-
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.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Wishful thinking?
- Thread starter Assyrian
- Start date
- Status
If the evidence doesn't stack up, why do you think AiG felt the need to fiddle the skull sizes?
Upvote
0
You really think so? They have these ape like skulls getting larger and more human like, then a sudden jump to much larger skulls which then continue to get bigger and more human.
This is not just a random collection of skulls, they do give a reasonable, if sketchy, illustration the development of the human skull, except for the glaring difference in size between skull three and four, which just so happens to fit the Creationist view that the fossil skulls are either 'clearly ape', or 'quite human'.
But you don't have that jump in cranial capacity in the fossils, and the folks in AiG know there isn't a jump in cranial capacity, so why does it appear in the powerpoint slide?
This is not just a random collection of skulls, they do give a reasonable, if sketchy, illustration the development of the human skull, except for the glaring difference in size between skull three and four, which just so happens to fit the Creationist view that the fossil skulls are either 'clearly ape', or 'quite human'.
But you don't have that jump in cranial capacity in the fossils, and the folks in AiG know there isn't a jump in cranial capacity, so why does it appear in the powerpoint slide?
Upvote
0
Smidlee
Veteran
My guess would to illustrate simply what I heard famous paleontologists have stated for decades ; that there is still a huge difference between the ape-like skulls and the human -like skulls. Of course the big jump isn't the skull size since we have example of recent humans having both better skulls than us and smaller ones (which just recently been discovered).
Upvote
0
EnemyPartyII
Well-Known Member
And re John... modern primates other than humans might not use fire... they use tools though
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
