Understanding Genealogy via Human Evolution

[OswaldProductions]

I am a published writer and scientist with a very strong interest in researching human evolution via anthropology and genetics.

Since 2012, I have used popular science writing to setup and update a popular website for beginners.

My website is at
http://www.lwrw.org/Part2.htm


I will be happy for more experienced forum members to either peer review the website offer new data for me to add to the popular website.

Sincerely Yours

Godfrey Oswald, BSc, MSc
London, Britain.

 

[Cactus Jack]

Hmmm. Looks interesting. I'll have to dig into it later on.
You do realize that this is a Christian group, and some of the folks here have this insane idea that the Earth is only 6000 or so years old. No, I don't agree with it, but, well, they can believe what they want I suppose.

AFAIC-

 

[OswaldProductions]

Hmmm. Looks interesting. I'll have to dig into it later on.
You do realize that this is a Christian group, and some of the folks here have this insane idea that the Earth is only 6000 or so years old. No, I don't agree with it, but, well, they can believe what they want I suppose.

AFAIC-

Hello, I am aware that Christians say Earth is only 6000 year old even though fossils and genetics say it much much older. However my eBook does mention that the Vatican does not deny that evolution is correct. Ask the Vatican Library about this. In my Ebook near the end of the book section titled Evolution and God One I explain that both the concept of God and the principles of Evolution are both true. One can still accept the core principles of Evolution and still believe in God (as I do). For instance the Catholic Church does not deny that Evolution is a fact (recall that early contributions to the development of evolutionary theory were made by Catholic scientists such as Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Charles Darwin and the monk Gregor Mendel).After reading the entire book you will see that I have not excluded the concept of a Supreme Being or whom Christians call God.

 

[ScottA]

Uggg...You would do better to study Time, than the effects of time.

The reason the two schools of learning do not agree, is simply their different points of reference. Like the models for global warming...it is all relative to the model used, none of which indicates any conclusive authority. Accuracy within the one, is as good as accuracy within the other...because, each refers to their own authority.

The compromised position of the Catholic church (or any other), is nothing more than a switch of rulers (a double entendre). But Time is relative, and to switch one relativity for another...only proves an insecurity on their part: doubt, and a lack of faith in what and whom they attained the information from (meaning God).

As the Author of the relativity of Time, there is no better source of information than God. Why would a fly begin to believe he is only moving slowly within the vehicle, when God has told him the car is going 60 mph? (so to speak) Sadly...because, he is no longer listening to the Him.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Interesting..