PrisonPlanet Forum
May 21, 2013, 06:46:47 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Evolution is a Lie  (Read 14115 times)
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #40 on: June 20, 2009, 01:16:23 PM »

How about what remains of your useless 3rd eyelid? 

I suppose god wanted to leave something of the evil serpent in his perfected creation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx

Their you go you admit its vestigial. So lets remove that bugger. You game?? After that well eat a lot of Mexican food, and see if you miss it or not?  Cheesy
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #41 on: June 20, 2009, 01:20:02 PM »

really?? Well if you think anything is Vestigial, i will pay to have yours removed. Sounds fair yes? well start with your tail bone, its vestigial right? I mean you dont need it do you?

When you were 31-35 days old you had a tail, doktor. Cool

Why would a "perfected man" need a tail for 4 weeks inside then womb, and then disappears on almost all of them before they are born?

A few manage to slip out of the womb with tails though... read for yourself Cool

Quote
Coccyx

The coccyx, or tailbone, is the remnant of a lost tail. All mammals have a tail at one point in their development; in humans, it is present for a period of 4 weeks, during stages 14 to 22 of human embryogenesis.[5] This tail is most prominent in human embryos 31-35 days old.[6] The tailbone, located at the end of the spine, has lost its original function in assisting balance and mobility, though it still serves some secondary functions, such as being an attachment point for muscles, which explains why it has not degraded further.

In rare cases congenital defect results in a short tail-like structure being present at birth. Twenty-three cases of human babies born with such a structure have been reported in the medical literature since 1884.[7][8] These structures are covered by skin and contain fatty and connective tissue, muscles, blood vessels, and nerves, but they do not contain cartilage or any bones and the spinal cord does not extend into them.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx

I suppose these newborn with tails are your proof of demonic possession?
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #42 on: June 20, 2009, 01:27:06 PM »

When you were 31-35 days old you had a tail, doktor. Cool Why would a perfected man need a tail for 4 weeks inside then womb, and then disappears on almost all of them before they are born?

A few manage to slip out of the womb with tails though... read for yourself Cool
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx

I suppose these newborn with tails are your proof of demonic possession?


uhm no we dont. As i said if you think your "tail bone" is vestigial we can remove it, and see how well you function.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #43 on: June 20, 2009, 01:30:59 PM »

Quote
In rare cases congenital defect results in a short tail-like structure being present at birth. Twenty-three cases of human babies born with such a structure have been reported in the medical literature since 1884.[7][8] These structures are covered by skin and contain fatty and connective tissue, muscles, blood vessels, and nerves, but they do not contain cartilage or any bones and the spinal cord does not extend into them.[7]

The brief research portion of Ledley’s paper (1982:1212) concerned the case report of a 7-pound baby that was born with a caudal appendage 2 inches in length. Shortly after it was born the child was transferred to Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Boston where doctors removed the growth. Ledley related that it was a “. . . well-formed caudal appendage” located near the end of the baby’s spine; “. . . it was covered by skin of normal texture and had a soft fibrous consistency:’ Ledley also noted that there were no vertebrae or even cartilaginous elements in the so-called “caudal appendage:’ Ledley included a helpful review of caudal appendage research. Such cases have been noted throughout history, but very few have been scientifically documented.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #44 on: June 20, 2009, 01:32:31 PM »

uhm no we dont. As i said if you think your "tail bone" is vestigial we can remove it, and see how well you function.

I suppose those thirty-three babies born with useless tails, are just the perfect mistakes made by god then?

Quote
In rare cases congenital defect results in a short tail-like structure being present at birth. Twenty-three cases of human babies born with such a structure have been reported in the medical literature since 1884. These structures are covered by skin and contain fatty and connective tissue, muscles, blood vessels, and nerves, but they do not contain cartilage or any bones and the spinal cord does not extend into them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #45 on: June 20, 2009, 01:34:38 PM »

I suppose those thirty-three babies born with useless tails, are just the perfect mistakes made by god then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx


see above for answer. above being the post above yours.  Grin
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
NinjaPatriot
Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 280


« Reply #46 on: June 20, 2009, 01:37:29 PM »

I've debated Origins for years, let me break it down in my opinion.

This is a debate about semantics.  Evolution is a fact because biological systems change over time.  Now, some of the mechanisms, in fact imo, all of mechanisms are suspect.  Nevertheless, it's been studied long enough to where I think most of the mechanisms are viable for educational discourse.  

However, Common Descent is a religion, if you want to call it that.  It takes scientific philosophy to its extreme.  An analogy would be the garden tool has become the garden.  Any student of philosophy knows its limitations.  Yet these are taken priori to any serious scientific methodology.  The question shouldn't be did common ancestry occur, rather can I logically reject the fundamental assumptions of common ancestry and still be relevant in intelligent discourse?  The dirty secret of the Origins debate is that there just isn't enough evidence to draw strong conclusions, even when the evolutionists claim that every fossil, even every LIVING biological system continiuosly and demonstrably evolves.  Whether or not that is true remains to be seen, I've printed out talkorigins 29+ evidences for macroevolution, and if you haven't read it, you should, either way.  Because it explains that it can potentially be rejected for the very reasons I laid out.  

Shouldn't be scared to look at all the evidence of any claims to origins, reality is that which does not change.  Ironic?

