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.
They are pretty much all contested if you look into it.
You mean in the way that some scientists think they aren't legitimate? I hope you aren't serious.
Not in the way you're implying, they aren't. Try looking beyond Creationist sites at what real scientists say.They are pretty much all contested if you look into it.
Many, many years ago I came across a thread in the Usenet group sci.anthropology about the aquatic ape theory. In it the professional scientists were schooling a clueless newbie about some of the finer points of anthropology and why they showed the AAT to be wrong. I found it very educational because I was a clueless newbie concerning anthropology - and still am.The aquatic ape theory isn't the author's - it was postulated by a couple of scientists in the 1930s and then popularised by Alastair Hardy and Desmond Morris in the 1960s. It was resurrected in the 1990s by Elaine Morgan.
Um, wrong. If a find isn't legitimate, then obviously nothing connected to it is legitimate.There very likely are scientists that think certain finds won't be legitimate in some shape or form. There are also likely many scientists who will question and query every find that is made because that is a scientist's job.
You won't find any scientists that will say that a whole find is illegitimate and thus everything connected to that find is false.
I have. Yes, there are finds that are questionable. Which means they should not be accepted. If a find that's said to be a human ancestor is actually the bones of a modern human for all intents and purposes mixed with the bones of an extinct ape, would that be legitimate?Not in the way you're implying, they aren't. Try looking beyond Creationist sites at what real scientists say.
Um, wrong. If a find isn't legitimate, then obviously nothing connected to it is legitimate.
It's when they win that contest, causing others to lose (some dramatically), that science can take a hike.Of course everything is contested in science.
It's when they win that contest, causing others to lose (some dramatically), that science can take a hike.
Challenger, Thalidomide, Deepwater Horizon, cigarettes, LSD, to name a few.... come again?
Challenger, Thalidomide, Deepwater Horizon, cigarettes, LSD, to name a few.
You know? those things they blame on big pharmacies, big government, big management, the press?
What did you think I meant, when I said this ...I really suggest that you go and seek therapy because you taking so much revelry in pointing out deaths and disasters is not a healthy thing.
... and you asked for clarification?AV1611VET said:causing others to lose (some dramatically)
And that, as you rightly understood, was exactly the point I was making, but that AV was seemingly unable to grasp.Except you're not. Even if the theory of evolution was shown to be wrong, that does not automatically mean that creationism or Creationism is correct and can be used as a theory in its place.
What did you think I meant, when I said this ...... and you asked for clarification?
If supposed human ancestors aren't that at all, why would I believe that the ToE is legitimate?
You just made all that up, you actually have no idea why I reject evolution as an overall theory of origins.But you haven't shown that they are. Your problem comes from the science conflicting with your preconceived religious beliefs and you refuse to actually try and make them work out, so you refuse to acknowledge one as even a possibility.
You just made all that up, you actually have no idea why I reject evolution as an overall theory of origins.
And it doesn't matter how many inconsistencies I show in the so called Fossil record, the people on here that are loyal to the theory of evolution don't accept any of it. I've done it before...You would think that it was thier religion or something.
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?