have reached many places even earlier around the late 1st to mid 2nd century as there were reports of Christian tribes in places like Northern Africa and India. The disciple Paul covered a very large area including Asia and Africa. Considering other countries like Australia and America were not discovered until much later I think the Message of Christianity had reached most of the world fairly early. It would have taken some time to spread the message to the far reaches of these countries. In fact even through the early missionary years many remote areas still hadn't heard the Gospel. Some still havnt today.

http://russia.rin.ru/guides_e/6483.html
http://www.christiansinchina.com/2010/05/31/history-of-christianity-in-china-2/
http://www.worldology.com/Christianity/rise_christianity.htm

 

[eartheart]

The Bible should have never existed in the first place it even says this in the first books, it also takes about her as a harlot sitting on the seven hills of atlas, spread from east to west. But the cathos wanted war with science, they saw bifocals as an abomination, that the lens would have a counter part, a negative reaction. They saw weapons not as progress but as a forerunner to its counter weapon. Look at the vatican today, mostly scientist priest, even cathos is the targeter of heat unto the anode in x ray. Funny how science uses Biblical names too. Eniac whirlwind, atom, etc. I see the two working together secretly i mean, the bible is the first book taught to civilize people i to one universal society, science is logic while the religion is a bit of a trance or sleep. These two are an old old couple

 

[eartheart]

I remember going to the beach the first time a child, it was like i created this, i was a creator of all the things i saw, i was with creation, creating it with it. But then things changed when the catholic church started teaching me about devils and demons i lost that connection. I burned the bible, only later to be engulfed in it in my later years.

 

[Black Dog]

Barney Rubble, what an actor............

lol, still one of my favorite movie quotes.

 

[bhsmte]

lol, still one of my favorite movie quotes.

Mine too.

 

[YaphaSheba]

Hey,
Have you noticed that this world is falling apart? You want to know why?
Dont do this, God says most of you will:

Matthew 10:22 "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."

A godless nation can never stand, history proved it. Do you know Him and his purpose?
For us to come to His kingdom:

A place with great gold streets where you will prosper. The pleasures will be almost ungraspable. The angels will serve you, and God will love you as he does now. You will have dominion over animals. The almighty will keep you eternally happy.

On this planet for right now, He'll constantly bless you, as long as you keep His laws.

Psalms 20:4 says He will “Grant thee according to thine own heart, and fulfill all thy counsel.”

Many say He doesn't exist. Well, dentists exist. Why are there people with untreated cavities? Because they dont go to the dentist. The same is with God. He doesn't help you because you don't go to Him for help.

The bible is your best friend. In it, Jesus's words reveal thousands of prophecies that have came true and still are.

Do you want to take up His cross? Just accept His son, ask for forgiveness of your sins, and turn to Him.

 

[RickG]

Hey,
Have you noticed that this world is falling apart? You want to know why?
Dont do this, God says most of you will:

Matthew 10:22 "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."

A godless nation can never stand, history proved it. Do you know Him and his purpose?
For us to come to His kingdom:

A place with great gold streets where you will prosper. The pleasures will be almost ungraspable. The angels will serve you, and God will love you as he does now. You will have dominion over animals. The almighty will keep you eternally happy.

On this planet for right now, He'll constantly bless you, as long as you keep His laws.

Psalms 20:4 says He will “Grant thee according to thine own heart, and fulfill all thy counsel.”

Many say He doesn't exist. Well, dentists exist. Why are there people with untreated cavities? Because they dont go to the dentist. The same is with God. He doesn't help you because you don't go to Him for help.

The bible is your best friend. In it, Jesus's words reveal thousands of prophecies that have came true and still are.

Do you want to take up His cross? Just accept His son, ask for forgiveness of your sins, and turn to Him.

What does that have to do with ignoring the evidence for evolution?

 

[YaphaSheba]

It doesn't, I just need God heard.

 

[bhsmte]

It doesn't, I just need God heard.

If a God is out there and he really wants to be heard, he should be able to handle that.

 

[RickG]

It doesn't, I just need God heard.

Why?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Am I free to make unevidenced, untestable, unfalsifiable statements, as you did?

I've made no claims that are unevidenced, untestable or unfalsifiable.

All my claims are in direct agreement WITH science.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy

But if you have some kind of proof the science is incorrect??????

I am not the one claiming to know.

Study science and you would know.

Not stupid, but appropriate.