Edit:  I forgot to mention that there isn't much evidence in any field of Origins study, including "religious" texts.  Although I lean more towards the account according to First Book of ’Âthâ´m and Chauwâ´h and Genesis.  Merely an attachment to trust in the Creator, and the evidence, conjecture and conclusions laid out by CRS and AIG and the plasma cosmology movement I find these fascinating.
Logged
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 20, 2009, 01:38:35 PM »

Wisdom teeth

Quote
Lower Jaw grows as We Age, Becomes Squarer, Makes You Look older, ASPS Study Reveals

http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-technology-1/Looking-Older-3F-How-Square-is-Your-Jaw-Line-3F-1177-1/

The so called wisdom teeth only became Vestigial as a money cow for dentists. As we age our jaws never stop growing. This was never a problem until about 150 years ago. But hey get yours removed,  Cheesy. I have mine, no problems.  Grin  How about we cut open your head and remove your penial gland, as its vestigial also.  Roll Eyes
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #48 on: June 20, 2009, 01:39:22 PM »

I've debated Origins for years, let me break it down in my opinion.

This is a debate about semantics.  Evolution is a fact because biological systems change over time.  Now, some of the mechanisms, in fact imo, all of mechanisms are suspect.  Nevertheless, it's been studied long enough to where I think most of the mechanisms are viable for educational discourse.  

However, Common Descent is a religion, if you want to call it that.  It takes scientific philosophy to its extreme.  An analogy would be the garden tool has become the garden.  Any student of philosophy knows its limitations.  Yet these are taken priori to any serious scientific methodology.  The question shouldn't be did common ancestry occur, rather can I logically reject the fundamental assumptions of common ancestry and still be relevant in intelligent discourse?  The dirty secret of the Origins debate is that there just isn't enough evidence to draw strong conclusions, even when the evolutionists claim that every fossil, even every LIVING biological system continiuosly and demonstrably evolves.  Whether or not that is true remains to be seen, I've printed out talkorigins 29+ evidences for macroevolution, and if you haven't read it, you should, either way.  Because it explains that it can potentially be rejected for the very reasons I laid out.  

Shouldn't be scared to look at all the evidence of any claims to origins, reality is that which does not change.  Ironic?

really?? so if i take a dog and keep throwing it off a cliff its ancestors will be able to fly??
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #49 on: June 20, 2009, 01:39:32 PM »

So "God's Perfected Creation" just happen to make it off the design board with several useless to semi-useless items

- Wisdom Teeth
- Appendix
- 3rd eyelid
- Tailbone
- Non-flexing Ear -- muscles and tendons that don't allow us to flex our ears to avoid predators.
- Junk DNA -- mutated gene such as our dormant ability to produce Vitamin C. A gene that is off due to a mutation.

Wow!
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #50 on: June 20, 2009, 01:45:04 PM »

So "God's Perfected Creation" just happen to make it off the design board with several useless to semi-useless items

- Wisdom Teeth
- Appendix
- 3rd eyelid
- Tailbone
- Non-flexing Ear -- muscles and tendons that don't allow us to flex our ears to avoid predators.
- Junk DNA -- mutated gene such as our dormant ability to produce Vitamin C. A gene that is off due to a mutation.

Wow!

uhm ive already shown just how wrong you are, maybe you should not use WIKI as a source for answers, its not real reliable. Do you want answers for all of them??  Cheesy
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
NinjaPatriot
Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 280


« Reply #51 on: June 20, 2009, 01:46:12 PM »

really?? so if i take a dog and keep throwing it off a cliff its ancestors will be able to fly??

I've been called a cia operative, and misinterpreted, misread and have had numerous straw men attached to me.  Some people on this site seem like this isn't about finding Truth, it's about nasty derisive comments based on misinformation.  Please read my post before you make gross errors about my position.

Edit:  Furthermore, you have no idea what your talking about.  Do you even understand anything about how the Theory of Evolution works?  That sounds like some tripe comment from Hovind, of whom I've read and watched all of his stuff.  I didn't stop there, I went and read the counter arguments and there is some very good ones.  If you can't understand someones position, you'll never reach out to them in anything but ignorance.
Logged
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #52 on: June 20, 2009, 01:47:21 PM »

See this is exactly why I look upon you with disgust Doktor.


My proof is based observable facts able to be verified down to the genetic level.  

Your proof is nothing but faith based, citing a cartoon, and a few verses in a man-made printed book.  

Idiots such as yourself won't apply the same standard of "proof" to faith, which is far lower than the standard you want to hold to the theory of evolution.  

This hypocrisy highlights your ignorance.
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #53 on: June 20, 2009, 01:48:05 PM »

I've been called a cia operative, and misinterpreted, misread and have had numerous straw men attached to me.  Some people on this site seem like this isn't about finding Truth, it's about nasty derisive comments based on misinformation.  Please read my post before you make gross errors about my position.

got it, thanx...
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #54 on: June 20, 2009, 01:50:04 PM »

See this is exactly why I look upon you with disgust Doktor.


My proof is observable fact.  

Your proof is faith, and in a few verses in a man-made printed book.  


