What proof would you need?

[Mikecpking]

deleted

 

[becon]

CTD it is suffice to simply say, you and the ones who put the rubbish into your head, creationism, AiG and the rest of the sad gang are all wrong, we don't need to tell you why you're wrong you need to tell us why you're right.
So far you have failed in spades.

 

[CTD]

CTD it is suffice to simply say, you and the ones who put the rubbish into your head, creationism, AiG and the rest of the sad gang are all wrong, we don't need to tell you why you're wrong you need to tell us why you're right.
So far you have failed in spades.

All you needed to post was

 

[becon]

All you needed to post was

That's where we differ, I say it like it is and you say it how you would like it to be.

Creationism is on a par with Scientology, what do you think of Scientology?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

So, what would change your mind?

I'm going to go with something practical... cash!!!

 

[Exial]

What a monumental throw off, evasion and denial your entire post is. The truth of the mater is that you can not explain nor articulate why the same fossils are used to demonstrate ancestry to something like a chimp and to something unlike a chimp.

Listen, I don't owe you anything. You have this strange idea that I actually care about defending the theory of evolution or explaining it to you. I think it speaks for itself.

You lot may as well fess up now. Creationists know the delight evolutionists take in explaining the obvious stupidity of creationists. You haven't. Rather you have told me to go to a library. What a cop out and evidence that indeed you have no idea how to explain it.

I never said I did. My laymans knowledge (like your own) would not do justice to explain the complexities of evolution. A decent library would be able to provide you with 10,000x the infomation I could

Indeed what are any fossils transitional too when you have no idea what the common ancestor looked like. How would you know if any fossil was evolving into a variety of ape or supposed human? How come you have no demonstration of chimp ancestry.

Come on now have a go, it should be easy to explain for you evos!

The problem for you is there is no explanation other than to say the fossil evidence will be said to support a transition from a squirrel if it needs to.

I have told you Turkana Boy is an ape with ape features and what appear to be curved ape fingers almost down to his knees. Turkana Boys skull looks like Ardi's as does the upper thighbone.

I have also told you that Lucy is not the maker of the Laetolli footprints and guess what? Some of your own researchers agree with little creationist me. The only difference being your researchers are still quibbling about who made them. Where as I know it was mankind the only answer evos cannot deal with. Now fancy your researcher saying the Laetoli footprints could not have been made by the lovely Lucy after all the ridiculers that like to have a go at me?????

So here is your education for the day..
Footprints to Fill

Flat feet and doubts about makers of the Laetoli tracks

They also engendered controversy: scientists have debated everything from how many individuals made the prints to how best to protect them for posterity. Experts have generally come to agree, however, that the tracks probably belong to members of the species Australopithecus afarensis, the hominid most famously represented by the Lucy fossil. Now new research is calling even that conclusion into question

In contrast, the A. afarensis bone resembled that of the flat-footed apes, making it improbable that its foot had an arch like our own. As such, the researchers report, A. afarensis almost certainly did not walk like us or, by extension, like the hominids at Laetoli.

Footprints to Fill: Scientific American

Here is a little more education for this irefuteable nonsense that is heading for the garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past just like Lucy with human feet......

Ardi pieces

Ardi reconstruction of the pieces below...and Turkana Boy

See the upper thigh bones that are unlike either a living ape or human. They are much same. Tilt Turkana Boys side view of the skull back to square it up like Ardi's and they are very similar. The few finger bones on Turkana Boy come down almost to the knees and I'll bet they are curved. Tukana Boy has an extra verterbra like an ape and a small neural canal like an ape. In fact Turkana Boys legs sticking out past his hip bones make him look less human than Ardi, an ape with ape feet.

Ardi and Turkana Boy are so similar it is obvious both are varieties of apes.


Despite all the mumbo jumbo about Turkana Boy sharing this or that similarity to mankind, he is an ape. I cannot believe you evolutionists can't see it.

No intermediates is proof of creation, not evolution. Wish lists and non plausible scenarios are the supports for evolution.

Yes I have my view and you can keep believing human feet belong to a curved fingered, 3.5ft arboreal ape if you wish. However you guys really need to stop taking shots at creationists as you will believe any silly scenario as long as it is evolutionary.

You lot are obviously not able to differentiate fact from fiction. This is truly amazing as I am sure many of you are very clever. However the intoxication of evolutionary theory that blinds evolutionists to the obvious is truly scary.

