Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 218774 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106721 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok as someone asked me earlier what are you smoking? I get the knee slapper as you think I am funny/crazy. But where does the suns core or dark blue color come in?
Why does it matter? Enough to get you to answer I suppose. I would have ignored it if I were you, but then I know what I am talking about.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106722 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
I want java mans scientific classification. I have asked you numerous times and you cant give it with a link showing it. I don't know why. Every other homo species you can look on Wiki and get a complete scientific classification but not Java man. Why is that?
It has been given to the extent necessary to show that it is considered related enough to modern humans to more than meet the definition of transitional form.

You are just beating a dead horse lineage with replay time and time again.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106723 Nov 23, 2013
I was fairly sure that the genus "Homo" was unique, and I was correct. The rule is within a Kingdom a genus can only be used for one genus. In other words you could not have a rat with a genus Rattus and another animal, say a beetle with the genus Rattus. It is "against the rules" for naming animals. There can be repeats of genus names across Kingdoms.

I am pretty sure that even Extreme Ways will admit that Java Man was not a plant:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus

“Get Extreme or Go Home. ”

Since: Nov 13

United States

#106724 Nov 23, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>No. There are a number of reasons why this would not be a transitional fossil to modern man. The most important reason would be that there are no vertebrate fossils from 1bya.
Second, we are not talking about fossils across that broad of a time span, since we can't. Even if we were, I don't think there where be many shared characters all all that could be used to define them as very related. There are however, numerous forms that are transitional between humans and forms ancestral to mammals.
If a fossil is in a related group, that line can even have gone extinct and still be considered transitional, if it has ancestral characters from an ancestor basal to the lineages and if it has derived characters shared between itself and other species.
Is that so hard to understand. I guess it must be for someone that thinks vertebrates evolved a billion years ago. Love to see your evidence for that by the way.
I now return you to answering your posts with as much arrogance and ad hominem attack as you can muster.
Now your buddy subzone just said You are off at the first appearance of vertebrates by 500 million years. So, not any vertebrate fossil would be considered transitional, but the first one definitely would.

So a 500myo vertebrae fossil according to him is a transitional fossil between modern man(that was my question). You two need to get on the same page. It looks bad when you contradict each other.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#106725 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
I want java mans scientific classification. I have asked you numerous times and you cant give it with a link showing it. I don't know why. Every other homo species you can look on Wiki and get a complete scientific classification but not Java man. Why is that?
"Pithecanthropus erectus"

AKA: "Homo erectus erectus"

Semantics, Bubba.

Crap.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106726 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I just threw a number out there. But it is nice to know that you consider any fossil between 500mys up to modern humans a transitional fossil. That gives science a big swinging door to cover their mistakes with.
Again, no one said that.

Are you trying to be an idiot? Because you are succeeding.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106727 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
I want java mans scientific classification. I have asked you numerous times and you cant give it with a link showing it. I don't know why. Every other homo species you can look on Wiki and get a complete scientific classification but not Java man. Why is that?
It was in that link I just gave you. Are you blind along with being a fool?

“Get Extreme or Go Home. ”

Since: Nov 13

United States

#106728 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't know everything, the pieces of the puzzle are put together enough to see the big picture. But there are many pieces missing.
Fact is we don't know exactly where erectus fits in.
But he is there and nearly human, erectus may not be a direct ancestor to man , we don't know for sure. We are sure
Homo heidelbergensis is, but don't know the relation of erectus to heidelbergensis so cant make the connections exactly.
But we do know he is closer to us than Australopithecus so he is a transition between Australopithecus and modern humans.
There you go. A honest person for saying we don't know. Just like Java man, we don't know.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106729 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I just threw a number out there. But it is nice to know that you consider any fossil between 500mys up to modern humans a transitional fossil. That gives science a big swinging door to cover their mistakes with.
In the broad sense that would be correct. No, it just gives you a tiny little ledge to grasp on as you desperately try to derail evolution by picking obsessively on one minor point that you are wrong about.

No wonder you get chased away from other forums. Anybody interested in science isn't going to get a cogent discussion with you.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106730 Nov 23, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, no one said that.
Are you trying to be an idiot? Because you are succeeding.
He has my vote.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#106731 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
I want java mans scientific classification. I have asked you numerous times and you cant give it with a link showing it. I don't know why. Every other homo species you can look on Wiki and get a complete scientific classification but not Java man. Why is that?
Link...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Man

“Get Extreme or Go Home. ”

Since: Nov 13

United States

#106732 Nov 23, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Please point out where I lied. You claim it so you can support it. Right.
I did go to the link and I see that it classifies Java man as Homo erectus. So I guess I didn't lie. But you go ahead and show where I did.
Genus and species are scientific classifications. Anything above the species level is subject to argument. As a practicing scientist I see this all the time. Species get reclassified among genera when more information is found or moved around between families. Sometimes species in one genus are moved into an existing genus. There are a lot of possibilities that can occur based on new evidence. Sometimes these are accepted by science and sometimes they are not. Again, a form can still be transitional.
Man you are obsessed with this. It is very amusing to see you hold so fast to a point that doesn't change human evolution or alter the value of Java man as a transitional fossil form.
So you think a scientific classification is just saying something is such or such species? If that is what you think then why are we even talking?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106733 Nov 23, 2013
At any rate since there can only be one genus of Homo in the entire animal kingdom we have given its scientific classification by stating that its scientific name is "Homo erectus". There is no need to go any higher than genus in that ranking.