Idiots such as yourself won't apply the same standard of "proof" to faith, and you want to hold the theory of evolution.  This hypocrisy highlights your ignorance.

you should look in a miiror sir as everything i have said is verifiable by SCIENCE, leave WIKI and youd realise this. there are no vestigial organs.  Grin If you believe this, i will pay to have your "tail bone" removed. Before you decide though i think you should really look into just what this "vestigial" organ does.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #55 on: June 20, 2009, 01:51:27 PM »

you should look in a miiror sir as everything i have said is verifiable by SCIENCE, leave WIKI and youd realise this. there are no vestigial organs.  Grin If you believe this, i will pay to have your "tail bone" removed. Before you decide though i think you should really look into just what this "vestigial" organ does.

Wow when did science prove there is a soul, a heaven, and an all powerful god who designed mankind from mud?
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #56 on: June 20, 2009, 01:55:02 PM »

Indian boy born with a tail!   He is proof of creation... no wait he is a hindu god!

http://videos.caught-on-video.com/video/2cc8c388-0bb1-4754-9d9f-82597531613c.htm


All those people in the video have faith in this living god.  Later they can print books about his time on earth so he has to be a god right?
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #57 on: June 20, 2009, 01:56:45 PM »

Wow when did science prove there is a soul, a heaven, and an all powerful god who designed mankind from mud?

when did science disprove it??

dont forget to use this.v



Russian scientists explore human conscience on computer screen
http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/15-06-2009/107770-conscience-0

Center of Scientific Divulgation about Consciousness
http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf.html

 Cheesy
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #58 on: June 20, 2009, 01:59:48 PM »

Indian boy born with a tail!   He is proof of creation... no wait he is a hindu god!

http://videos.caught-on-video.com/video/2cc8c388-0bb1-4754-9d9f-82597531613c.htm


All those people in the video have faith in this living god.  Later they can print books about his time on earth so he has to be a god right?


do you have an x ray showing bones inside?? hmm?? because it really didnt act like a tail did it?? also i can show you skulls with horns, what does that mean??  Cheesy wow dude your grasping here.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #59 on: June 20, 2009, 02:05:51 PM »

when did science disprove it??

dont forget to use this.v



Russian scientists explore human conscience on computer screen
http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/15-06-2009/107770-conscience-0

Center of Scientific Divulgation about Consciousness
http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf.html

 Cheesy

Ok where did science prove god exists? The above didn't address the question.
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #60 on: June 20, 2009, 02:10:27 PM »

Ok where did science prove god exists? The above didn't address the question.

this is what you asked.
Quote
Wow when did science prove there is a soul, a heaven, and an all powerful god who designed mankind from mud?

i answered the soul one.  Grin If you want proof of God, well here ya go.

Mt. Sinai


Split rock for water. It is the only place you can find water erosion in the desert and its coming from the split.



The real Mt. Sinai, the blackened part is not a shadow. Its actually blackened.  Grin



Place of the red sea crossing, with the 1 of the 2 pilar stones erected by Solomon. The othere is right scross the sea.



Chariot wheel at the bottom of the sea at the crossing.

It really couldn't be in the northern Sinai peninsula because that land at that time was part of Egypt.Egypt controlled nearly all the Sinai peninsula at that time. Scripture clearly states that they didn't go North but, went into the wilderness outside of Egypt. If Egypt controlled the whole of the north than they could have only went south, through the wilderness.

17 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt:

 18 But God led the people about, through the way of the wilderness of the Red sea: and the children of Israel went up harnessed out of the land of Egypt.


The "way of the land of the Philistines" was the northern trade route, so God led them "through the way of the wilderness of the Red sea" which was through the Sinai peninsula.



You only get the northern route when you dont use the Bible as the guide book. When you follow the directions from the Bible itself you get the actual directions through the Sinai interior. Its evident in Exo 14:3 For Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, They are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in. They would only be "entangled" in the interior passage, because the route goes through a lot of canyons.



You do not find this on the northern route nor the very southern route. And the canyons opens up onto the only plain big enough to hold the entire Hebrew nation right on the coast of the Red Sea, right where theirs a land bridge going across.



The crossing point was marked later by 2 stone pillars. One on each side.


Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #61 on: June 20, 2009, 02:11:12 PM »

do you have an x ray showing bones inside?? hmm?? because it really didnt act like a tail did it?? also i can show you skulls with horns, what does that mean??  Cheesy wow dude your grasping here.

Again you can't even recall what I have posted just less then 30 minutes ago.

The boy's tail is a product of a genetic mistake, the embryonic tail continued to grow.

Quote
The coccyx, or tailbone, is the remnant of a lost tail. All mammals have a tail at one point in their development; in humans, it is present for a period of 4 weeks, during stages 14 to 22 of human embryogenesis.[5] This tail is most prominent in human embryos 31-35 days old.[6] The tailbone, located at the end of the spine, has lost its original function in assisting balance and mobility, though it still serves some secondary functions, such as being an attachment point for muscles, which explains why it has not degraded further.

In rare cases congenital defect results in a short tail-like structure being present at birth. Twenty-three cases of human babies born with such a structure have been reported in the medical literature since 1884.[7][8] These structures are covered by skin and contain fatty and connective tissue, muscles, blood vessels, and nerves, but they do not contain cartilage or any bones and the spinal cord does not extend into them.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx

The hindu boy's boneless tail prove it is a vestigial attribute, you are being a nunce!

Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
NinjaPatriot
Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 280


« Reply #62 on: June 20, 2009, 02:15:25 PM »

Again you can't even recall what I have posted just less then 30 minutes ago.

The boy's tail is a product of a genetic mistake, the embryonic tail continued to grow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx

The hindu boy's boneless tail prove it is a vestigial attribute, you are being a nunce!



It's certainly a unusuable attribute, but it doesn't prove it's vestigial because that would imply it had something to do with and evolutionary mechanism and it could potentially be from faulty information in the genome in a general sense.
Logged
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #63 on: June 20, 2009, 02:15:42 PM »

this is what you asked.
i answered the soul one.  Grin If you want proof of God, well here ya go.



Chariot wheel at the bottom of the sea at the crossing.

It really couldn't be in the northern Sinai peninsula because that land at that time was part of Egypt.Egypt controlled nearly all the Sinai peninsula at that time. Scripture clearly states that they didn't go North but, went into the wilderness outside of Egypt. If Egypt controlled the whole of the north than they could have only went south, through the wilderness.

A chariot wheel, a rock, and a pillar tied together with a bible verse?  It could prove an actual event happened on earth, but it doesn't prove the existence of a god.

Surely you are not this stupid...  Roll Eyes there is no standard of proof even applied to your "Theory".


A split Rock mentioned in a ancient book doesn't prove there is a god in heaven.
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #64 on: June 20, 2009, 02:17:12 PM »

Again you can't even recall what I have posted just less then 30 minutes ago.

The boy's tail is a product of a genetic mistake, the embryonic tail continued to grow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigial#Coccyx

The hindu boy's boneless tail prove it is a vestigial attribute, you are being a nunce!



so theres bone inside of it correct?? If its a tail it has bone in it, yes or no??

Quote
The hindu boy's boneless tail prove it is a vestigial attribute,

Ah so its just as you said a genetic mistake, and isnt a tail at all. So really how can you claim any of this as proof of it being vestigail?? Seems more like a cancer.  Cheesy Hey if you want to believe that go for it, as it obviously takes more faith than believing God did it.  Cheesy a vestigial tail but no bones, hmm. You really need to stop using WIKI as your giving real evolutionists a bad name.  Cheesy

Quote
The brief research portion of Ledley’s paper (1982:1212) concerned the case report of a 7-pound baby that was born with a caudal appendage 2 inches in length. Shortly after it was born the child was transferred to Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Boston where doctors removed the growth. Ledley related that it was a “. . . well-formed caudal appendage” located near the end of the baby’s spine; “. . . it was covered by skin of normal texture and had a soft fibrous consistency:’ Ledley also noted that there were no vertebrae or even cartilaginous elements in the so-called “caudal appendage:’ Ledley included a helpful review of caudal appendage research. Such cases have been noted throughout history, but very few have been scientifically documented.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #65 on: June 20, 2009, 02:19:18 PM »

so theres bone inside of it correct?? If its a tail it has bone in it, yes or no??

Ah so its just as you said a genetic mistake, and isnt a tail at all. So really how can you claim any of this as proof of it being vestigail?? Seems more like a cancer.  Cheesy Hey if you want to believe that go for it, as it obviously takes more faith than believing God did it.  Cheesy a vestigial tail but no bones, hmm. You really need to stop using WIKI as your giving real evolutionists a bad name.  Cheesy

No bone .... and actually try to dispute the information rather then resorting to poisoning the well.
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #66 on: June 20, 2009, 02:19:23 PM »

A chariot wheel, a rock, and a pillar tied together with a bible verse?  It could prove an actual event happened on earth, but it doesn't prove the existence of a god.

Surely you are not this stupid...


oh but it does, and there is no way you can refute it.  Cheesy

Rom 1
 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #67 on: June 20, 2009, 02:20:52 PM »

And where is your proof that these are actually god's words?   


Oh yeah it is in the same book, written by the same people... rofl  You do see the difference in the standard of proof you "apply" to your own position, compared to evolution.
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #68 on: June 20, 2009, 02:22:11 PM »

No bone .... and actually try to dispute the information rather then resorting to poisoning the well.

I did dispute it when you first brought it up?

If there is no bone then it for one is not a tail, its a growth. I have already explained this.

Quote
The brief research portion of Ledley’s paper (1982:1212) concerned the case report of a 7-pound baby that was born with a caudal appendage 2 inches in length. Shortly after it was born the child was transferred to Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Boston where doctors removed the growth. Ledley related that it was a “. . . well-formed caudal appendage” located near the end of the baby’s spine; “. . . it was covered by skin of normal texture and had a soft fibrous consistency:’ Ledley also noted that there were no vertebrae or even cartilaginous elements in the so-called “caudal appendage:’ Ledley included a helpful review of caudal appendage research. Such cases have been noted throughout history, but very few have been scientifically documented.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #69 on: June 20, 2009, 02:22:28 PM »

And where is your proof that these are god's words?

prophecy.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #70 on: June 20, 2009, 02:23:34 PM »

prophecy.

Again prophecy is the word of a man, written down and passed on to another.  Where is the proof that they are actually uttered by a god?


My guess it is yet another bible verse?
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #71 on: June 20, 2009, 02:26:31 PM »

Again prophecy is the word of a man, written down and passed on to another.  Where is the proof that they are actually uttered by a god?


