Creation vs. Evolution

[6days]

If...!

You don't even understand the term Homo erectus, do you.

Yes...IF.

Homo erectus is the species name assigned to human fossils that evolutionists claim are transitional forms between australopithecines (apes) and both Neanderthals and modern humans. To date, more than 280 fossil individuals have been found that are identified with this group. The species name means “erect or upright man” and was the name first put forth by Ernst Mayr to unify the classification of Asian fossils.
Creationists generally agree that all supposed ape-men fossils are, in fact, either ape or fully human. Species names within the taxonomic genus homo are viewed as fabricated classes invented to support evolutionary theory, and should be regarded as mere instruments of propaganda. The majority of Homo erectus fossils represent the populations of humans that lived following the global flood and the Tower of Babel, and should be considered true Homo sapiens
http://creationwiki.org/Homo_erectus

An interesting change is taking place in creationist circles in respect of the status of the taxon Homo erectus and its relationship to Homo sapiens sapiens. This development is paralleled by a similar change of direction in evolutionary thinking, and in both cases it seems likely that the impetus is being largely propelled by the discovery of the erectus specimen KNM-WT 15000 in Africa in 1984. This attitudinal shift has connotations for the whole topic of alleged evolution of human beings. In this brief paper it is proposed to track these amended attitudes and the implications for the creation-evolution controversy.
http://creation.com/homo-erectus-to-modern-man-evolution-or-human-variability

 

[Stuu]

Yes...IF.

Homo erectus is the species name assigned to human fossils that evolutionists claim are transitional forms between australopithecines (apes) and both Neanderthals and modern humans. To date, more than 280 fossil individuals have been found that are identified with this group. The species name means “erect or upright man” and was the name first put forth by Ernst Mayr to unify the classification of Asian fossils.
Creationists generally agree that all supposed ape-men fossils are, in fact, either ape or fully human. Species names within the taxonomic genus homo are viewed as fabricated classes invented to support evolutionary theory, and should be regarded as mere instruments of propaganda. The majority of Homo erectus fossils represent the populations of humans that lived following the global flood and the Tower of Babel, and should be considered true Homo sapiens
http://creationwiki.org/Homo_erectus

An interesting change is taking place in creationist circles in respect of the status of the taxon Homo erectus and its relationship to Homo sapiens sapiens. This development is paralleled by a similar change of direction in evolutionary thinking, and in both cases it seems likely that the impetus is being largely propelled by the discovery of the erectus specimen KNM-WT 15000 in Africa in 1984. This attitudinal shift has connotations for the whole topic of alleged evolution of human beings. In this brief paper it is proposed to track these amended attitudes and the implications for the creation-evolution controversy.
http://creation.com/homo-erectus-to-modern-man-evolution-or-human-variability

Blah Crtl-C Ctrl-V heh blah blah.

Interestingly, Crtl-C Ctrl-V blah blah pretty sure they're something, but blah blah blah those evilutionists mrhh!



Crtl-C- Ctrl-V and nothing else. The sure sign of a lazy creationist.



So, basically creationists have nothing of note to say about these facts of natural history that fit into their conspiracy theory like a porcupine fits into a condom.

Stuart

 

[patrick jane]

like a porcupine fits into a condom.

Stuart

 

[Greg Jennings]

Moved

 

[Greg Jennings]

Nope.... Gods Word is saying... 'Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of*all creatures that move along the ground, male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark,"


Once again...you are creating strawmen that you think you can beat. The ark easily could have held every KIND of animal. There may have been only 2 of the dog kind. Keep in mind that the Biblical model is supported by emperical evidence that animals can adapt and even speciate rapidly ...using their pre-existing genetic information.*

You're missing the point. There are too many dinosaur "types" alone. Never mind everything else! And what about food storage? And living quarters for Noah's family? There must be room for that also!

 

[Greg Jennings]

Greg, its very simple and evidence is always consistent with GodsWord. Read the flood account. The world that was, was destroyed. We see evidence of that rapid burial everywhere on earth.

It's really not. Not literally anyway. And I'm afraid that you saying that it is doesn't change that. Ask some experts

That is a good question. We do see many modern animals buried with dinosaurs. We see birds eaten by dinosaurs and dinos eaten by mammals.... but no humans. Why? Well the answer is possibly found in Genesis 6 " So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created".

We see no modern mammals or modern bird species with dinosaurs. Not. A. One. Why is that?

The fossil record may be totally bereft of any pre-flood humans other than those on the ark. It would seem most dinosaurs went extinct shortly after the flood, however there is some evidence that some dinosaurs may have lived up until the time of Marco Polo.

