Creationists stumped by new hominid fossils

[Jose Fly]

Even though there haven't been any threads on it here at ToL, I'm sure most everyone has at least heard about the hominid fossils discovered deep in a South African cave. If not, National Geographic has a very good article...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/09/150910-human-evolution-change/

In sum, these specimens show a fascinating mixture of modern and primitive traits, which is what we would expect if humans shared an evolutionary common ancestry with other primates.

But one of the more entertaining aspects of finds like these is to watch the creationists try and figure out how to force them into their religious belief that such organisms must either be "fully human" or "fully ape". So what are we seeing?

Bones of Contention: How Will Creationists Respond To A Huge New Hominid Fossil Find?

Answers in Genesis sez: Fully ape

Institute for Creation Research sez: Doesn't matter, but maybe human

Kurt Wise sez: Fully human

Reasons to Believe sez: Fully ape

Todd Wood sez: I dunno

And creationists wonder why they're laughed at? Hilarious. :chuckle:

 

[patrick jane]

nope. i can tell the hip bones are off kilter -

 

[Interplanner]

It's not the fossils that will make the difference, it is the evidence of activities and capacities.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Looks a lot like they created another fiji mermaid, piltdown man, or lucy.

 

[Jose Fly]

Three responses so far, and none of them make a bit of sense. Amazing.

 

[6days]

Looks a lot like they created another fiji mermaid, piltdown man, or lucy.

It looks a whole lot more ape like than the 'missing link' 'Ida'

 

[Interplanner]

Three responses so far, and none of them make a bit of sense. Amazing.

It is much easier to make sense of what activities they were doing than out of bone fragments. It is very easy to manipulate explanations of bone fragments compared to charts with numbers, even if primitive. That's why my response is that the activities of homo sapiens--worship, records, artwork--is what sets him off from anything else, and these activities are also found in Genesis 1-11.

 

[User Name]

Bones of Contention: How Will Creationists Respond To A Huge New Hominid Fossil Find?

Thanks for introducing me to this blog. Tremendous resource!

 

[musterion]

It's a fake.

 

[Right Divider]

Three responses so far, and none of them make a bit of sense. Amazing.

Same old, same old..... believers in evolution are always trilled by the new fantasy. Always the pretty pictures from so little evidence.

Keep up the good work and don't forget to "date" everything properly (again and again and again).

 

[patrick jane]

nope. i can tell the hip bones are off kilter -

kil·ter
ˈkiltər/Submit
noun
noun: kilter; noun: kelter
out of harmony or balance.
"daylight savings throws everybody's body clock out of kilter"
synonyms: awry, off balance, unbalanced, out of order, disordered, confused, muddled, disoriented, out of tune, out of whack, out of step; humorousdiscombobulated
"jet lag has left me completely out of kilter"
Origin
early 17th century: of unknown origin.

 

[User Name]

But one of the more entertaining aspects of finds like these is to watch the creationists try and figure out how to force them into their religious belief that such organisms must either be "fully human" or "fully ape". So what are we seeing?

Bones of Contention: How Will Creationists Respond To A Huge New Hominid Fossil Find?

Answers in Genesis sez: Fully ape

Institute for Creation Research sez: Doesn't matter, but maybe human

Kurt Wise sez: Fully human

Reasons to Believe sez: Fully ape

Todd Wood sez: I dunno

And creationists wonder why they're laughed at? Hilarious. :chuckle:

Found this quote to be of particular relevance to the topic:

Jim Foley at the TalkOrigins archive has a chart showing how all the major creationist authors classify various hominid skulls and the results are rather amusing. Creationists always claim that it’s easy to distinguish apes from humans, yet they themselves cannot agree on which specimens are ape and which are human. Ironically, several of those creationist authors have classified numerous specimens of Homo erectus – the very ones Wise says built the tower of Babel, as apes. The Java man specimens and the Peking man specimens are all Homo erectus, yet 3 out of 6 creationist authors consider the Peking man specimens to be apes, while 4 out of 6 consider the Java man specimens to be apes. So much for being “clearly distinguished.”​

Source: http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/08/22/the-sadness-of-kurt-wise/

 

[aikido7]

Even though there haven't been any threads on it here at ToL, I'm sure most everyone has at least heard about the hominid fossils discovered deep in a South African cave. If not, National Geographic has a very good article...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/09/150910-human-evolution-change/

In sum, these specimens show a fascinating mixture of modern and primitive traits, which is what we would expect if humans shared an evolutionary common ancestry with other primates.

But one of the more entertaining aspects of finds like these is to watch the creationists try and figure out how to force them into their religious belief that such organisms must either be "fully human" or "fully ape". So what are we seeing?

Bones of Contention: How Will Creationists Respond To A Huge New Hominid Fossil Find?

Answers in Genesis sez: Fully ape

Institute for Creation Research sez: Doesn't matter, but maybe human

Kurt Wise sez: Fully human

Reasons to Believe sez: Fully ape

Todd Wood sez: I dunno

And creationists wonder why they're laughed at? Hilarious. :chuckle:

BEHIND THE SANDBAGS....

"IN-BREAKING! The modern global culture!"

HIDE !!!

 

[patrick jane]

Three responses so far, and none of them make a bit of sense. Amazing.

because of the dumb headline -

OP - Creationists stumped by new hominid fossils



yeah, that's it. creationists are suddenly stumped -

 

[Jose Fly]

It looks a whole lot more ape like than the 'missing link' 'Ida'

Um.....what? This is "Ida" (Darwinius)...

And this is H. naledi...

So if H. naledi is "more ape" than Darwinius, I guess that means humans are "more ape" than Darwinius too. :chuckle:

 

[Granite]

It's a fake.

Sooner or later that's the only card you guys have left.

And mock ups of dinosaurs with saddles are...accurate?

 

[Jose Fly]

It's a fake.

Well played.

 

[Jose Fly]

yeah, that's it. creationists are suddenly stumped -

Judging by the responses in this thread, the headline seems to be very accurate. :up:

 

[Caledvwlch]

Sooner or later that's the only card you guys have left.

And mock ups of dinosaurs with saddles are...accurate?

 

[serpentdove]

"There's a Sucker Born Every Minute" ~ David Hannum

See:

Feather Problem