The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1787 Aug 30, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
But what you all forget when you argue there is no God is that evolution is merely change. It does not explain where life came from or started.
Oh darn, ya got us. Again!

:-/

Oh, wait - you didn't.

I've addressed this so often now I'm just going to assume you've already seen it and are either too stupid or too dishonest to deal with me the first few hundred times.

Do wake us up when you have anything relevant to the validity of evolution.

Because that ain't it.

Doofus.(shrug)

“If It Is Possible”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

It Will Likely Happen

#1789 Aug 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh darn, ya got us. Again!
:-/
Oh, wait - you didn't.
I've addressed this so often now I'm just going to assume you've already seen it and are either too stupid or too dishonest to deal with me the first few hundred times.
Do wake us up when you have anything relevant to the validity of evolution.
Because that ain't it.
Doofus.(shrug)
What I have seen is you all say that evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis but yet turn around and say that they go hand in hand. Make up your mind will ya!!!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#1790 Aug 30, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
What I have seen is you all say that evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis but yet turn around and say that they go hand in hand. Make up your mind will ya!!!
You are probably misunderstanding. Perhaps purposefully, many creatards use that as a defense mechanism.

Abiogenesis is a different, but RELATED topic to evolution.

Evolution is true regardless of abiogensis. The evidence for it is overwhelming. So it does not matter if the first cell came from abiogenesis, directly from GAWD, or it was farted by me into a time warp. The important fact is that once life was here it evolved.

Now the odds are extremely high that life came from abiogenesis. What would you expect scientists to investigate: The possibility that life appeared naturally or the relation between my anus and white holes?

“If It Is Possible”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

It Will Likely Happen

#1791 Aug 30, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are probably misunderstanding. Perhaps purposefully, many creatards use that as a defense mechanism.
Abiogenesis is a different, but RELATED topic to evolution.
Evolution is true regardless of abiogensis. The evidence for it is overwhelming. So it does not matter if the first cell came from abiogenesis, directly from GAWD, or it was farted by me into a time warp. The important fact is that once life was here it evolved.
Now the odds are extremely high that life came from abiogenesis. What would you expect scientists to investigate: The possibility that life appeared naturally or the relation between my anus and white holes?
1. I don't even want to hear about your anus, there are probably there are homosexual threads on here for that.

2. Any time some one brings up evolution and life evolving from a muddy soup your first claim will be they are totally different.

3. If you took the time to read my first post you would see that I said evolution is just merely change.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#1792 Aug 30, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
1. I don't even want to hear about your anus, there are probably there are homosexual threads on here for that.
2. Any time some one brings up evolution and life evolving from a muddy soup your first claim will be they are totally different.
3. If you took the time to read my first post you would see that I said evolution is just merely change.
Replay, why can't you be honest.

I have always said that abiogenesis is a related but different topic.

Who has said that they are totally different?

My reference to farting was aimed at your intelligence. I guess I should have aimed lower.

“If It Is Possible”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

It Will Likely Happen

#1793 Aug 30, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Replay, why can't you be honest.
I have always said that abiogenesis is a related but different topic.
Who has said that they are totally different?
My reference to farting was aimed at your intelligence. I guess I should have aimed lower.
Even I can tell you how they are different. Abiogenesis is how life formed where as evolution is how life progressed in time. Now a true atheist will believe fully in both therefore ruling out any need for God. As I have said many times I believe God created life with the ability to evolve.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#1794 Aug 30, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Even I can tell you how they are different. Abiogenesis is how life formed where as evolution is how life progressed in time. Now a true atheist will believe fully in both therefore ruling out any need for God. As I have said many times I believe God created life with the ability to evolve.
Okay, it should be obvious that if God exists he used evolution for life to get to its present state.

So what would stop such a God from using abiogenesis for the first life?

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1795 Aug 31, 2013
replaytime wrote:
As I have said many times I believe God created life with the ability to evolve.
And then remarkably, some Jews happened to guess exactly what God was like and, by sheer coincidence you were born to someone who believed them.