Marco Polo also saw unicorns according to his journal. Were they real as well?

Besides, read the description of the "dinosaurs" Polo wrote about. It doesn't match a description of any dinosaur species known of. It does, however, resemble crocodiles very closely. Just as Polo's "unicorns" resemble rhinoceros

 

[Hedshaker]

When is soon enough? Still waiting

Oh man, he's been picked up on this so many times now it's not funny any more. Michael seems to think that saying, "it's going to happen soon" means the matter is settled, point proved, game over. You'll see. Then you'll be sorry. :yawn:

Trouble is, he's been saying this for over two and half years now and it's still just as soon now as it was the first time he said it :rotfl:


And the one time he did hazard an estimate he got it every bit as wrong as everyone who ever made the same prediction. The prediction I made at the time was:- when it doesn't happen he will do what all the others have done and adjust his time line to suit. So not this time just yet, but soon. At least one of us was on the button.

Come on Michael. Jesus won't be floating through the clouds any time "soon". "Soon" doesn't mean anything at all. Any one could predict anything about anyone, soon. All they have to do is keep saying soon, soon, soon.

 

[MichaelCadry]

The fact is Michael that individual creatures, human or chimp, simply do not evolve, you have simply got it all wrong. Species evolve not individuals.
The individuals' own DNA is fixed at conception, it can't adapt, individuals don't morph, so don't believe any such YEC nonsense because it just isn't true.
Darwinian evolution actually explains that adaptions or mutations may occur in the offspring, that over many generations and natural selection can amount to real change, if there is a benefit to be had.

You can't explain it to me because I can tell that you simply don't know the first thing about it. All of life is continuously in the process of gradually evolving, which I can assure you does not involve any individuals "morphing".

Dear alwight,

I'm sorry, but I don't believe what you've said, for a minute!! Don't tell me they all evolved at the exact same time or the rest of this 'story.' How convenient to say that they all changed into different beings in the same year{s} and now they don't change any more. Supposedly one of our ancestors became extinct? I don't buy that either. I don't believe that species only evolve, but not individuals. What you are saying is preposterous. So all of a sudden, each chimp/human family changes in unison? With this thing called 'evolution,' you would expect to see individuals changing within each birth. They don't all change at the same time or in a matter of a few years and then quit changing anymore. I'm trying my best to be kind. Will chat again in a bit!!

Cheerio, Matey!!

Michael

 

[Hedshaker]

Dear alwight,

I'm sorry, but I don't believe what you've said, for a minute!! Don't tell me they all evolved at the exact same time or the rest of this 'story.' How convenient to say that they all changed into different beings in the same year{s} and now they don't change any more. Supposedly one of our ancestors became extinct? I don't buy that either. I don't believe that species only evolve, but not individuals. What you are saying is preposterous. So all of a sudden, each chimp/human family changes in unison? With this thing called 'evolution,' you would expect to see individuals changing within each birth. They don't all change at the same time or in a matter of a few years and then quit changing anymore. I'm trying my best to be kind. Will chat again in a bit!!

Wow, talk about missing the point. I'll let Alwight put you straight, if that's possible, because, honestly, I haven't got Al's patience with you.

 

[patrick jane]

Oh man, he's been picked up on this so many times now it's not funny any more. Michael seems to think that saying, "it's going to happen soon" means the matter is settled, point proved, game over. You'll see. Then you'll be sorry. :yawn:

Trouble is, he's been saying this for over two and half years now and it's still just as soon now as it was the first time he said it :rotfl:


And the one time he did hazard an estimate he got it every bit as wrong as everyone who ever made the same prediction. The prediction I made at the time was:- when it doesn't happen he will do what all the others have done and adjust his time line to suit. So not this time just yet, but soon. At least one of us was on the button.

Come on Michael. Jesus won't be floating through the clouds any time "soon". "Soon" doesn't mean anything at all. Any one could predict anything about anyone, soon. All they have to do is keep saying soon, soon, soon.

Maybe not in our short lifetimes, but God's word is true and reliable. Remember, the Bible has never been proven wrong on one single point.

 

[MichaelCadry]

I suppose some dinosaurs had tails pliable enough to curl a bit. That takes off about 1/3 of length of the average species, about.


