Creation vs. Evolution

[DFT_Dave]

Dave you get it wrong consistently. Complex ideas are sometimes problematic for people to understand, despite being true.

These fossils that I have shown were not an attempt to show how human evolution happened. They are examples in an attempt to show that it did happened.

Can I hear an Amen?

--Dave

 

[6days]

Natural scientists usually have a higher understanding than most of course and conclude that Neanderthals were a close but distinctly different species of human, based on their features and DNA.

"Natural" scientists?
You are referring to those who refuse to follow the evidence when it leads in a direction they don't like?
Neandertals are NOT a different species. You are falling for some of the belief system that once taught us Neandertals were sub humans incapable of speech.
Modern science has shown us that Neandertals were capapable of speech. They had slightly larger brains than us. They farmed, used tools, used cosmetics, likely enjoyed music etc etc.

Neandertal DNA is 99.7% similar to ours (People living today are 99.9% similar) Often the definition for a separate species is when interbreeding can't produce fertile offspring, however...We have inherited some of our genes from Neandertals. Neandertals are us!

Your claim Neandertals are a separate species is nothing more than an attempt to cling to your beliefs which science has proven wrong.

This is a recreation done from a skull of a Neandertal child. Not so different from people today.

 

[Jukia]

"
Neandertals are NOT a different species. You are falling for some of the belief system that once taught us Neandertals were sub humans incapable of speech.
Modern science has shown us that Neandertals were capapable of speech. They had slightly larger brains than us. They farmed, used tools, used cosmetics, likely enjoyed music etc etc.

Neandertal DNA is 99.7% similar to ours (People living today are 99.9% similar) Often the definition for a separate species is when interbreeding can't produce fertile offspring, however...We have inherited some of our genes from Neandertals. Neandertals are us!

Your claim Neandertals are a separate species is nothing more than an attempt to cling to your beliefs which science has proven wrong.

This is a recreation done from a skull of a Neandertal child. Not so different from people today.

Neanderthals pre Flood or Post Flood?

 

[alwight]

"Natural" scientists?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_science
That looks like rather good evidence to me that you have no interest at all in natural sciences or in the scientists who work in it. If you can't find something you like on a creationist website I suspect you simply make it up, right?

You are referring to those who refuse to follow the evidence when it leads in a direction they don't like?
Neandertals are NOT a different species. You are falling for some of the belief system that once taught us Neandertals were sub humans incapable of speech.

Sez you.

Modern science has shown us that Neandertals were capapable of speech. They had slightly larger brains than us. They farmed, used tools, used cosmetics, likely enjoyed music etc etc.

They had bigger eye orbits, conical, not globular, brain cavities and thus comparable brain sizes but brain development after birth seems to show signs of a different evolutionary path:

Summary Neanderthals had brain sizes comparable to modern humans, but their brain cases were elongated and not globular as in Homo sapiens 1 and 2. It has, therefore, been suggested that modern humans and Neanderthals reached large brain sizes along different evolutionary pathways [2]. Here, we assess when during development these adult differences emerge. This is critical for understanding whether differences in the pattern of brain development might underlie potential cognitive differences between these two closely related groups. Previous comparisons of Neanderthal and modern human cranial development have shown that many morphological characteristics separating these two groups are already established at the time of birth 3, 4 and 5, and that the subsequent developmental patterns of the face are similar, though not identical [6]. Here, we show that a globularization phase seen in the neurocranial development of modern humans after birth is absent from Neanderthals.

​

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982210012820

Neandertal DNA is 99.7% similar to ours (People living today are 99.9% similar) Often the definition for a separate species is when interbreeding can't produce fertile offspring, however...We have inherited some of our genes from Neandertals. Neandertals are us!

Your claim Neandertals are a separate species is nothing more than an attempt to cling to your beliefs which science has proven wrong.

This is a recreation done from a skull of a Neandertal child. Not so different from people today.

I simply say what natural science says, it's not my claim or a wild assertion to suit any presupposition or agenda that I am trying desperately to support, I am only interested in what is actually the truth, whatever it is.

So it must all be a part of that darned global scientific conspiracy going on, duh silly me, I forgot.:doh:

Chimpanzee DNA is 98.8% similar to ours, whom we and Neanderthals share ERVs (Endogenous retroviruses) clearly showing our common ancestry, while Neanderthals were just that bit closer to us perhaps but still evidentially different enough for those darned conspiratorial natural scientists to categorise them as having been on a separate evolutionary branch, albeit a dead end, and not us or our particular branch. Sorry if that doesn't fit with your presuppositional beliefs and ancient scripture 6days.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Evolution is the conclusion reached from logic, the empirical evidence and an assumption of naturalistic processes in regard to the origin of species, that's it. It does not vary from any other area of science in that regard. So your objections are based on either ignorance of that fact, or downright knowledgeable deceit.

False theories are logic?
Assumptions?