Of course, if we were in a predominantly Hindu society, you would believe that and be just as convinced.
Mitch

Prior Lake, MN

#1797 Nov 10, 2013
Human-like Fossil Menagerie Stuns Scientists
by Brian Thomas, M.S., & Frank Sherwin, M.A.*

An international team of scientists made a stunning and controversial discovery from an archaeological site in Dmanisi, a small town in the country of Georgia, that is forcing some scientists to unlearn everything they knew about the story of human evolution. The results from the find appeared in an October issue of the journal Science.1

Among other human skeleton bones, the researchers found five skulls or partial skulls. Some of them looked human, though they were smaller than today's average skull size. But the biggest surprise was that, though these human skulls all had very different shapes, they were buried together within a short time.

Yale University anthropologist Andrew Hill, who was not involved in the discovery, told the Wall Street Journal, "'It gives you a chance to look at variation for the first time.'"2 Instead of showing different transitional human forms living at different times and leading up to modern humans, the fossilized remains at this site showed variation occurring at the same time. Assuming the remains were all human, as the Science authors did, these results end up "drastically simplifying the story of human evolution," according to the WSJ.2

That means, among other things, Homo erectus can no longer be considered an ancestor who lived long before and gave rise to "early Homo" peoples, since the new evidence showed H. erectus, H. rudolfensis, and H. habilis clumped together. "Analysis of the skull and other remains at Dmanisi suggests that scientists have been too ready to name separate species of human ancestors in Africa. Many of those species may now have to be wiped from the textbooks," according to The Guardian.3

Among those species would be Neandertal and Cro-Magnon, which deserve no recognition as separate forms that supposedly evolved into Homo sapiens—modern humans.4 They were uniquely formed people living at the same time as modern-looking people. Australopithecus is also out of the evolutionary line up, now that evolutionists have finally followed its fossil evidence to where creation scientists did long ago when they concluded that it was just an extinct ape and had clearly never evolved into humans.5 Without these key players, the popular pageant of human evolution truly should all be wiped from the textbooks.

If the Dmanisi fossils represent ancient humans, then they show that generations of experts in human evolution have spent effort, time, and research dollars arranging fossil fragments of human skulls into an evolutionary line of descent that never really existed. Perhaps it is time to rethink the whole story.

References

Lordkipanidze, D. et al. A Complete Skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the Evolutionary Biology of Early Homo. Science. 342 (6156): 326-331.
Hotz, R. L. Skull Suggests Single Human Species Emerged From Africa, Not Several. The Wall Street Journal. Posted on wsj.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 29, 2013.
Sample, I. Skull of Homo erectus throws story of human evolution into disarray. The Guardian. Posted on theguardian.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 23, 2013.
Thomas, B. Neandertals Mixed with Humans in China. Creation Science Update. Posted on icr.org November 3, 2010, accessed November 4, 2013.
Gish, D. 1975. Man...Apes...Australopithecine s...Each Uniquely Different. Acts & Facts. 4 (9).
Image credit: Copyright © 2013 AAAS. Adapted for use in accordance with federal copyright (fair use doctrine) law. Usage by ICR does not imply endorsement of copyright holders.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer and Mr. Sherwin is Research Associate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on November 8, 2013.
Mitch

Prior Lake, MN

#1798 Nov 10, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are probably misunderstanding. Perhaps purposefully, many creatards use that as a defense mechanism.
Abiogenesis is a different, but RELATED topic to evolution.
Evolution is true regardless of abiogensis. The evidence for it is overwhelming. So it does not matter if the first cell came from abiogenesis, directly from GAWD, or it was farted by me into a time warp. The important fact is that once life was here it evolved.
Now the odds are extremely high that life came from abiogenesis. What would you expect scientists to investigate: The possibility that life appeared naturally or the relation between my anus and white holes?
Can you show me the whitnessed proof of evolution.