However, the volume of all the species still far exceeds that of a 450x75x75 ark. And when you add in all of the other modern and prehistoric fauna then the quandary gets worse

Dear Greg J,

Sometimes, I butt in and answer a post. The animals that were to be put on the Ark all CAME TO Noah and his boat. He didn't go after them and catch them. God pulled another miracle. Oh!! Some of the dinosaurs did not go on the Ark. They went extinct. They were drowned in the flood. We have some animals that did make it, like alligators, crocodiles, tortoises, etc. That dinosaurs that didn't make the cut were not inclined to go to Noah to be included onto the Ark. God caused only those He wanted to save to approach Noah and his Ark. The giant men and women did not make it either, but only Noah and his family. See Gen. 6:4KJV. 'And there were giants there and also after that...etc.' Now we know that Goliath was a giant, for an example, so he probably had an active pituitary gland.

God Be With You!!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

Remember about a month ago, when I was telling you about all the pitiful lies you were spreading? That's what I meant.

Ok, ok, take is easy, maybe you've accepted a naturalistic origin for snow, but let's talk about the rainbow, shall we....
Remember how you delightfully talked about your master chemist or something rather?

When is soon enough? Still waiting

Dear TheDuke,

I've tried putting a date on it and was wrong, so all I can tell you is that it is extremely soon, but I can't give you the hour or day, or month, or even year, to be honest. You'll just have to wait, just like all of us. The bad part is that you really need to do something quick and accept Jesus as your Savior, you know, Love Him and God. If you don't, you're going down literally. So please revamp your life accordingly, if you are wiser. You seem nice to me. See what you can do. Just get on your knees and ask Jesus to come into your heart. It's that easy. And ask Him to forgive your sins while you are at it. That will help tremendously. Please give it a try, Greg, for your own sake. I would not hesitate, Greg!!

Much Love, In Jesus Christ,

Michael

 

[6days]

You're missing the point. There are too many dinosaur "types" alone. Never mind everything else! And what about food storage? And living quarters for Noah's family? There must be room for that also

You have missed the boat on this one. There was LOTS of room on the ark. There might have been a couple hundred dinosaurs only. Some are as small as chickens. Larger dinosaurs represented by juvenile might have the size of cows or even elephants. They could have fit quite nicely within the space of a few boxcars out of the 550 boxcar capacity.

Greg, its very simple and evidence is always consistent with GodsWord. Read the flood account. The world that was, was destroyed. We see evidence of that rapid burial everywhere on earth.

It's really not. Not literally anyway. And I'm afraid that you saying that it is doesn't change that. Ask some experts

Yes... the experts agree that the evidence is consistent with God's Word. Oh..... or did you mean experts that believe the same way you do?

We see no modern mammals or modern bird species with dinosaurs. Not. A. One. Why is that?

Your false belief system seems to have given you a blind spot to the evidence.

Top one is a avocet found in dinosaur layers and displayed with dinosaurs in the Milwaukee Museum. Bottom picture is a live avocet.

The fossil record may be totally bereft of any pre-flood humans other than those on the ark. It would seem most dinosaurs went extinct shortly after the flood, however there is some evidence that some dinosaurs may have lived up until the time of Marco Polo.

Marco Polo also saw unicorns according to his journal. Were they real as well?

Are you saying that if he really did see unicorns, then he really did see dinosaurs? Unicorns were a one horned non mythical animal. Wiki says "It is clear that Marco Polo was describing a rhinoceros.". HE also seem to be describing a dinosaur.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Blah Crtl-C Ctrl-V heh blah blah.

Interestingly, Crtl-C Ctrl-V blah blah pretty sure they're something, but blah blah blah those evilutionists mrhh!



Crtl-C- Ctrl-V and nothing else. The sure sign of a lazy creationist.



So, basically creationists have nothing of note to say about these facts of natural history that fit into their conspiracy theory like a porcupine fits into a condom.

Stuart

Dear Stuu,

Have you been drinking or something else? Why are you banned again? What happened? I don't believe this.

Michael

 

[gcthomas]

Top one is a avocet found in dinosaur layers and displayed with dinosaurs in the Milwaukee Museum. Bottom picture is a live avocet.

First, that top avocet ancestor looks rather different to the bottom one, and the similarities are the makers imagination, since the flesh and feathers were not preserved. You need to compare the skeletal structure details, not the fake feathers, to see the differences.

Second, I would expect to see ancestral forms of lots of bird groups in the Cretaceous, as that was when they evolved.

Tell me, are these birds also found in the dinosaur bearing jurassic or triassic rocks? If not, why not? Evolution theory gives a reason, but do your creationism advocacy websites (that you depend upon for your entire belief system) ?