BTW..thanks CTD.

Print this post off, go down to a university, get some real answers.

I have demonstrated that you lot have no observed evidence for your theory, humans are a case in point. Besides I got heaps of blessing putting up my views elsewhere so obviously some like what I have to say.

You are wasting your time trying to look as if you know how to refute me. Clearly..you do not! Throw offs are obvious!

Astrid, you are aware that evolution is accepted by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community accross the world? It is taught in schools, universities to millions and millions of people.

You really think that posting this rubbish on a christian internet forum is actually going to make any difference to that? If you had real data against it you would publish rather than babble to "evolutionists".

 

[razeontherock]

Better yet, did you convince anybody that mattered? A teacher, politician, lecturer, scientist or biologist? You know, someone with the power and authority to influence teaching or advocacy of evolution? If not, your kinda, sorta, definatley, maybe wasting your time.

And here we have it! No matter how much it gets shoved in our face that evolution isn't a religion, it's really about power and authority; i.e., control.

Truly the age of enlightenment *smh*

 

[razeontherock]

CTD it is suffice to simply say, you and the ones who put the rubbish into your head, creationism, AiG and the rest of the sad gang are all wrong, we don't need to tell you why you're wrong you need to tell us why you're right.
So far you have failed in spades.

IOW:

Monty Python - Argument Clinic - YouTube

 

[becon]

And here we have it! No matter how much it gets shoved in our face that evolution isn't a religion, it's really about power and authority; i.e., control.

I must say that if evolution was indeed a religion it would be the only religion to come with a 100% guarantee of being true.

 

[Exial]

And here we have it! No matter how much it gets shoved in our face that evolution isn't a religion, it's really about power and authority; i.e., control.

Truly the age of enlightenment *smh*

I think its sensible advice to give someone who clearly disagrees with evolution to take their case to higher authority than people on a internet forum.

Evolution is as much as religion as gravity is. I really don't see your point.

 

[razeontherock]

What you think is clear to you, is provably wrong. What you can't see is equally simple. Which includes the existence of this sub-forum ...

 

[Exial]

What you think is clear to you, is provably wrong. What you can't see is equally simple. Which includes the existence of this sub-forum ...

Your being very obtuse.

What you think is clear to you, is provably wrong

Then what are you waiting for?

What you can't see is equally simple

Please, enlighten me. Can't be hard can it?

 

[Astridhere]

Listen, I don't owe you anything. You have this strange idea that I actually care about defending the theory of evolution or explaining it to you. I think it speaks for itself.



I never said I did. My laymans knowledge (like your own) would not do justice to explain the complexities of evolution. A decent library would be able to provide you with 10,000x the infomation I could



Print this post off, go down to a university, get some real answers.



Astrid, you are aware that evolution is accepted by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community accross the world? It is taught in schools, universities to millions and millions of people.
So was human knuckle walking ancestry accepted by the majority of evolutionists until the new flavour of the month. Scientific consensus means nothing more than flavour of the month heading for the garbage bin tomorrow.
You really think that posting this rubbish on a christian internet forum is actually going to make any difference to that? If you had real data against it you would publish rather than babble to "evolutionists".

So again and again and again a post hinged on an inability to answer or defend your science.

You are yet another testimony to evolutionists inability to defend their science.

Much of what your evolutionary scientists accept has been thrown into the garbage bin of evolutionary delusons past. What was convincing evidence for common ancestry now lies in that garbage bin along with a plethora of outcast supposed human ancestors akin to a revolving door.

Sahelanthropus dated to 7 million years ago demonstrates bipedalism. Although your researchers cannot make up their mind and agree on a human/chimp divergence time, this Sahelanthropus generally predates the split according to most.

This Sahelanthropus is debated and disputed heavily. It has a foramen magnem that indicates bipedalism. A femur suggestive of bipedalism was found along side it that was not published. Those of your researchers that do not want to accept that this creature was bipedal suggest the femor was washed into the vicinity and may not belong to the same individual.

What you lot are doing is demonstrating that indeed chimps evolved from a biped. The icing on the cake of course is Ardi because he was found with ape grasping feet. It is incredibly hilarious to suggest that an ape footed creature was any more a biped than chimps are today.

Sahelanthropus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sahelanthropus: "The femur of Toumaï?" | john hawks weblog

You lot are creating a whip to strike yourself with. You come up with all this garbage then land yourselves in trouble.

