It’s been extensively explained and researched in the books and papers I referred to.
Maybe you should try reading them?
You would be more credible and thought smart if you would explain what's in a link in your own words or use a link to back up your argument.
More conspiracy fantasies.The man died. This is the kind of science institution the Smithsonian is. Maybe he hid other valuable work, too, lying by omission? Why don't we just say that it was selective science by the Smithsonian?
More videos.So where's the evidence? Where's the common ancestor? Did Walcott or other Smithsonian geeks hide even more stuff? BTW I just found this because of your questions. No conspiracy on my part.
I mention 20 million years for the Cambrian. 20 to 25 millions years is still not enough for the long-time evolution is what I stated.
Why not, yours went poof...... have you ever observed this process? No, in fact you haven't observed anything change into anything else, ever.
You're ju7st mad because you can't get it done without outside help..... and don't want to admit to the outside help..... It's ok, I understand.....
assertions aren’t evidence and tallest VERIFIED human was 8 ft 11 in .Giants are possible if the Earth's environment was different. This is what's hard for atheist sceintists to believe because they think that it was uniformitarianism. If uniformitarianism was true, i.e. observable, then creation scientists would be using it. However, we find that catastrophism is what shaped the earth. Today, we find evolutionists claim that catastrophism is what made the dinosaurs extinct. We find that there are mountains underneath the seas. We find stratification happened rapidly with the Mt. St Helens volcano.
Giants are explained in the Bible.
"Giants are mentioned in the Bible in several places (e.g., Genesis 6:4; Joshua 12:4). Og, king of Bashan (Deuteronomy 3:11); the giant people in Canaan that Moses’ spies reported (Numbers 13:30–33); Goliath (2 Samuel 21:19); and the Anakites (Deuteronomy 9:1–2) are all examples of giants in Scripture. We should keep in mind that the “giants” of the Bible were not forty-foot colossi who sat on houses and picked their teeth with elm trees. The giants of the Bible were tall—Goliath was maybe nine or ten feet tall—and they were powerful, but they were human. In addition to the biblical accounts of giants, there are three main sources of evidence for giants: written accounts outside of the Bible, archaeology and eyewitness accounts of archaeological finds, and graphic depictions of giants found in ancient art."
The evidence for nine to ten feet tall giants are found insubstantial material evidence that has fallen through the cracks of the establishment, some of which even resides in museums:
- The ancient city of Ashtaroth in the Golan Heights has cut stone buildings with giant proportions.
- Giant Inca mummies and golden garments over eight feet in length. Gold Museum, Lima, Peru.
- Giant double headed axes on display in Baghdad Museum, Iraq.
- Giant double headed axe from Cypress in the British Museum, London.
- Giant neolithic stone tools found in Australia.
- Two enormous petrified skulls found in anthracite coal bed in Pennsylvania.
- Gigantopithecus blacki, numerous remains found in China, Vietnam & India. Estimated height is ten feet.
- Meganthropus paleojavanicus (Paranthropus robustus) jaw and skull remains excavated on Swartkrans, Java in 1948, estimated to be 8 feet tall.
We also have the NY Times article.1890 NY Times Article: Race Of Giants Discovered In New York
There is the Giant of Castelnau who was estimated to be 11.5' tall.
Giant of Castelnau - Wikipedia
Stonehenge is hypothesized to be created by giants with giant tools.
Giants, aliens and team building: The most unusual theories about Stonehenge
>>What do you mean 25 million years wasn’t long enough for evolution.<<
Already explained #112.
Why? It's obvious that you aren't listening to anything any one is telling you. Gene2Meme has already attempted to explain it and all you can do is bring up 19th century quotes and nonsense like....
"Darwin inferred that an enormous amount of time and many, many generations of species must have come before the Cambrian. He worked it out to roughly “442 million years ago” by secular radiometric dating."
Besides, you can believe what you like, no one will be able to convince you of something you refuse to accept.
I only popped by to correct your nonsense that "The Cambrian Explosion was discovered by an evolutionist and quickly discarded because it didn't fit ToE".
None of the Cambrian Explosion is nonsense, but fact.
Recent articles are from 2016 and there are articles from this month trying to explain the Cambrian.
Since you know so much about Walcott now, why did Walcott use his family and not other scientists to look for the Cambrian fossils? When was the Cambrian first presented and by whom? Why couldn't Darwin explain it?
Why are we finding out how important the Cambrian Explosion was in 2016? It continues into 2018 as articles try to explain the Cambrian Explosion and how important it was. All of this should have been discussed much, much earlier.
ETA: The Cambrian Explosion should be a topic for another day since it destroys evolution and is still being explained today.
To get back to the topic, I think doctors agree that the second brain is your gut.
They think that anxiety and depression contribute to gastro conditions. They believe there is a brain-gut connection. It is revolutionizing "medicine’s understanding of the links between digestion, mood, health and even the way you think." Isn't it wonderful how God designed our bodies to work?
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/healthy_aging/healthy_body/the-brain-gut-connection
How can I get humiliated when I have God on my side?
To the contrary, I have learned much from this thread about how my second brain tells me things in keeping with the Holy Spirit and what I should do to keep it healthy.
Existence of the enteric nervous system (ENS) is no more evidence for creation than the existence of any other structures of animals (or plants, or bacteria).
From a 2018 study entitled 'The first brain: Species comparisons and evolutionary implications for the enteric and central nervous systems':
...Investigation of extant species suggests that the ENS developed in animals that preceded the division that led to cnidaria (exemplified by hydra) and bilateria, which includes the vertebrates. The CNS is deduced to be a bilaterian development, later than the divergence from cnidaria. Consistent with the ENS having developed independent of the CNS, reciprocal connections between ENS and CNS occur in mammals, and separate neurons of ENS and CNS origin converge on visceral organs and prevertebral ganglia. We conclude that an ENS arose before and independently of the CNS. Thus the ENS can be regarded as the first brain.
From this 1996 New York Times article: Complex and Hidden Brain in Gut Makes Stomachaches and Butterflies
In evolutionary terms, it makes sense that the body has two brains, said Dr. David Wingate, a professor of gastrointestinal science at the University of London and a consultant at Royal London Hospital. "The first nervous systems were in tubular animals that stuck to rocks and waited for food to pass by," according to Dr. Wingate. The limbic system is often referred to as the "reptile brain." "As life evolved, animals needed a more complex brain for finding food and sex and so developed a central nervous system. But the gut's nervous system was too important to put inside the newborn head with long connections going down to the body," says Wingate. Offspring need to eat and digest food at birth. Therefore, nature seems to have preserved the enteric nervous system as an independent circuit inside higher animals. It is only loosely connected to the central nervous system and can mostly function alone, without instructions from topside.
Umm... When the things you write about on this forum are in error, naive, silly, etc.?
If I want dopey conspiracy theories, I will listen to Fox News...
OK, dude..I think you ought to look in the mirror for that.
No does evolution - please do not tell me that you think cooperation and 'survival of the fittest' are two sides of the same coin...The God theory explains the ENS and CNS better because it doesn't have to do with survival of the fittest in one situation and cooperation for the common good in another.
Some of which has to do with just having an ENS for the single cells.
Sure - if you consider Rube Goldberg arrangements, inefficiencies, multiple means of doing the same things, etc., to be God's work. But to do so sort of makes God look inept.Instead, isn't what we observe in single-cell and multicellular creatures more fitting of God's work?
Question begging.He has designed these things so it functions very well together in either case.
Do Probiotics Really Work?13 Great Probiotic Foods You Should Be Eating
8 Greatest Probiotic Foods You Should Be Eating - Dr Axe
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?