I already covered yer Dineyesque thought experiments.

 

[noguru]

False theories are logic?
Assumptions?

I already covered yer Dineyesque thought experiments.

You are a moron. Anything you say does not matter. When you can demonstrate you have an accurate and adult understanding your opinion might gain some weight. Until then your words are nothing more than a baby crying.

 

[noguru]

These fossils that I have shown were not an attempt to show how human evolution happened. They are examples in an attempt to show that it did happened.


--Dave

Again, all you do is demonstrate that you have a very poor grasp of this subject matter.

Can I hear an Amen!

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

You are a moron. Anything you say does not matter. When you can demonstrate you have an accurate and adult understanding your opinion might gain some weight. Until then your words are nothing more than a baby crying.

I will speak as a fool for you compel me.

I graduated in the top 5% of the united states in academics.

I did it with a half hearted attempt, as I spent more time ditchin class, partyin, and chasin girls.

I can out think you with my C game anyday, anytime.

Just because not many of us Mighty & Wise Men are called, does not mean we havent been.

So head back in to Disneyland, Mickey.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Neanderthals pre Flood or Post Flood?

Nice.............. tryin to misdirect the subject now hunh?

 

[Tyrathca]

I will speak as a fool for you compel me.

I graduated in the top 5% of the united states in academics.

I did it with a half hearted attempt, as I spent more time ditchin class, partyin, and chasin girls.

I can out think you with my C game anyday, anytime.

Just because not many of us Mighty & Wise Men are called, does not mean we havent been.

So head back in to Disneyland, Mickey.

Yes I too is also good at the academics. Me pass English with very high letters!



LOL who are you trying to kid 0mind? If you're going to try and pretend to be smart at least put some effort in. Plus only top 5%? Try harder.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Again, all you do is demonstrate that you have a very poor grasp of this subject matter.

Can I hear an Amen!

Origin of Species was published on 24 November 1859

Piltdown Man was fabricated in 1912

Nebraska man was fabricated in 1922

Taung fossil was discovered in 1924 but mostly rejected until the 1940s.

Ramapithecus fossil mistake was in 1932

What this means is, having no human fossils to formulate a theory of human evolution to begin with, the how of evolution (natural selection) was conceived before the fact of human evolution had been established.

Are you ready to concede these facts?

And as we will see, it has never been confirmed by the fossil record, but perhaps you think you can "prove" other wise with more than just ad hominem arguments.

--Dave

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Yes I too is also good at the academics. Me pass English with very high letters!



LOL who are you trying to kid 0mind? If you're going to try and pretend to be smart at least put some effort in. Plus only top 5%? Try harder.

Only difference is, my percentile grade curve was not calculated against a banished criminal populace. :jawdrop:

 

[6days]

Neandertals are NOT a different species.

Sez you.

Not just me, but also modern science...Even many evolutionists now admit Neandertals are us.

Modern science has shown us that Neandertals were capapable of speech. They had slightly larger brains than us. They farmed, used tools, used cosmetics, likely enjoyed music etc etc.

They had bigger eye orbits, conical, not globular, brain cavities and thus comparable brain sizes but brain development after birth seems to show signs of a different evolutionary path:

Comparable brain size? Evolutionists find it difficult to admit Neandertals had LARGER brains than us.

Funny that evolutionists use SLIGHT difference in physical traits to justify their belief that Neandertals were a different species. We don't call dwarfs, pygmies, mongoloids etc a different species when they look slightly different. There are many people with genetic physical defornities and we don't call them a different species. So, there is no justification in calling Neandertals a different species.

Neandertal DNA is 99.7% similar to ours (People living today are 99.9% similar) Often the definition for a separate species is when interbreeding can't produce fertile offspring, however...We have inherited some of our genes from Neandertals. Neandertals are us!

Your claim Neandertals are a separate species is nothing more than an attempt to cling to your beliefs which science has proven wrong.

Chimpanzee DNA is 98.8% similar to ours, whom we and Neanderthals share ERVs (Endogenous retroviruses) clearly showing our common ancestry, while Neanderthals were just that bit closer to us perhaps but still evidentially different enough for those darned conspiratorial natural scientists to categorise them as having been on a separate evolutionary branch, albeit a dead end, and not us or our particular branch. Sorry if that doesn't fit with your presuppositional beliefs and ancient scripture 6days.

Wow... So typical. Try to make chimps more human like and try make humans more ape like.

God's Word tells us that all humans are one blood. And science confirms it. There are no separate human species...no sub species of humans

Evolutionists at one time thought some people groups were more highly evolved than others. (EX. They thought Caucasian men were more highly evolved than dark skin people. Evolutionists thought men were more highly evolved and more intelligent than women)

Some modern evolutionists are similar to those older evolutionists. Modern evolutionists no longer believe men are more evolved than women... Yet some still believe there are different species and sub species of humans such as Neandertals.


