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.
Ummmm the link you are posting in no way supports your position. The guy you are linking fully accepts evolution and the demonstrable fact that humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor. Are you attempting to dishonestly quote mine?
Ummmm the link you are posting in no way supports your position. The guy you are linking fully accepts evolution and the demonstrable fact that humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor. Are you attempting to dishonestly quote mine?
If you would like pertinent quotes from it:
" Indeed, at 6 million years of separation, the difference in MSY gene content in chimpanzee and human is more comparable to the difference in autosomal gene content in chicken and human, at 310 million years of separation.
More than thirty percent of the chimpanzee Y chromosome has no homolog in humans, and likewise for the human Y in chimpanzees."
From another source:
" As you can see, every chromosome in the chimpanzee genome, with the exception of the Y chromosome, matched a corresponding region of the human genome by somewhere between 85% and 90%."
http://blog.drwile.com/?p=13917
As shown last post, the Y chromosome isn't even close.
This doesn't falsify evolution in the least bit. The entire article is in full support of evolution. I'm not surprised you're quote mining and pretending it supports your position. Why do you use such dishonest tactics. You're bearing false witness against the author. Why?
You have no idea what you're reading is what I see.
You have no idea what you're reading is what I see.
Even worse stuff about chimp and human DNA, for evolution, that is.
http://www.darwinconspiracy.com/ape_vs_human.php
Even worse stuff about chimp and human DNA, for evolution, that is.
http://www.darwinconspiracy.com/ape_vs_human.php
Oh the irony.
"Darwin conspiracy dot com" isn't a scientific source.
edit - Ugh, I just read that page. It's even worse than I thought it was going to be. They start with ENCODE which doesn't have anything to do with human/chimp common ancestry. They then go on to cite "scientists" and "they" numerous times, but never provide any actual names or citations.
Shoddy.
If you make a series of robots, which are likely to
have the most similar parts and programming?
Those with the same features and the same uses.
Common design ensures that, as long as you use
the most efficient designs and programming.
The Ica stones, for example.
There are no quotes in my post. My words, and a link.
Here is a list of evolution breakers:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/time_travel/esp_ciencia_timetravel08c.htm
and more:
http://humansarefree.com/2011/04/amazing-evidence-human-specie-is.html
There is no doubting familial connections with every human alive.
I'm talking different kinds. How can you prove any two families of
fossils are related without DNA to check?
There are many animals that could fit within more than one family tree by morphology.
Some animals today look like unrelated animals.
http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2001-12/animals-look-alike-arent
Tricky, you purposely left out my other evidence. why do you feel deception is necessary here?
Because when you put God in the picture, unless you are thinking otherwise, I think the God of the Bible, the God that had the wherewithal to tell us how he did what he did, so he did tell us and that's not the way it went.
For me, that is not an assumption. I have never seen any christian creationist present any evidence at all for their beliefs. And many have tried.You misunderstood, it's assumption Christians don't have evidence
, but I think you'd rather lie to yourselves and others about that because following this, you once again continue to leave my other evidence out completely.
Again, why do you find it necessary to deceive?
Do you figure leaving out the full truth will actually make it untrue? Sounds like you are a bit insecure with you stance in this if you have to take lying measures to convince yourself you are right.
And yet you do it again and again, your whole post here is based on conveniently leaving very significant parts of my post out and commenting on what you can pretend is all there is. Are you unable to address my post as it was written? I guess that was too much for you...had to twist it into something else in order to address it? What are you afraid of. Thing is, it's so blatant this time, anyone can see just what you are doing, and why. *tsk
Several things convince me, and the Bible is one, and that in conjunction with the OTHER THINGS I MENTIONED.LOL!
My evidence, the evidence that is just as compelling to me as yours is to you. Denial I have evidence other than the Bible is not going to make that fact go away, or are you just having a very tough time keeping up here?
I told you a good part of what my evidence was already. You really do simply refuse to see what is 100% fact, don't you? I have my evidence and it is just as much evidence to me as yours is to you and for you to discount that fact shows me that you are beyond realistic, and I'm being kind with the assertion. And to pretend you don't even see the evidence I mentioned so you can harp on just the Bible, is way the heck out there.
Once again, you conveniently forgot the other part of my post....absolutely laughable. Stick with using a partial truth or might as well be a lie, to make your point...is not only pitiful but proves your point must be about as weak as they come.
And?
Another very arrogant, short sighted comment...you assume you are reasonable and rational and I/others that oppose your view are not. ......no wonder your view is right in your mind. The delusions you use to create things could convince one of just about anything. Walt Disney created it all....run with that, should be interesting to see you make it a fact..
Why is it ridiculous? you didn't say?
Science neutral? Science is not anything without the people using it, people are NOT always neutral. I must say, you are very narrow minded.
Oh, now we are going to leave it to the imagination what exactly you are referring too?
What is the:
1. argument from incredulity
2. argument from ignorance
3. false premises (false dichotomy etc)
Don't be ridiculous, you choose what to believe just as anyone does.
You just said you choose what you are convinced of
, well, that's how you choose what to believe. Goodness, don't get spacey on me on top of everything else.
No, it's my way of saying if you have faith in something from nothing or whatever you choose to accept as the beginning, then having faith in God is just not that far fetched.
Ooh! Next do the "Dropa Stones"!The problem isn't one or two examples. These
OOPARTs have shown up from the beginning of
archeology and still show up today. Like missing
link fossils, some few may be fakes, but most are
dismissed and shunned without any consideration.
The Ica stones, for example.
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?