What proof would you need? (2)

[Keachian]

Who said the data doesn’t mean anything. My world view (consistent with the direct observations) leaves out common descent.

Just because you don't like it?

 

[Astridhere]

Who said the data doesn’t mean anything. My world view (consistent with the direct observations) leaves out common descent.

You and I disagree on erectus, I think. However erectus has an IQ of around 50 according to some research. Neanderthal had a larger brain than mankind but was not smarter, a contradiction within Progmonks graph. It is not about the size of the brain as it is about neural networks.

If Turkana Boy had a small neural canal, half the size of mankind and could not use sophisticated language, for me Turk/erectus did not meet the most important hallmark of humanity. Without language I suggest abstract thought was also not apparent in erectus. Erectus was also very primitive in having huge sexual dimorphism comparative to a gorilla.

Also the scenarios produced by evolutionists around the Gona female pelvis are non plausible as I have previously spoken to. Erectus is now short and not an athlete at all.

Do you think Erectus is human or a non human primate?

 

[Keachian]

Creationists attacking Creationists, love it

 

[Zaius137]

Just because you don't like it?

Common descent is not supported by the science. Every ware you look in biology a common ancestor (evolution) is not supported by the facts.



I was a dyed in the wool evolutionist up to about 25 years ago and at that time I came to the conclusion that either the Bible was true or evolution was true, both can not coexist. To my amazement the deeper I looked at the evidence the more I discovered the Bible account the more factual.

The truth is there for the taking, ask Him and it will set you free.

 

[mzungu]

You and I disagree on erectus, I think. However erectus has an IQ of around 50 according to some research. Neanderthal had a larger brain than mankind but was not smarter, a contradiction within Progmonks graph. It is not about the size of the brain as it is about neural networks.

If Turkana Boy had a small neural canal, half the size of mankind and could not use sophisticated language, for me Turk/erectus did not meet the most important hallmark of humanity. Without language I suggest abstract thought was also not apparent in erectus. Erectus was also very primitive in having huge sexual dimorphism comparative to a gorilla.

How do you know what language capabilities Erectus had? Bees use a sophisticated language to communicate the distance and position of nectar bearing flowers. Many animals use some form of language (chimps, dolphins, etc). Whether Erectus had sophisticated language or not bears no weight on whether he was our ancestor or whether he has humanoid or not.

Do you think Erectus is human or a non human primate?

Makes no difference what we think. The very moment you dismissed ToE you have nothing to add except citations from creationist sites.

You have failed to provide any evidences that will refute ToE. Even if Erectus is proven to be non human; This will not even dent ToE!

You may as well try to refute the Atomic theory as this will be easier than to even contemplate refuting the most scrutinised and peer reviewed scientific theory of all time! You will need more than mere BB pellets to even scratch the surface of ToE!

 

[Keachian]

Common descent is not supported by the science. Every where you look in biology a common ancestor (evolution) is not supported by the facts.

Actually the opposite is true.

I was a dyed in the wool evolutionist up to about 25 years ago and at that time I came to the conclusion that either the Bible was true or evolution was true, both can not coexist. To my amazement the deeper I looked at the evidence the more I discovered the Bible account the more factual.

Then from my view you misunderstand both evolution and the Bible.

The truth is there for the taking, ask Him and it will set you free.

I did, he lead me to evolution.

 

[mzungu]

Creationists attacking Creationists, love it

 

[Zaius137]

You and I disagree on erectus, I think. However erectus has an IQ of around 50 according to some research. Neanderthal had a larger brain than mankind but was not smarter, a contradiction within Progmonks graph. It is not about the size of the brain as it is about neural networks.

If Turkana Boy had a small neural canal, half the size of mankind and could not use sophisticated language, for me Turk/erectus did not meet the most important hallmark of humanity. Without language I suggest abstract thought was also not apparent in erectus. Erectus was also very primitive in having huge sexual dimorphism comparative to a gorilla.

Also the scenarios produced by evolutionists around the Gona female pelvis are non plausible as I have previously spoken to. Erectus is now short and not an athlete at all.

Do you think Erectus is human or a non human primate?

I am not a biologist. But I do know that evolution does not work and that either Turkana boy was a human or he was an ape (nothing exists in between) there was never an ape man. In studying the matter I have encountered the small neural canal argument. The canal is a neuropathway for other functions than just speech and if speech was impaired what about other motor functions? I personally find it a bit of a stretch on the part of the evolutionist but in his field what isn’t?