Evolutionists... totally wrong about Neandertals

God's Word.....totally correct.

 

[6days]

Origin of Species was published on 24 November 1859

Piltdown Man was fabricated in 1912

Nebraska man was fabricated in 1922

Taung fossil was discovered in 1924 but mostly rejected until the 1940s.

Ramapithecus fossil mistake was in 1932

What this means is, having no human fossils to formulate a theory of human evolution to begin with, the how of evolution (natural selection) was conceived before the fact of human evolution had been established.

Are you ready to concede these facts?

And as we will see, it has never been confirmed by the fossil record, but perhaps you think you can "prove" other wise with more than just ad hominem arguments.

--Dave

Not easy to get them to concede frauds were committed because of beliefs.
Enjoying your posts Dave.

 

[6days]

Nice.............. (Jukia) tryin to misdirect the subject now hunh?

Yes

 

[gcthomas]

Origin of Species was published on 24 November 1859

Piltdown Man was fabricated in 1912

Nebraska man was fabricated in 1922

Taung fossil was discovered in 1924 but mostly rejected until the 1940s.

Ramapithecus fossil mistake was in 1932

What this means is, having no human fossils to formulate a theory of human evolution to begin with, the how of evolution (natural selection) was conceived before the fact of human evolution had been established.

Are you ready to concede these facts?

And as we will see, it has never been confirmed by the fossil record, but perhaps you think you can "prove" other wise with more than just ad hominem arguments.

--Dave

There are many thousands of hominin fossils discovered now, which confirm the general evolutionary origin of humans. That the theory was described based on the evidence of evolution in animals and plants is hardly surprising, as there are many more of those fossils to be found.

Are you going to dismiss the thousands of hominin finds one by one? Will you claim they are all frauds since you claim four already? Four down, thousands to go! :chuckle:

 

[6days]

There are many thousands of hominin fossils discovered now, which confirm the general evolutionary origin of humans. That the theory was described based on the evidence of evolution in animals and plants is hardly surprising, as there are many more of those fossils to be found.

Are you going to dismiss the thousands of hominin finds one by one? Will you claim they are all frauds since you claim four already? Four down, thousands to go! :chuckle:

I think he asked if you concede that the facts he mentioned so far were correct.

 

[Jukia]

Nice.............. tryin to misdirect the subject now hunh?

Oh goodness gracious, no. 6days has stated that Neanderthals were 100% human, I am just trying to fill in the blanks. We have a certain amount of Neanderthal fossils, are they pre flood or post flood.

Although as I think about it, those fossils must be all pre flood, since if Neanderthals are human kind they did not get on the Ark since only Noah's family was on the Ark---unless of course Noah was a Neanderthal. Ah but that strikes me as silly since there is nothing in the Bible that suggests that.

So all Neanderthal fossils are from the 2000+/- years between Creation Week and the end of the Flood, right?

 

[DFT_Dave]

There are many thousands of hominin fossils discovered now, which confirm the general evolutionary origin of humans. That the theory was described based on the evidence of evolution in animals and plants is hardly surprising, as there are many more of those fossils to be found.

Are you going to dismiss the thousands of hominin finds one by one? Will you claim they are all frauds since you claim four already? Four down, thousands to go! :chuckle:

SPECIES AND TIME PERIOD

1. Ardipithicus ramidus 5 to 4 million years ago

2. Australopithecus anamensis 4.2 to 3.9 million years ago

3. Australopithecus afarensis (Oldest Ancestor 4 to 2.7 million years ago

4. Australopithecus africanus 3 to 2 million years ago

5. Australopithecus robustus 2.2 to 1.6 million years ago

6. Homo habilis 2.2 to 1.6 million years ago

7. Homo erectus 2.0 to 0.4 million years ago

8. Homo sapiens archaic 400 to 200 thousand years ago

9. Homo sapiens neandertalensis 200 to 30 thousand years ago

10. Homo sapiens sapiens 200 thousand years ago to present

We only have to deal with the major fossils in each group to prove my point.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

This debate requires a starting point. It's primarily about human origin. We ultimately want to know where we come from and where we are going. Science is concerned with physical/material proof for that answer.

Is the theory of evolution a science only or also a philosophy? I think we could all agree by now that it is both.

Is creationism a religion only or also a science? I think we should all agree that it is also both.

We all agree that the theory of evolution has a history of correcting itself. Why is this so? I will show you simply by going through the history of evolution that it has changed, not because of the incompleteness of the fossil record, or because we don't know how we evolved, but because we have never found fossil evidence that we have evolved.

That history of failure to demonstrate human evolution is documented by all those who were students of evolution, not by creationists. Many evolutionist have been honest enough to acknowledge when contrary evidence to their theory has been discovered, but we will see that the driving force of the philosophy of evolution explains away every contradiction it has faced because the theory of evolution is a dialectic approach to science and not a science of antithesis.

--Dave