So, no Neanderthals before The Flood? Can you give us a post Flood timeline with the appearance of Neanderthals and their demise. I'd like to see that over the last 4355 years (using AiG's time line).
Where did the races come from? Evolutiion, Creation or Other.
- Thread starter iamaberean
- Start date
So, no Neanderthals before The Flood? Can you give us a post Flood timeline with the appearance of Neanderthals and their demise. I'd like to see that over the last 4355 years (using AiG's time line).
6days
New member
Actually.... Gish won his debates by overwhelming the opposition with evidence.
There ISN'T much debate anymore. Evolutionists are finally accepting the evidence that Neandertals are us.Stuu said:
That argument is over. Even hard core 'evangelical' evolutionists like Michael Shermer have had to admit that genetics shows Neandertals are "homo sapiens".Stuu said:
Yes...it's a problem for evolutionists . Generally species is defined as a population capable of interbreeding. It seems like a bitter pill to swallow for some that genetics has shown Neandertals are us.Stuu said:
The Hahnöfersand skull was recently re-dated from 36,000 years up to only 7500 years. This skull bears strong resemblance to Neandertals. We don't need invent explanations why our genome is almost identical to NeandertalsStuu said:
Last edited:
Baloney! You are still stuck believing God has to be always flesh.
There is no separate Neanderthal group. They only looked different. It is human nature to be too impressed by human looks and difference.
Good to see 6days has it right as usual.
6days
New member
Gish was famous for winning debates knowing the facts.Caino said:
I seen an opponent of Gish (on video) get so flustered at not knowing science as well as Gish, that he tried to derail the debate by 'offering' to electrocute Gish. And... the best defence evolutionists have is calling Gish a quack....or by complaining Gish overwhelmed them with scientific information.*Caino said:
And what exactly did Gish win? Fastest talker?
Well obviously, morphologically Neanderthals aren't 'us'. Check out the differences. While each of the features individually is within the range of homo sapiens (sapiens), no sapiens would have all of the Neanderthal features, and vice-versa.
I can see that appreciation of nuanced arguments for each position are not your strength.
Do you mean scientists? It's actually no problem at all for scientists, because unlike black-and-white point-scoring YECs, they appreciate that the concept of species needs to be understood in the context of evolution. Who were the last breeding pair of Homo rhodesiensis who gave birth to the first Homo sapiens?
It's a nonsense question because you would be trying to place an arbitrary changeover point on what is essentially continuous change from one sort of animal into another, into another, into another. There is an unbroken line of 'ability to breed' back into the past for at least the past 1200 million years. It makes no difference to history where we put the demarcation lines.
Yes, apparently it is like a bitter pill for some. But who cares about that moronic attitude?
Stuu: It is also possible that similarities in the two genomes are left over from common ancestry 500,000 or so years ago, before the emergence out of Africa.
If you believe in separately created species then you will continue to get this wrong. The DNA had a common origin.
Stuart
Neanderthal differences have arisen by allopatric speciation: their ancestors were in Europe while our ancestors were still in Africa. Genetic drift and natural selection due to differences in environment mean that you can easily tell the differences between Neanderthal and Homo sapiens (sapiens) fossils, and between the genomes as well. Homo sapiens do not include Neanderthals within the normal range of Homo sapiens genetically, even though the two are very close and have some overlap for reasons that have not yet been fully teased out.
You have answered my statement "Neanderthals did not descend from a common modern human ancestor" with "There is no separate Neanderthal group". Well, there is a 'separate group' called the Kurds and another called the Australian Aboriginals, and stating that isn't just being impressed by looks, it is cultural difference too, so I think you haven't justified your claim.
Stuart
The human skull that challenges the Out of Africa theory
29 January, 2014 - 06:59 johnblack
http://www.ancient-origins.net/human-origins-science/human-skull-challenges-out-africa-theory-001283
Urantia Book 1955
THE BADONAN TRIBES
64:3.1 Besides the Foxhall peoples in the west, another struggling center of culture persisted in the east. This group was located in the foothills of the northwestern Indian highlands among the tribes of Badonan, a great-great-grandson of Andon. These people were the only descendants of Andon who never practiced human sacrifice.