My guess it is yet another bible verse?

100% absolutley true prophecy. No other book or person can make that claim.

Now we are getting off topic here. back on topic please, or start a new one, if you want to talk about that.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #72 on: June 20, 2009, 02:29:24 PM »

100% absolutley true prophecy. No other book or person can make that claim.

Now we are getting off topic here. back on topic please, or start a new one, if you want to talk about that.

How is asking you to actually prove there is a god responsible for your claim of creation "Off-Topic"? 

To prove that we are actually products "Created" by a god, you have to prove that the God even exists to begin with.  ROFL your standard of proof changes yet again to suit your claim.
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
LoveToGod
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 37


« Reply #73 on: June 20, 2009, 02:36:56 PM »

Ok where did science prove god exists? The above didn't address the question.

The question as to whether God exits falls outside of science, but the fact that we are too complex to have evolved and that evolution is shot points to a Creator.

The scientific method is used until it comes to the question of origins and then it is cast off.  Evolutionist do not use the scientific method.  They presupposed that evolution has already occurred and then based off of that they look for "proof".

Though don't get confused if you are thinking of Macro-Evolution, because this one does happen.  Bacteria become resistant to drugs.  Dogs produce a variety of dogs. But notice it is still a dog.

Macro-Evolution does not happen:  one kind of animal evolving into another.  If evolution is true, why aren't we still evolving.

There is a conspiracy in the scientific community about Evolution just like there is with the one world government.

Think of it this way:  if our government can lie to us about one thing, what else are they lying to us about?

That Bible is literally true and 100% accurate.  I know this statement will trip someone out!

You want to see the NWO: look at Revelation Chapter 13 and see its cross-references.

Logged
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #74 on: June 20, 2009, 02:39:01 PM »

How is asking you to actually prove there is a god responsible for your claim of creation "Off-Topic"? 

To prove that we are actually products "Created" by a god, you have to prove that the God even exists to begin with.  ROFL your standard of proof changes yet again to suit your claim.

uhm, how has my standard changed?? I have said prophecy, that hasnt changed. Yet the discussion is getting off of evolution.
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
BaronVonBongo
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139



« Reply #75 on: June 20, 2009, 03:54:11 PM »

Thats right, go ahead and perpetuate the myth that Christians havn't got a grasp of science and afe ignorant in the true sense, not meaning stupid, but to ignore everything that does not fit with a literal reading of the bible.
 The Material world is not nor ever has been the focus of the bible. As Christians you should be well aware of this fact.
Tell me where there is science as we understand the meaning today in the bible, please.

Our God given intellect can tell us all we need know of the material world.  God is known only through revelation and cannot be proved or disproved by material means, as by definition God transcends human intellectual capacity. We know him through that likewise ingraspible thing the soul.
Spend your time fighting against evolutionay theory as pertaining to society and human interaction, thats where the evil lies, not in whether Genesis is literal truth or not. The PTB laugh their asses off everytime they see the evolution battle being waged in the false dichotomy between faith and reason.
If you want to refute something you HAVE to be able to understand the material. Jesus said be as wise as serpants yet innocent as lambs.

Logged

'....and the truth shall set you free.'
v.s.
arbeit macht frei.

You decide.
Aerioch
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,332



« Reply #76 on: June 20, 2009, 05:33:31 PM »

uhm, how has my standard changed?? I have said prophecy, that hasnt changed. Yet the discussion is getting off of evolution.

...Standard of Proof...and the discussion isn't going off-topic.

I will go slowly here, due to your limited ability to comprehend complex ideas. For your "Creation Theory" to occur a Divine Creator would have to exist. 

Simply prove to me that a "Divine Creator" exists, without falling back on the non-proof of prophecy, faith, or using quotes from a man-made book, which is simply filled with the collections of personal testimony of men.

It flows logically. First establish the divine creator, and only then discuss his ability to intelligently design, and create mankind.


 
Logged

Dr. Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
BaronVonBongo
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139



« Reply #77 on: June 20, 2009, 06:05:35 PM »

http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/johanson.html

One of the most hotly debated issues in paleoanthropology (the study of human origins) focuses on the origins of modern humans, Homo sapiens.9,10,3,6,13,15,14 Roughly 100,000 years ago, the Old World was occupied by a morphologically diverse group of hominids. In Africa and the Middle East there was Homo sapiens; in Asia, Homo erectus; and in Europe, Homo neanderthalensis. However, by 30,000 years ago this taxonomic diversity vanished and humans everywhere had evolved into the anatomically and behaviorally modern form. The nature of this transformation is the focus of great deliberation between two schools of thought: one that stresses multiregional continuity and the other that suggests a single origin for modern humans.
Understanding the issue
Multiregional theory: homo erectus left Africa 2 mya to become homo sapiens in different parts of the world.

The Multiregional Continuity Model15 contends that after Homo erectus left Africa and dispersed into other portions of the Old World, regional populations slowly evolved into modern humans. This model contains the following components:

    * some level of gene flow between geographically separated populations prevented speciation, after the dispersal
    * all living humans derive from the species Homo erectus that left Africa nearly two million-years-ago
    * natural selection in regional populations, ever since their original dispersal, is responsible for the regional variants (sometimes called races) we see today
    * the emergence of Homo sapiens was not restricted to any one area, but was a phenomenon that occurred throughout the entire geographic range where humans lived

In contrast, the Out of Africa Model13 asserts that modern humans evolved relatively recently in Africa, migrated into Eurasia and replaced all populations which had descended from Homo erectus. Critical to this model are the following tenets:
Out of Africa theory: homo sapiens arose in Africa and migrated to other parts of the world to replace other hominid species, including homo erectus.

