new primate fossil

[randman]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/tj_v15n2_homininskull.asp

 

[Zadok]

... yeah, because getting all our information from a bunch of guys who got their PHDs by sending a SASE and 35 bucks really makes sense...

 

[randman]

Uh, so ridicule and derison counts for substantive posts. Hey, if you really say nasty things about them, like ya'll do Nick, i suspect they are doing fairly well. Ya got 0 credibility in my book, and though you may say the same thing about me, I used to believe ya'll's spin.

no more

 

[Zadok]

Here, go to some REAL science based news sites if you really want to read this-

Hardly a new species...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/wt40000.html

http://crab.rutgers.edu/~christen/Aboutanthro/weekly/aa032601a.htm

http://www.archaeologyinfo.com/kenyanthropus.htm

 

[Zadok]

Uh, so ridicule and derison counts for substantive posts. Hey, if you really say nasty things about them, like ya'll do Nick, i suspect they are doing fairly well. Ya got 0 credibility in my book, and though you may say the same thing about me, I used to believe ya'll's spin.

Ok...

The bible says so, so it must be true...

Wow, considering %90 of christianity accepts all the findings of science, and since your part of the "fundamentalist minority", you must be right then eh?

 

[randman]

Nah. From your tone, it isn't worth the time, and if you think Talkorigins is a "science" site that you'd recommend, I don't think too highly of your judgment.
TO is a propaganda site.

 

[Zadok]

Nah. From your tone, it isn't worth the time, and if you think Talkorigins is a "science" site that you'd recommend, I don't think too highly of your judgment.

Wow, I suppose a traditional "science" book couldn't handle your christian home schooled scruitiny.

TO is a propaganda site.

I don't suppose this is a conspiracy theory?

 

[Jerry Smith]

I wonder which creationists consider Kenyanthropus platyops fully ape & which consider it fully human? That's always an interesting question.

 

[Morat]

There's a nice chart on TO, listing the more pertinent hominid fossils, in chronological order.

Next to them is the name of three or four prominent Creationists or groups and whether they consider the fossil in question ape or human.

The earliest fossils are uniformly listed as "ape". The most recent as "human". Those in between show a graduation of opinion.

The middle ones are uniformly split between "human" and "ape" according to Creationists.

I can't think of a better rebutally to anyone's claim that they aren't transitional than to point out that people who are absolutely dead set against them being transitional, can't agree if they're ape or human.