64:3.2 These highland Badonites occupied an extensive plateau surrounded by forests, traversed by streams, and abounding in game. Like some of their cousins in Tibet, they lived in crude stone huts, hillside grottoes, and semiunderground passages.
64:3.3 While the tribes of the north grew more and more to fear the ice, those living near the homeland of their origin became exceedingly fearful of the water. They observed the Mesopotamian peninsula gradually sinking into the ocean, and though it emerged several times, the traditions of these primitive races grew up around the dangers of the sea and the fear of periodic engulfment. And this fear, together with their experience with river floods, explains why they sought out the highlands as a safe place in which to live.
64:3.4 To the east of the Badonan peoples, in the Siwalik Hills of northern India may be found fossils that approach nearer to transition types between man and the various prehuman groups than any others on earth.
64:3.5 850,000 years ago the superior Badonan tribes began a warfare of extermination directed against their inferior and animalistic neighbors. In less than one thousand years most of the borderland animal groups of these regions had been either destroyed or driven back to the southern forests. This campaign for the extermination of inferiors brought about a slight improvement in the hill tribes of that age. And the mixed descendants of this improved Badonite stock appeared on the stage of action as an apparently new people—the Neanderthal race.
=
=
=
ORIGIN OF THE COLORED RACES
64:5.1 500,000 years ago the Badonan tribes of the northwestern highlands of India became involved in another great racial struggle. For more than one hundred years this relentless warfare raged, and when the long fight was finished, only about one hundred families were left. But these survivors were the most intelligent and desirable of all the then living descendants of Andon and Fonta.
64:5.2 And now, among these highland Badonites there was a new and strange occurrence. A man and woman living in the northeastern part of the then inhabited highland region began suddenly to produce a family of unusually intelligent children. This was the Sangik family, the ancestors of all of the six colored races of Urantia.
64:5.3 These Sangik children, nineteen in number, were not only intelligent above their fellows, but their skins manifested a unique tendency to turn various colors upon exposure to sunlight. Among these nineteen children were five red, two orange, four yellow, two green, four blue, and two indigo. These colors became more pronounced as the children grew older, and when these youths later mated with their fellow tribesmen, all of their offspring tended toward the skin color of the Sangik parent.
64:5.4 And now I interrupt the chronological narrative, after calling attention to the arrival of the Planetary Prince at about this time, while we separately consider the six Sangik races of Urantia.
29 January, 2014 - 06:59 johnblack
http://www.ancient-origins.net/human-origins-science/human-skull-challenges-out-africa-theory-001283
Urantia Book 1955
THE BADONAN TRIBES
64:3.1 Besides the Foxhall peoples in the west, another struggling center of culture persisted in the east. This group was located in the foothills of the northwestern Indian highlands among the tribes of Badonan, a great-great-grandson of Andon. These people were the only descendants of Andon who never practiced human sacrifice.
64:3.2 These highland Badonites occupied an extensive plateau surrounded by forests, traversed by streams, and abounding in game. Like some of their cousins in Tibet, they lived in crude stone huts, hillside grottoes, and semiunderground passages.
64:3.3 While the tribes of the north grew more and more to fear the ice, those living near the homeland of their origin became exceedingly fearful of the water. They observed the Mesopotamian peninsula gradually sinking into the ocean, and though it emerged several times, the traditions of these primitive races grew up around the dangers of the sea and the fear of periodic engulfment. And this fear, together with their experience with river floods, explains why they sought out the highlands as a safe place in which to live.
64:3.4 To the east of the Badonan peoples, in the Siwalik Hills of northern India may be found fossils that approach nearer to transition types between man and the various prehuman groups than any others on earth.
64:3.5 850,000 years ago the superior Badonan tribes began a warfare of extermination directed against their inferior and animalistic neighbors. In less than one thousand years most of the borderland animal groups of these regions had been either destroyed or driven back to the southern forests. This campaign for the extermination of inferiors brought about a slight improvement in the hill tribes of that age. And the mixed descendants of this improved Badonite stock appeared on the stage of action as an apparently new people—the Neanderthal race.