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#1799 Nov 10, 2013
Mitch wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you show me the whitnessed proof of evolution.
Look around you.

I don't know all the citations for the thousands upon thousands of publications for the last 150 years, but there ya go.

Enjoy your reading Mitch. It will lead you to understand Mitch. Bye Mitch.

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#1800 Nov 10, 2013
Mitch wrote:
Human-like Fossil Menagerie Stuns Scientists
by Brian Thomas, M.S., & Frank Sherwin, M.A.*
An international team of scientists made a stunning and controversial discovery from an archaeological site in Dmanisi, a small town in the country of Georgia, that is forcing some scientists to unlearn everything they knew about the story of human evolution. The results from the find appeared in an October issue of the journal Science.1
Among other human skeleton bones, the researchers found five skulls or partial skulls. Some of them looked human, though they were smaller than today's average skull size. But the biggest surprise was that, though these human skulls all had very different shapes, they were buried together within a short time.
Yale University anthropologist Andrew Hill, who was not involved in the discovery, told the Wall Street Journal, "'It gives you a chance to look at variation for the first time.'"2 Instead of showing different transitional human forms living at different times and leading up to modern humans, the fossilized remains at this site showed variation occurring at the same time. Assuming the remains were all human, as the Science authors did, these results end up "drastically simplifying the story of human evolution," according to the WSJ.2
That means, among other things, Homo erectus can no longer be considered an ancestor who lived long before and gave rise to "early Homo" peoples, since the new evidence showed H. erectus, H. rudolfensis, and H. habilis clumped together. "Analysis of the skull and other remains at Dmanisi suggests that scientists have been too ready to name separate species of human ancestors in Africa. Many of those species may now have to be wiped from the textbooks," according to The Guardian.3
Among those species would be Neandertal and Cro-Magnon, which deserve no recognition as separate forms that supposedly evolved into Homo sapiens—modern humans.4 They were uniquely formed people living at the same time as modern-looking people. Australopithecus is also out of the evolutionary line up, now that evolutionists have finally followed its fossil evidence to where creation scientists did long ago when they concluded that it was just an extinct ape and had clearly never evolved into humans.5 Without these key players, the popular pageant of human evolution truly should all be wiped from the textbooks.
If the Dmanisi fossils represent ancient humans, then they show that generations of experts in human evolution have spent effort, time, and research dollars arranging fossil fragments of human skulls into an evolutionary line of descent that never really existed. Perhaps it is time to rethink the whole story.
References
Lordkipanidze, D. et al. A Complete Skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the Evolutionary Biology of Early Homo. Science. 342 (6156): 326-331.
Hotz, R. L. Skull Suggests Single Human Species Emerged From Africa, Not Several. The Wall Street Journal. Posted on wsj.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 29, 2013.
Sample, I. Skull of Homo erectus throws story of human evolution into disarray. The Guardian. Posted on theguardian.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 23, 2013.
Thomas, B. Neandertals Mixed with Humans in China. Creation Science Update. Posted on icr.org November 3, 2010, accessed November 4, 2013.
Gish, D. 1975. Man...Apes...Australopithecine s...Each Uniquely Different. Acts & Facts. 4 (9).
Image credit: Copyright © 2013 AAAS. Adapted for use in accordance with federal copyright (fair use doctrine) law. Usage by ICR does not imply endorsement of copyright holders.
* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer and Mr. Sherwin is Research Associate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.
Article posted on November 8, 2013.
This discover does not refute evolution. It might change the story of human evolution, but evolution still stands.
Mitch

Prior Lake, MN

#1801 Nov 10, 2013
Dan from smithville you guys are funny.

Presented with facts you just get nasty.

Let's egret rude, vile and miserable to be around, carry on a conversation with. Then they will leave and we can declare victory

Dam, create me a simple grain of sand from nothing...not a beach. Just a single grain.