    * after Homo erectus migrated out of Africa the different populations became reproductively isolated, evolving independently, and in some cases like the Neanderthals, into separate species
    * Homo sapiens arose in one place, probably Africa (geographically this includes the Middle East)
    * Homo sapiens ultimately migrated out of Africa and replaced all other human populations, without interbreeding
    * modern human variation is a relatively recent phenomenon

The multiregional view posits that genes from all human populations of the Old World flowed between different regions and by mixing together, contributed to what we see today as fully modern humans. The replacement hypothesis suggests that the genes in fully modern humans all came out of Africa. As these peoples migrated they replaced all other human populations with little or no interbreeding.

To understand this controversy, the anatomical, archaeological, and genetic evidence needs to be evaluated.
Anatomical evidence

Sometime prior to 1 million years ago early hominids, sometimes referred to as Homo ergaster, exited Africa and dispersed into other parts of the Old World. Living in disparate geographical areas their morphology became diversified through the processes of genetic drift and natural selection.

    * In Asia these hominids evolved into Peking Man and Java Man, collectively referred to as Homo erectus.
    * In Europe and western Asia they evolved into the Neanderthals.

Neanderthals lived in quasi isolation in Europe during a long, relatively cool period that even included glaciations. Neanderthals are distinguished by a unique set of anatomical features, including:

    *

      a large, long, low cranial vault with a well-developed double-arched browridge
    *

      a massive facial skeleton with a very projecting mid-face, backward sloping cheeks, and large nasal aperture, with large nasal sinuses
    *

      an oddly shaped occipital region of the skull with a bulge or bun
    *

      molars with enlarged pulp chambers, and large, often very heavily worn incisors
    *

      a mandible lacking a chin and possessing a large gap behind the last molar
    *

      a massive thorax, and relatively short forearms and lower legs
    *

      although short in stature they possessed robustly built skeletons with thick walled limb bones
    *

      long clavicles and very wide scapulas

Homo sapiens is a separate species from Neanderthals and other hominids

By 130,000 years ago, following a prolonged period of independent evolution in Europe, Neanderthals were so anatomically distinct that they are best classified as a separate species — Homo neanderthalensis. This is a classic example of geographic isolation leading to a speciation event.

In contrast, at roughly the same time, in Africa, a body plan essentially like our own had appeared. While these early Homo sapiens were anatomically modern they were not behaviorally modern. It is significant that modern anatomy evolved prior to modern behavior. These early sapiens were characterized by:

    * a cranial vault with a vertical forehead, rounded occipital and reduced brow ridge
    * a reduced facial skeleton lacking a projecting mid-face
    * a lower jaw sporting a chin
    * a more modern, less robustly built skeleton

Hence, the anatomical and paleogeographic evidence suggests that Neanderthals and early modern humans had been isolated from one another and were evolving separately into two distinct species.
Archaeological evidence

Very interestingly, while Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens were distinguished from one another by a suite of obvious anatomical features, archaeologically they were very similar. Hominids of the Middle Stone Age of Africa (H. sapiens) and their contemporary Middle Paleolithic Neanderthals of Europe had artifact assemblages characterized as follows:

    *

      little variation in stone tool types, with a preponderance of flake tools that are difficult to sort into discrete categories
    *

      over long periods of time and wide geographical distances there was general similarity in tool kits
    *

      a virtual lack of tools fashioned out of bone, antler or ivory
    *

      burials lacked grave goods and signs of ritual or ceremony
    *

      hunting was usually limited to less dangerous species and evidence for fishing is absent
    *

      population densities were apparently low
    *

      no evidence of living structures exist and fireplaces are rudimentary

Homo sapiens exhibited technological skills around 50,000 years ago.

    * evidence for art or decoration is also lacking

The archaeological picture changed dramatically around 40-50,000 years ago with the appearance of behaviorally modern humans. This was an abrupt and dramatic change in subsistence patterns, tools and symbolic expression. The stunning change in cultural adaptation was not merely a quantitative one, but one that represented a significant departure from all earlier human behavior, reflecting a major qualitative transformation. It was literally a “creative explosion” which exhibited the “technological ingenuity, social formations, and ideological complexity of historic hunter-gatherers.”7 This human revolution is precisely what made us who we are today.

The appearance of fully modern behavior apparently occurred in Africa earlier than anywhere else in the Old World, but spread very quickly, due to population movements into other geographical regions. The Upper Paleolithic lifestyle, as it was called, was based essentially on hunting and gathering. So successful was this cultural adaptation that until roughly 11,000 years ago, hominids worldwide were subsisting essentially as hunter-gatherers.