I tend to believe He was a human and that at the bottleneck of the flood human diversity narrowed.

 

[Psudopod]

Originally Posted by Zaius137

Who said the data doesn’t mean anything. My world view (consistent with the direct observations) leaves out common descent.
​

You and I disagree on erectus, I think.

Isn't that interesting? One creationist thinks erectus is human, the other that it is completely non human. Almost as if erectus has traits of both humans and earlier apes that make it hard for the lay-person to classify.

However erectus has an IQ of around 50 according to some research. Neanderthal had a larger brain than mankind but was not smarter, a contradiction within Progmonks graph.

If you think that's a contradiction in the graph, you're reading the graph wrong. It says nothing about intelligence, only size vs age of fossil.

It is not about the size of the brain as it is about neural networks.

Please explain how you can determine neural networks from fossil skulls.

If Turkana Boy had a small neural canal, half the size of mankind and could not use sophisticated language, for me Turk/erectus did not meet the most important hallmark of humanity. Without language I suggest abstract thought was also not apparent in erectus. Erectus was also very primitive in having huge sexual dimorphism comparative to a gorilla.

Also the scenarios produced by evolutionists around the Gona female pelvis are non plausible as I have previously spoken to. Erectus is now short and not an athlete at all.

So erectus is both highly sexually dimorphic and now short and not an athlete. Think I found the contradiction you were looking for.

Do you think Erectus is human or a non human primate?

Or do you think that erectus is a non human primate with human traits, such as you might expect in an ancient ancestor on the line between humans and earlier apes?

 

[Zaius137]

Actually the opposite is true.


Then from my view you misunderstand both evolution and the Bible.


I did, he lead me to evolution.

Sorry my friend but if genesis is right evolution is wrong. You know where I stand. I always found that fence to be a bit uncomfortable. Christians don’t need a lie when the truth is in hand.

 

[Huram Abi]

That's only if you take genesis in the strict literal sense.

Which is unreasonable considering that it conflicts with what we know about the natural world through observation.

 

[Keachian]

That's only if you take genesis in the strict literal sense.

Which is unreasonable considering that it conflicts with what we know about the natural world through observation.

Taking genesis in the strict literal sense also happens to disregard what we know of Hebrew understanding of literature and truth.

 

[Keachian]

Sorry my friend but if genesis is right evolution is wrong.

Interesting understanding of right and wrong, and a misunderstanding of the purpose of Genesis.

You know where I stand. I always found that fence to be a bit uncomfortable. Christians don’t need a lie when the truth is in hand.

I'm not sitting on any fence, I'm thoroughly Christian, thoroughly Theist and every bit as saved as you are.

 

[Psudopod]

But I do know that evolution does not work

How do you know this? What evidence do you have for this?

Sorry my friend but if genesis is right evolution is wrong.

Really? What if Genesis is correct, in that God created the heavens and the earth, and evolution is the way he did it? Put it this way, if a book about God's handiwork disagrees with God's handiwork, which is more likely to be false? Humans can write books, but they can't create planets. If you set up a dichomy like that you imply that Christianity is falsifiable. I always think its very sad when former Creationists gain an understanding of evolution but lose their faith because they've been led to believe that if evolution is true then genesis is necessarily false.

 

[Psudopod]

Why do you ask them such stupid questions? you know very well they don't have answers.

You are never going to change their minds by arguing with them the best you can hope for is you make them think.

I'm certainly not going to change their minds by insulting them and their religion. This is a science forum, so I prefer to stay on topic.

 

[USincognito]

Go away Consol, the grown-ups are trying to have a conversation.

Yeah. Nice try consol, but I see they zapped Bimbo and don't expect Erectus to be around for very long either.

 

[jpcedotal]

Evolution is a worldview at best, and an anti-God religion at worst.

 

[Keachian]

Evolution much like God doesn't ask for your approval to exist. And it certainly doesn't require you to like it to continue to happen it just happens and says Pooh to you too

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution is a worldview at best, and an anti-God religion at worst.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution much like God doesn't ask for your approval to exist.

Well, when the Antichrist gets here ... that will change.

He will take evolution to the very heights of religious fervor, starting with a display of abiogenesis.

Revelation 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

Those who refuse evolution will be beheaded.

In my opinion.