I'll wait.
Mitch

Prior Lake, MN

#1802 Nov 10, 2013
email this
share this
tweet this
Human-like Fossil Menagerie Stuns Scientists
by Brian Thomas, M.S., & Frank Sherwin, M.A.*

An international team of scientists made a stunning and controversial discovery from an archaeological site in Dmanisi, a small town in the country of Georgia, that is forcing some scientists to unlearn everything they knew about the story of human evolution. The results from the find appeared in an October issue of the journal Science.1

Among other human skeleton bones, the researchers found five skulls or partial skulls. Some of them looked human, though they were smaller than today's average skull size. But the biggest surprise was that, though these human skulls all had very different shapes, they were buried together within a short time.

Yale University anthropologist Andrew Hill, who was not involved in the discovery, told the Wall Street Journal, "'It gives you a chance to look at variation for the first time.'"2 Instead of showing different transitional human forms living at different times and leading up to modern humans, the fossilized remains at this site showed variation occurring at the same time. Assuming the remains were all human, as the Science authors did, these results end up "drastically simplifying the story of human evolution," according to the WSJ.2

That means, among other things, Homo erectus can no longer be considered an ancestor who lived long before and gave rise to "early Homo" peoples, since the new evidence showed H. erectus, H. rudolfensis, and H. habilis clumped together. "Analysis of the skull and other remains at Dmanisi suggests that scientists have been too ready to name separate species of human ancestors in Africa. Many of those species may now have to be wiped from the textbooks," according to The Guardian.3

Among those species would be Neandertal and Cro-Magnon, which deserve no recognition as separate forms that supposedly evolved into Homo sapiens—modern humans.4 They were uniquely formed people living at the same time as modern-looking people. Australopithecus is also out of the evolutionary line up, now that evolutionists have finally followed its fossil evidence to where creation scientists did long ago when they concluded that it was just an extinct ape and had clearly never evolved into humans.5 Without these key players, the popular pageant of human evolution truly should all be wiped from the textbooks.

If the Dmanisi fossils represent ancient humans, then they show that generations of experts in human evolution have spent effort, time, and research dollars arranging fossil fragments of human skulls into an evolutionary line of descent that never really existed. Perhaps it is time to rethink the whole story.

References

Lordkipanidze, D. et al. A Complete Skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the Evolutionary Biology of Early Homo. Science. 342 (6156): 326-331.
Hotz, R. L. Skull Suggests Single Human Species Emerged From Africa, Not Several. The Wall Street Journal. Posted on wsj.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 29, 2013.
Sample, I. Skull of Homo erectus throws story of human evolution into disarray. The Guardian. Posted on theguardian.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 23, 2013.
Thomas, B. Neandertals Mixed with Humans in China. Creation Science Update. Posted on icr.org November 3, 2010, accessed November 4, 2013.
Gish, D. 1975. Man...Apes...Australopithecine s...Each Uniquely Different. Acts & Facts. 4 (9).
Image credit: Copyright © 2013 AAAS. Adapted for use in accordance with federal copyright (fair use doctrine) law. Usage by ICR does not imply endorsement of copyright holders.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer and Mr. Sherwin is Research Associate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on November 8, 2013.
Mitch

Prior Lake, MN

#1803 Nov 10, 2013
Really dan?
Did you read it?

Wrong again
Mitch

Prior Lake, MN

#1804 Nov 10, 2013
email this
share this
tweet this
Human-like Fossil Menagerie Stuns Scientists
by Brian Thomas, M.S., & Frank Sherwin, M.A.*

An international team of scientists made a stunning and controversial discovery from an archaeological site in Dmanisi, a small town in the country of Georgia, that is forcing some scientists to unlearn everything they knew about the story of human evolution. The results from the find appeared in an October issue of the journal Science.1

Among other human skeleton bones, the researchers found five skulls or partial skulls. Some of them looked human, though they were smaller than today's average skull size. But the biggest surprise was that, though these human skulls all had very different shapes, they were buried together within a short time.