If there is any truth to ape bipedalism, what you lot are demonstrating is that perhaps apes were bipedal before the fall. Perhaps all modern apes 'evolved' from bipeds. Just wait....that may be tomorrows flavour of the month. Who knows? Not you.

You lot have absolutly no idea what the human/chimp common ancestor looks like. First it was supposed to be like a chimp now it is nothing like a chimp. Hence your comparisons of fossils to todays chimps is useless.

Brief communication: Foramen magnum–carotid foramina relationship: Is it useful for species designation? - Schaefer - 1999 - American Journal of Physical Anthropology - Wiley Online Library


This Sahelanthropus, at 7mya, has a flatter face than many of your erectus fossils as did Lluc 12mya, and is meant to be a biped. Ardi at 4.4mya has ape feet, not transitional but fully ape. What you lot have proven beyond doubt is that your evolutionary researchers have absolutly no idea what they are talking about. They run around like chooks in a pen going bla bla bla where any person with reasoning ability in tact can clearly see the bla bla bla are the meanderings of desperation.

So OK, now I know you lot have no explantion as to why the fossil evidence demonstrates ancestry to something like a chimp as well as a creature nothing like a chimp at all. A couple of you have demonstrated your gobsmackedness by not being able to provide an explanation and gone with throw offs as an excuse.

Well done you guys and gals. It is this sort of nonsense that provides a good platform for creationists to not need to reconsider their view at all. It is you guys that really need to reconsider the garbage you base your views on.

 

[SkyWriting]

That's where we differ, I say it like it is and you say it how you would like it to be. Creationism is on a par with Scientology, what do you think of Scientology?

The basis for Creationism is that an outside force exists. Science insists it.
When starting with nothing one must add heat and work:
First Law of Thermodynamics

The Universe cannot have been created without work:
Second Law of Thermodynamics

So...given a void...where did all this work and energy come from?
The only answer is from OUTSIDE of natural time and space.

Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love

 

[SkyWriting]

I must say that if evolution was indeed a religion it would be the only religion to come with a 100% guarantee of being true.

You mean a guarantee of "eventually being corrected in the future" by some 10% minority group.

Minority Rules: Scientists Discover Tipping Point for the Spread of Ideas | ScienceBlog.com

I don't see how that offers any guarantee of anything. Back to the thinking board.

 

[SkyWriting]

I'm fond of telling these guys that their preoccupation with Christianity should be considered as evidence for the existence of God.

Very Paul-ish.

Acts 26:11 Many a time I went from one synagogue to another to have them punished, and I tried to force them to blaspheme.
In my obsession against them, I even went to...[CHRISTIAN WEBSITES]... to persecute them.

 

[AV1611VET]

Very Paul-ish.

Acts 26:11 Many a time I went from one synagogue to another to have them punished, and I tried to force them to blaspheme.
In my obsession against them, I even went to...[CHRISTIAN WEBSITES]... to persecute them.

ZING!
​

 

[Exial]

So again and again and again a post hinged on an inability to answer or defend your science.(SNIP)
Well done you guys and gals. It is this sort of nonsense that provides a good platform for creationists to not need to reconsider their view at all. It is you guys that really need to reconsider the garbage you base your views on.

Your science?

You must be joking. I don't owe you an explanation, I owe no alleigence to any scientific theory including evolution and your constant demands for me to refute your infomation are bordering on arrogance. Why don't you take your infomation to someone who actually cares. I'm sure any reasonable scientist will give you the time of day to assess your data, if you are sincere in your claims.

I just see no reason why you take your case to an obscure internet forum instead of a relevant educational or scientific society? It makes no sense to me.

Please do not waste your time responding to this with further demands for me to look over your infomation, I truly do not care.

 

[razeontherock]

I'm sure any reasonable scientist will give you the time of day to assess your data

Rose colored glasses much?

Please do not waste your time responding to this with further demands for me to look over your infomation, I truly do not care.

Sez the guy who frequents CF

 

[becon]

I find it strange that creationists know nothing about evolution and refuse to answer questions about creationism.
So what are you all doing here? I know, you're trying to prove that evolution is wrong and failing miserably,
is that frustrating or what?

In case you're wondering... evolution doesn't care what you, me or Donald Duck thinks because it's going to carry on doing it's thing no matter what.