=
=
=
ORIGIN OF THE COLORED RACES
64:5.1 500,000 years ago the Badonan tribes of the northwestern highlands of India became involved in another great racial struggle. For more than one hundred years this relentless warfare raged, and when the long fight was finished, only about one hundred families were left. But these survivors were the most intelligent and desirable of all the then living descendants of Andon and Fonta.
64:5.2 And now, among these highland Badonites there was a new and strange occurrence. A man and woman living in the northeastern part of the then inhabited highland region began suddenly to produce a family of unusually intelligent children. This was the Sangik family, the ancestors of all of the six colored races of Urantia.
64:5.3 These Sangik children, nineteen in number, were not only intelligent above their fellows, but their skins manifested a unique tendency to turn various colors upon exposure to sunlight. Among these nineteen children were five red, two orange, four yellow, two green, four blue, and two indigo. These colors became more pronounced as the children grew older, and when these youths later mated with their fellow tribesmen, all of their offspring tended toward the skin color of the Sangik parent.
64:5.4 And now I interrupt the chronological narrative, after calling attention to the arrival of the Planetary Prince at about this time, while we separately consider the six Sangik races of Urantia.
From Ape To Man Pictorial Guide
by Saskia Praamsma 2003
(based on the Urania Book narrative 1934, printed 1955)
http://www.squarecircles.com/studyaids/manandape/primates_pictorial.pdf
by Saskia Praamsma 2003
(based on the Urania Book narrative 1934, printed 1955)
http://www.squarecircles.com/studyaids/manandape/primates_pictorial.pdf
6days
New member
Gish won debates. As Gish said, by beating evolutionists in their own element, "secular scientific evidence"..Stuu said:
Wiki ..."spokespersons for evolution publicly recommended that evolutionists not debate Duane Gish because they would surely lose." Evolutionists cried basically saying that the debates were rigged...that the moderators were unfair.... that Gish could gallop while they could only limp.
Stuu said:
Morphilogically I am different from my sister...different from Aboriginal Australians, African pygmies, etc. But, we are all homo sapiens, even though we may have different labels, and not all look the same. As your link says about the distinguishing traits of Neandertals, "many of these traits occasionally manifest in modern humans, particularly among certain ethnic groups...".
No, I meant evolutionists.Stuu said:
Not all evolutionists are scientists.
Not all scientists are evolutionists.
Stuu said:
YES... our DNA and Neandertal DNA has a common origin...Adam
NO... I don't believe in*separately created species. I do believe God created organisms with genetic information and mechanisms allowing them to rapidly adjust to changing environments.*
iT IS MY BELIEF, NOT A PROOF
Your quote originates at the IRC. Not exactly an honest or impartial source.
Anyway, you appear convinced by Gish's veracity. Tell us what one argument of his really has changed the way scientists think about biology.
No, you're not. Not compared to the differences between you and H. neanderthanensis.
Nope. Your morphology and all those others are distinctly different from the morphology of Neanderthals.
Right, but not all of them. Only a very small number in any one individual.
The number of biologists who do not consider evolution by natural selection a proven fact of history is so small it's not even worth listing them. Of those, the number who have not also declared an unswerving commitment to the Judeo-christian god and a literal interpretation of scripture ahead of physical evidence must be pretty much zero.
And what species was this Adam?
Right, so you believe in separately created species.
Stuart
iamaberean
New member
6days
New member
I believe God programmed genomes with enough info to diversify and survive in various enviroments. Breeders also understand this and select OUT traits they don't want. The kinds God created *always remain the same kind. *Dogs are dogs...humans are humans.... bacteria always remains bacteria etc.iamberean said:
*
6days
New member
Also.... what I meant when I said I don't believe in seperatly created species is that God created distinct kinds... not species. 'Species' is a bit of a rubbery evolutionist word, Seperate 'species' often results during adaptation when genetic info is LOST. The various species of finches for example may be descendants of just one created parent population.
6days: can you provide us with such a time line? And how do you know that from non-Biblical, non-religious sources. Thanks.