In the Upper Paleolithic of Eurasia, or the Late Stone Age as it is called in Africa, the archaeological signature stands in strong contrast to that of the Middle Paleolithic/Middle Stone Age. It was characterized by significant innovation:

    *

      a remarkable diversity in stone tool types
    *

      tool types showed significant change over time and space
    *

      artifacts were regularly fashioned out of bone, antler and ivory, in addition to stone
    *

      stone artifacts were made primarily on blades and were easily classified into discrete categories, presumably reflecting specialized use
    *

      burials were accompanied by ritual or ceremony and contained a rich diversity of grave goods
    *

      living structures and well-designed fireplaces were constructed
    *

      hunting of dangerous animal species and fishing occurred regularly higher population densities
    *

      abundant and elaborate art as well as items of personal adornment were widespread
    *

      raw materials such as flint and shells were traded over some distances

Homo sapiens of the Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age was quintessentially modern in appearance and behavior. Precisely how this transformation occurred is not well understood, but it apparently was restricted to Homo sapiens and did not occur in Neanderthals. Some archaeologists invoke a behavioral explanation for the change. For example, Soffer11 suggests that changes in social relations, such as development of the nuclear family, played a key role in bringing about the transformation.
Social or biological changes may account for “smarter” hominids.

Klein7, on the other hand, proffers the notion that it was probably a biological change brought about by mutations that played the key role in the emergence of behaviorally modern humans. His biologically based explanation implies that a major neural reorganization of the brain resulted in a significant enhancement in the manner in which the brain processed information. This is a difficult hypothesis to test since brains do not fossilize. But it is significant that no changes are seen in the shape of the skulls between earlier and later Homo sapiens. It can only be surmised from the archaeological record, which contains abundant evidence for ritual and art, that these Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age peoples possessed language abilities equivalent to our own. For many anthropologists this represents the final evolutionary leap to full modernity.

Shortly after fully modern humans entered Europe, roughly 40,000 years ago, the Neanderthals began a fairly rapid decline, culminating in their disappearance roughly 30,000 years ago. Neanderthals were apparently no match for the technologically advanced fully modern humans who invaded Europe and evidence for interbreeding of these two types of hominids is equivocal.
Genetic evidence

Investigation of the patterns of genetic variation in modern human populations supports the view that the origin of Homo sapiens is the result of a recent event that is consistent with the Out of Africa Model.

    *

      Studies of contemporary DNA, especially mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) which occurs only in the cellular organelles called mitochondria, reveal that humans are astonishingly homogeneous, with relatively little genetic variation.1,5
    *

      The high degree of similarity between human populations stands in strong contrast to the condition seen in our closest living relatives, the chimpanzees.2 In fact, there is significantly more genetic variation between two individual chimpanzees drawn from the same population than there is between two humans drawn randomly from a single population. Furthermore, genetic variation between populations of chimpanzees is enormously greater than differences between European, Asian and African human populations.

Africans display higher genetic variation than other populations, supporting the idea that they were the first modern humans.

    *

      In support of an African origin for Homo sapiens the work of Cann and Wilson1 has demonstrated that the highest level of genetic variation in mtDNA occurs in African populations. This implies that Homo sapiens arose first in Africa and has therefore had a longer period of time to accumulate genetic diversity. Using the genetic distance between African populations and others as a measure of time, they furthermore suggested that Homo sapiens arose between 100,000 and 400,000 years ago in Africa.
    *

      The low amount of genetic variation in modern human populations suggests that our origins may reflect a relatively small founding population for Homo sapiens. Analysis of mtDNA by Rogers and Harpending12 supports the view that a small population of Homo sapiens, numbering perhaps only 10,000 to 50,000 people, left Africa somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago.
    *

      Scientists recently succeeded in extracting DNA from several Neanderthal skeletons.8 After careful analysis of particularly the mtDNA, but now also some nuclear DNA, it is apparent that Neanderthal DNA is very distinct from our own. In assessing the degree of difference between DNA in Neanderthals and modern humans, the authors suggest that these two lineages have been separated for more than 400,000 years.

Although in its infancy, such genetic studies support the view that Neanderthals did not interbreed with Homo sapiens who migrated into Europe. It is, therefore, highly likely that modern humans do not carry Neanderthal genes in their DNA.
Additional considerations

The chronology in the Middle East does not support the Multiregional Model where Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans overlapped for a long period of time.

    * Cave sites in Israel, most notably Qafzeh and Skhul date to nearly 100,000 years and contain skeletons of anatomically modern humans. Furthermore, Neanderthal remains are known from sites such as the 110,000-year-old Tabun cave, which predates the earliest Homo sapiens by about 10,000 years in the region.

Neanderthals and modern humans coexisted in some parts of the world for thousands of years.

    *

      The presence of Neanderthals at two other caves in Israel, Amud and Kebara, dated to roughly 55,000 years means that Neanderthals and Homo sapiens overlapped in this region for at least 55,000 years. Therefore, if Homo sapiens were in this region for some 55,000 years prior to the disappearance of the Neanderthals, there is no reason to assume that Neanderthals evolved into modern humans.
    *

      Archaeological evidence from Europe suggests that Neanderthals may have survived in the Iberian Peninsula until perhaps as recently as 30,000 to 35,000 years ago. Fully modern humans first appear in Europe at around 35,000-40,000 years ago, bringing with them an Upper Paleolithic tool tradition referred to as the Aurignacian. Hence, Neanderthals and fully modern humans may have overlapped for as much as 10,000 years in Europe. Again, with fully modern humans on the scene, it is not necessary to have Neanderthals evolve into modern humans, further bolstering the view that humans replaced Neanderthals.