No, stupid and inappropriate. Would have taken you two seconds to do a search to find out what science believes all things are made of.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Show me a religion that claims the absence of the body of one of those individuals as "evidence" for the veracity of their belief system.

lol.

Show me one historical claim that absence of a body is claimed as evidence for it not being true?????

As a matter of fact you claim your missing links are just "missing" - absence of a body doesn't seem to bother you much at all when it comes to your faith.

What part of "I'll go with the experts, thanks" did you fail to comprehend?

The question stands, why do you not go with the experts?

What part of all the experts agree that he did exist do YOU not understand? Show me where the experts say Jesus did not exist historically?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus
"Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed historically,... and historians consider the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) to be the best sources for investigating the historical Jesus."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
"Nevertheless there is "near universal consensus" among scholars that Jesus existed historically,"

Again - you claim to believe the experts - yet the historical experts believe he did exist. Funny how what you believe does not match them. Funny how you make claims you follow them - yet they diagree with you. Claims with no substance are just mere claims. Anyone can do that. I provided you with verifiable links the experts agree he existed - you provide nothing.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

There's a lot to unpack in your post, but lets give it a go.

"Cavemen" is a really imprecise term - do you mean neanderthals, denisovans, homo sapiens or any of our older hominid ancestors?

What do you mean by "hunched over"? Are you referring to the iconic image of the horizontal progression along a series of a common ape ancestor through various hominid ancestors that are less ape like and more like us all the way through to anatomically modern humans? Anatomically modern humans emerged around 50-80,000 years ago and that iconic picture isnt actually that accurate. To use a Terry Pratchett phrase is a "lies we tell to children" to allow them to understand the basics of what is actually a very complicated concept.

Do you have any extra-biblical evidence that these "cavemen" lived for 900 years, and not, say and average lifespan of under 40 years?

What do you mean by "wise"? Does that mean more or less intelligent than modern humans?

White bread is not an abomination. Its highly processed source of carbohydrate and contains some preservatives, and has a small but important role in the Western world's obesity crisis, but its not an abomination. Now natto, that's an abomination!

"The world is not millions of years old only thousands." Well, you're wrong on both of those. The world is billions of years old. 5.543 (+/- about 50 million years). We've known that the world is at least 10s of millions of years old for better than 200 years, thanks to chemical dating, better than 100s of millions of years old for better than 150 years, thanks to knowledge of volcanism, and better than billions of years old for more than 100 years, thanks to radiometric dating. If you want to challenge this, you've got a lot of legwork to do.

"Science evolutionist are 100% lies." Not sure that makes a lot of grammatical sense, but I get your gist. Unfortunately for you, the theory of biological evolution is one of the most robustly evidenced and supported theories in human history. We understand biological evolution better than we do gravity, for example. If it was all lies, then its the biggest conspiracy in history. Hundreds of thousands of practicing biologist, paleontologists, geologists and historians are all actively deceiving the general public and have done so for better than 150 years. The other interpretation, that people circa 2500-2800 years ago invoked gods for things they had no explanation for, is vastly less complicated and much more satisfactory. The application of Occam's Razor would seem to suggest the latter is correct.


I've probably waffled enough, but one more point. Hitchen's dictum - That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence - would seem to apply here.

If you're going to make a series of claims - cavemen lived for 900 years, the world is thousands of years old, ccience evolutionist are 100% lies - then you should support those with evidence. Otherwise, your claims carry about the same weight as the phrase 'Spiderman lives in New York and saved Mary Jane Parker from the Green Goblin'.

Hope this helps

Why do all evolutionists refuse to accept empirical observations??????

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...an-evolutionist.7916357/page-15#post-68891501

Are you going to run from it too as every other evolutionist on here has????

And please, stop with those illogical fallacies that majority means correct.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

All of science once believed the Milky-Way was the entire universe. They too thought they had observational data to back up that belief. They were sincere - not lying to us - but that didn't make them any less wrong just because they believed they were right.

I am still waiting for someone to match theory to the observational evidence instead of asking we ignore it.

And if you wish to discuss Relativity - we can certainly have a discussion of the age of the earth - as long as you promise you won't suddenly turn 360 degrees and reject the theory they claim to follow in calculating the age of the universe?????

Although the belief it is a young earth is wrong because they mistranslated the second word in the second verse of the Bible. Hayah does not mean it's present condition - but the condition it fell into or became. It is only man and the animals created with him that are young.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Have you ever tried paragraphs?

Have you ever tried anything but avoidance of the subject in the posts?