“e pluribus unum”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

primus inter pares

#106734 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
I want java mans scientific classification. I have asked you numerous times and you cant give it with a link showing it. I don't know why. Every other homo species you can look on Wiki and get a complete scientific classification but not Java man. Why is that?
Maybe is has to due with insufficient evidence..ever think of that?

Dubois' find was a very incomplete specimen, consisting of a skullcap, a femur, and a few teeth.

If they find more of them they maybe able to give you satisfaction.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106735 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
Now your buddy subzone just said You are off at the first appearance of vertebrates by 500 million years. So, not any vertebrate fossil would be considered transitional, but the first one definitely would.
So a 500myo vertebrae fossil according to him is a transitional fossil between modern man(that was my question). You two need to get on the same page. It looks bad when you contradict each other.
Wow! Simply Wow! Extreme Ways is set on proving that he is an idiot. He misread every point that Dan was trying to teach him.

Perhaps we should be limiting our conversation with him to one syllable words.

“Get Extreme or Go Home. ”

Since: Nov 13

United States

#106736 Nov 23, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, no one said that.
Are you trying to be an idiot? Because you are succeeding.
You did right here
extreme ways wrote:
<quoted text>So other words a vertebrae fossil from 1bya can be considered a transitional fossil between them and modern man. Is that what you are saying? Anything from the first fossil ever found to modern man is a transitional fossil in between. What a croc of poopoo.
You reply was
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Plus, there were no vertebrates around at 1 bya. You are off at the first appearance of vertebrates by 500 million years. So, not any vertebrate fossil would be considered transitional, but the first one definitely would.
Again the question was "a vertebrae fossil from 1bya can be considered a transitional fossil between them and modern man.. You replied with the above comment.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106737 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
Now your buddy subzone just said You are off at the first appearance of vertebrates by 500 million years. So, not any vertebrate fossil would be considered transitional, but the first one definitely would.
So a 500myo vertebrae fossil according to him is a transitional fossil between modern man(that was my question). You two need to get on the same page. It looks bad when you contradict each other.
You might want to be more specific when with the reasons for you conclusion.

We both told your there were no 1bya invertebrates to leave fossils. Your mistake was quickly pointed out by both of us.

You keep changing your words. You say it can't be a transitional fossil one time and then it can't be a transitional fossil of modern man. You get the answers you ask for in each case.

I think SZ, Kong, Aura and I are pretty much all on the same page. I don't believe you are in the same building though.

“Get Extreme or Go Home. ”

Since: Nov 13

United States

#106738 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Maybe is has to due with insufficient evidence..ever think of that?
Dubois' find was a very incomplete specimen, consisting of a skullcap, a femur, and a few teeth.
If they find more of them they maybe able to give you satisfaction.
But subzone and danfromsmithville say he is a transitional/intermediate species of modern humans. And yes I agree. Lack of evidence of the specimen they don't know where Java man fits in or how to classify him.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106739 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think a scientific classification is just saying something is such or such species? If that is what you think then why are we even talking?
You are not very clear in your comment.

A species is defined, where it is assigned in the classification is based on supporting evidence.

We are arguing because you have a limited and confused understanding of classification and transitional form.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106740 Nov 23, 2013
Extreme Ways wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think a scientific classification is just saying something is such or such species? If that is what you think then why are we even talking?
If you know its kingdom then Genus and species is all that you need.

There can only be one example of each genus ( which may incorporate several species ) in the animal kingdom. The naming rules say so. So if you hear that a species genus is Homo you know its classification all the way up to being in the animal Kingdom is the same for it and all other species of Homo.

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 14 min Go Out There 209,841
+=Keep 1 Drop 1=+ 3 STACK (Mar '13) 23 min Poppyann 11,522
A to Z songs by title or group! 45 min Scarbelly Bob 613
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 1 hr Mustang GT Girl 45,961
Word Association (Mar '10) 1 hr Poppyann 21,716
4 Word Game (Use Same Letter) (Dec '14) 1 hr Mustang GT Girl 1,577
2words into 2new words (May '12) 1 hr Poppyann 7,371
True False Game (Jun '11) 1 hr Poppyann 13,519
5 Letter Word, Change 1 Letter (Oct '15) 4 hr Aussie Kev 6,111
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 6 hr Brandiiiiiiii 2,159
More from around the web