Neanderthals probably did not breed with modern humans but they borrowed some of their tools and skills

    *

      The situation in southern France is, however, not quite as clear. Here, at several sites, dating to roughly 40,000 years there is evidence of an archaeological industry called the Châtelperronian that contains elements of Middle and Upper Paleolithic artifacts. Hominids from these sites are clearly Neanderthals, sparking speculation that the Châtelperronian is an example of Neanderthals mimicking the culture of modern humans. The lack of anatomical intermediates at these sites, suggests that if Neanderthals did encounter and borrow some technology from Homo sapiens, they did not interbreed.
    *

      A potential 24,500-year-old Neanderthal/sapiens hybrid was announced from the site of Lagar Velho, Portugal.4 This 4-year-old has a short, squat body like a Neanderthal, but possesses an anatomically modern skull. There are a number of problems with interpreting this find as a Neanderthal/sapiens hybrid.14 First of all, as a hybrid it should have a mixture of traits throughout its body and not possess the body of a Neanderthal and skull of a modern human. For example, if we look at hybrids of lions and tigers they do not possess the head of one species and the body of the other, but exhibit a morphological mixture of the two species. Secondly, and more importantly, acceptance of this specimen as a hybrid would suggest that Neanderthal traits had been retained for some 6,000 to 10,000 years after Neanderthals went extinct, which is highly unlikely. This is theoretically unlikely since Neanderthal traits would have been genetically swamped by the Homo sapiens genes over such a protracted period of time.
    *

      Proponents of the Multiregional Model, such as Milford Wolpoff, cite evidence in Asia of regional continuity. They see an evolutionary link between ancient Homo erectus in Java right through to Australian aborigines. A possible problem with this view is that recent dating of late surviving Homo erectus in Indonesia suggests that they survived here until 50,000 years ago, which is potentially when fully modern humans may have arrived in the region from Africa.
    *

      China may contain the best evidence for supporting the Multiregional Model. Here there are discoveries of a couple of skulls dated to roughly 100,000 years ago that seem to possess a mixture of classic Homo erectus and Homo sapiens traits. Better geological dating and more complete specimens are needed to more fully assess this possibility.

Conclusion

For the moment, the majority of anatomical, archaeological and genetic evidence gives credence to the view that fully modern humans are a relatively recent evolutionary phenomenon. The current best explanation for the beginning of modern humans is the Out of Africa Model that postulates a single, African origin for Homo sapiens. The major neurological and cultural innovations that characterized the appearance of fully modern humans has proven to be remarkably successful, culminating in our dominance of the planet at the expense of all earlier hominid populations.
Logged

'....and the truth shall set you free.'
v.s.
arbeit macht frei.

You decide.
Dok
Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,716



WWW
« Reply #78 on: June 20, 2009, 06:09:15 PM »

...Standard of Proof...and the discussion isn't going off-topic.

I will go slowly here, due to your limited ability to comprehend complex ideas. For your "Creation Theory" to occur a Divine Creator would have to exist. 

Simply prove to me that a "Divine Creator" exists, without falling back on the non-proof of prophecy, faith, or using quotes from a man-made book, which is simply filled with the collections of personal testimony of men.

It flows logically. First establish the divine creator, and only then discuss his ability to intelligently design, and create mankind.

I did, now can you prove we all came from a rock?
Logged

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship Wink
NinjaPatriot
Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 280


« Reply #79 on: June 20, 2009, 07:39:03 PM »

The question as to whether God exits falls outside of science, but the fact that we are too complex to have evolved and that evolution is shot points to a Creator.

That isn't an established fact, in fact complexity of bio systems is why the theory of evolution exists.

Quote
The scientific method is used until it comes to the question of origins and then it is cast off.  Evolutionist do not use the scientific method.  They presupposed that evolution has already occurred and then based off of that they look for "proof".

Incorrect.  Evolutionists DO in fact very much so use the scientific method, to suggest otherwise is preposterous.  Do not use this in any debate please, my response is mild compared to those who would look to exploit weakness in your logic.  The assumptions and conclusions are what in contention.  There certainly is evidence for evolution.

Quote
Though don't get confused if you are thinking of Macro-Evolution, because this one does happen.  Bacteria become resistant to drugs.  Dogs produce a variety of dogs. But notice it is still a dog.

Micro.  Got what you meant though. 

Quote
Macro-Evolution does not happen:  one kind of animal evolving into another.  If evolution is true, why aren't we still evolving.

Those aren't really well defined terms in the scientific community.  Because there is no one "kind" to another since evolution is viewed linearly.  And there is significant debate on individual change.

Quote
 
There is a conspiracy in the scientific community about Evolution just like there is with the one world government.

I don't think so.  Scientific philosophy is materialistic because it must be to be accurate.  Edit:  And of course testable.  Testability puts the blinders on big to the assumptions of scientists.
Quote
Think of it this way:  if our government can lie to us about one thing, what else are they lying to us about?

I think that's equivocation. 

Quote
That Bible is literally true and 100% accurate.  I know this statement will trip someone out!

You want to see the NWO: look at Revelation Chapter 13 and see its cross-references.



I believe that the original scrolls are accurate, not so much in the bible.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.17 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!