 

[MichaelCadry]

Oh man, he's been picked up on this so many times now it's not funny any more. Michael seems to think that saying, "it's going to happen soon" means the matter is settled, point proved, game over. You'll see. Then you'll be sorry. :yawn:

Trouble is, he's been saying this for over two and half years now and it's still just as soon now as it was the first time he said it :rotfl:


And the one time he did hazard an estimate he got it every bit as wrong as everyone who ever made the same prediction. The prediction I made at the time was:- when it doesn't happen he will do what all the others have done and adjust his time line to suit. So not this time just yet, but soon. At least one of us was on the button.

Come on Michael. Jesus won't be floating through the clouds any time "soon". "Soon" doesn't mean anything at all. Any one could predict anything about anyone, soon. All they have to do is keep saying soon, soon, soon.

Dear Hedshaker,

Shame on you! You're supposed to be a friend!! When I say soon, it could be one year or five years. That is soon compared to 25 years, isn't it. How soon do you want it to be? Tomorrow? Then you wouldn't have to wait any longer for an answer. It doesn't work that way and you know it. No man knows, not even the Son, Jesus, but the Father only, God, He knows which day and hour. Certain things have to be taken care of first to fulfill the scriptures and then, it will be. You'll just have to have some patience. I can't pull a rabbit out of a hat and say it will happen next Tuesday. Sorry!!

Warm Regards & Cheerio,

Michael

 

[gcthomas]

I can't pull a rabbit out of a hat

I would be more impressed of you could pull a rabbit out of the Jurassic!

 

[TheDuke]

Oh man, he's been picked up on this so many times now it's not funny any more.

...

Trouble is, he's been saying this for over two and half years now and it's still just as soon now as it was the first time he said it :rotfl:

Yes, indeed. I was really looking forward to the one made for may 21 a few years back, would've been awesome, right on my b-day :rapture:

Dear TheDuke,

I've tried putting a date on it and was wrong, so all I can tell you is that it is extremely soon, but I can't give you the hour or day, or month, or even year, to be honest. You'll just have to wait, just like all of us. The bad part is that you really need to do something quick and accept Jesus as your Savior, you know, Love Him and God. If you don't, you're going down literally. So please revamp your life accordingly, if you are wiser. You seem nice to me. See what you can do. Just get on your knees and ask Jesus to come into your heart. It's that easy. And ask Him to forgive your sins while you are at it. That will help tremendously. Please give it a try, Greg, for your own sake. I would not hesitate, Greg!!

Much Love, In Jesus Christ,

Michael

Thank you Michael for worrying so much about my soul. I appreciate your effort, but I think I'll pass.
You see, what you have suggested is a free ticket to do whatever hideous atrocities anyone can, then do a short exercise in make-believe and presto: you're saved.

So much to seeking morality in religion!

Maybe not in our short lifetimes, but God's word is true and reliable. Remember, the Bible has never been proven wrong on one single point.

Oh dear, true & reliable??? never proven wrong???
What have you been smoking lately, mate? I want some o' that. :wazzup:

 

[alwight]

Dear alwight,

I'm sorry, but I don't believe what you've said, for a minute!! Don't tell me they all evolved at the exact same time or the rest of this 'story.' How convenient to say that they all changed into different beings in the same year{s} and now they don't change any more. Supposedly one of our ancestors became extinct? I don't buy that either. I don't believe that species only evolve, but not individuals. What you are saying is preposterous. So all of a sudden, each chimp/human family changes in unison? With this thing called 'evolution,' you would expect to see individuals changing within each birth. They don't all change at the same time or in a matter of a few years and then quit changing anymore. I'm trying my best to be kind. Will chat again in a bit!!

Cheerio, Matey!!

Michael

:sigh:
Michael you simply haven't got a clue, I could almost think you were deliberately missing the point or getting it wrong on purpose.

Yes I could be here until doomsday and I don't think you'd get it.

Species as a whole evolve gradually, individuals do not. I never suggested that they all do it in unison. Individual members of a species are simply participants in the same genepool, they are typically not important regarding evolution. The best adapted members of the species will produce the next generation from which, by natural selection, the best of those will produce the next generation, and so on. The less well adapted will simply die out because they will not be reproducing. The species evolves gradually by small changes over many generations, there has never been a time when a species as a whole has ever suddenly changed into another type of being or species.
Yes I realise that I am probably wasting my time trying to explain it to someone who clearly doesn't want to understand, who can only contemplate sudden magical mystical changes. But in a natural world there are no such sudden magical changes, just a slow process of gradual adaption over time within the interbreeding species/population as a whole, whereby natural selection sorts out the best adapted individuals to pass on their genes to the next generation of that species.

 

[TheDuke]

So you banned another one.

So you banned another one.

Oh you lot.

So, no tolerance of other opinions any more, eh?



linger: STU, we will miss you ...........