Yale University anthropologist Andrew Hill, who was not involved in the discovery, told the Wall Street Journal, "'It gives you a chance to look at variation for the first time.'"2 Instead of showing different transitional human forms living at different times and leading up to modern humans, the fossilized remains at this site showed variation occurring at the same time. Assuming the remains were all human, as the Science authors did, these results end up "drastically simplifying the story of human evolution," according to the WSJ.2

That means, among other things, Homo erectus can no longer be considered an ancestor who lived long before and gave rise to "early Homo" peoples, since the new evidence showed H. erectus, H. rudolfensis, and H. habilis clumped together. "Analysis of the skull and other remains at Dmanisi suggests that scientists have been too ready to name separate species of human ancestors in Africa. Many of those species may now have to be wiped from the textbooks," according to The Guardian.3

Among those species would be Neandertal and Cro-Magnon, which deserve no recognition as separate forms that supposedly evolved into Homo sapiens—modern humans.4 They were uniquely formed people living at the same time as modern-looking people. Australopithecus is also out of the evolutionary line up, now that evolutionists have finally followed its fossil evidence to where creation scientists did long ago when they concluded that it was just an extinct ape and had clearly never evolved into humans.5 Without these key players, the popular pageant of human evolution truly should all be wiped from the textbooks.

If the Dmanisi fossils represent ancient humans, then they show that generations of experts in human evolution have spent effort, time, and research dollars arranging fossil fragments of human skulls into an evolutionary line of descent that never really existed. Perhaps it is time to rethink the whole story.

References

Lordkipanidze, D. et al. A Complete Skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the Evolutionary Biology of Early Homo. Science. 342 (6156): 326-331.
Hotz, R. L. Skull Suggests Single Human Species Emerged From Africa, Not Several. The Wall Street Journal. Posted on wsj.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 29, 2013.
Sample, I. Skull of Homo erectus throws story of human evolution into disarray. The Guardian. Posted on theguardian.com October 17, 2013, accessed October 23, 2013.
Thomas, B. Neandertals Mixed with Humans in China. Creation Science Update. Posted on icr.org November 3, 2010, accessed November 4, 2013.
Gish, D. 1975. Man...Apes...Australopithecine s...Each Uniquely Different. Acts & Facts. 4 (9).
Image credit: Copyright © 2013 AAAS. Adapted for use in accordance with federal copyright (fair use doctrine) law. Usage by ICR does not imply endorsement of copyright holders.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer and Mr. Sherwin is Research Associate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on November 8, 2013.
Oo

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#1805 Nov 10, 2013
Mitch wrote:
Really dan?
Did you read it?
Wrong again
Actually we did. At the most this may lower the number of pre-homo Sapiens species by one. None of those finds are homo Sapiens, they may all be homo Erectus. What is being disputed if they take away either homo Rudolfus or homo Heidleberg, I cannot remember which right now.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#1806 Nov 10, 2013
Mitch wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you show me the whitnessed proof of evolution.
Mitch, your substandard Prior Lake education is showing again. The correct terminology would be a demand for evidence. There is no such thing as "proof" in science. All theories are accepted as provisionally true. Once a hypothesis becomes a theory the odds are very high that it is correct or at the very least almost correct. And sadly you would not recognize evidence if it was presented to you. So first you have to learn what qualifies as scientific evidence.

Do you want to learn? I can help you.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1807 Nov 10, 2013
Institute of Creation Research? Oxymoron if ever there was one.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#1808 Nov 10, 2013
Mitch, this is an article about a new finding that is not understood yet. It contains speculation about what it MIGHT mean to the present classification of human species, but no one knows yet.

it may turn out to be easily explainable.

It may turn out to be a Creationist HOAX. That would not be shocking, now would it?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 12 min dirtclod 17,986
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 17 min Denisova 154,826
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 1 hr Dogen 933
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 3 hr One way or another 178,163
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) Mar 26 Dogen 1,714
News Another Successful Prediction of Intelligent De... Mar 26 MikeF 1
News Intelligent Design: Corey Lee Mar 25 Paul Porter1 1
More from around the web