I haven't seen that before now, I like it! (The "lmgtfy," not the evolution stuff.)
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Your entire post was full of ignorant claims, as I showed.
Alright. The way that this works is that a fossil is found, a fraction of a jawbone, a couple of portions of a couple of fingers and a bit of a wrist bone. These bones are taken to an artist who renders a possible skeleton off of those couple of bones and what we currently know of anatomy.
Alright. The way that this works is that a fossil is found, a fraction of a jawbone, a couple of portions of a couple of fingers and a bit of a wrist bone. These bones are taken to an artist who renders a possible skeleton off of those couple of bones and what we currently know of anatomy.
Pop culture representations are not accepted in academic circles. National Geographic is not an authoritative a peer-reviewed journal. Nor is Wikipedia. Look for your sources' sources.
What I said is that the evolution is man is incomplete and that there is no missing link. There is no skeletal trail, like I used to think there was, from ape to man
and instead are merely fractions of bones in most cases and no bones for others.
I am saying that a lack of proof is enough proof for me to feel confident my religious decision is right for me
. That is the same evidence more atheists and gnostics use to validate their lack of religious faith.
What I said is that the evolution is man is incomplete and that there is no missing link. There is no skeletal trail, like I used to think there was, from ape to man
Yet you then contradict and refute yourself by stating that there are fossils.
and instead are merely fractions of bones in most cases and no bones for others.
Saying that the image is incomplete is not the same as saying it';s not there. You just highlighted your own ignorance as you refuted yourself.
I am saying that a lack of proof is enough proof for me to feel confident my religious decision is right for me
You reject one theory because you are not satisfied with the evidence, yet you embrace a hypothesis with zero evidence? Do you not see how illogical that is?
. That is the same evidence more atheists and gnostics use to validate their lack of religious faith.
Wrong. Fossil evidence for the evolution of man (which is only one piece of evidence and less compelling that DNA evidence) merely supports the theory of the evolution of Man. It is not this evidence that has any bearing on belief in deity, but the lack of evidence for the existence of deity.
You called me ignorant for saying that the fossil records are incomplete
an ignorant and inaccurate claimand that there is no missing link.
The old is the word of god, according to itself. The New is only valid insomuch as it rests upon the OldFor stating that as a Christian I follow the more recent New Testement rather than sticking to the Old as the only truth in the Bible I am apparently ignorant as well
I said it is illogical to reject one theory because you are unsatisfied with the evidence yet accept a hypothesis with no evidenceYou said that it is wrong of me to believe that my faith in God, Jesus, and the Bible
That is not what I said. Why can't you theists ever speak without lying?, that living my life as a good person based on the teachings of Christ is wrong of me
It became noticeable though that it seemed both sides needed a bit of a leap of faith to believe. We don't have a missing link between humans and monkeys. Most of the fossil records we claim to have are based off of a single bone or a partial skeleton. Look at the mistakes that the Romans and Greeks made from seeing an elephant skeleton, we got the myth of the cyclops.
As I have now highlighted I did NOT say that there were NO fossil records but rather that the records were and are incomplete
.Also I said "We don't have a missing link" meaning we have not found anything
People have claimed the lemur is a missing link but as I stated, the reason which they are making this claim is because of a similar structure between our thumb and the lemur's thumb on its foot.
You are a theist- or are you recanting your faith?Please knock it off and stop calling me a theist
ignorant,
As I have now highlighted I did NOT say that there were NO fossil records but rather that the records were and are incomplete
I was referring to your insistence that the 'missing link' means there is not sufficient evidence to support tToE, which you are about to do (and contradict your words quoted above) with this:
.Also I said "We don't have a missing link" meaning we have not found anything
You need to read more; that is not the only evidence cited for Ida's place along our evolutionary line.
You are a theist- or are you recanting your faith?Please knock it off and stop calling me a theist
,ignorant,
You have demonstrated much ignorance in regards to the subject matter.
I asked you to stop calling me a theist
because you seem to be using as a way to lump me in with the people who claim the earth is 3 or 5 thousand years old and who say God placed dinosaur bones in the ground to confuse humanity.
meant to seperate you from "them" and honestly you should try listening to the individual instead of assuming there is only one way for the religious to feel and one way for the scientific to feel.
LDS talk like they're on LSD
LDS talk like they're on LSD
Without extending (or at least trying not to) any further judgment, I agree My first-ever boyfriend was member of the LDS church and while I liked him and his family, their arrogant - we'll survive the big judgment while you and the likes of you that don't convert to our bullshit ideas will die forever (or some other bullshit like that - did you notice, it's always the same with these folks) turned me off him... He just wasn't worth listening to all this crap over and over again. Also, the one that preached this bullshit the most ended up being unfaithful to his wife (after having two kids with her) and ended up becoming an alcoholic and a gamer... So... that's about as much as I know of LDS...
This was a bit cynical, wasn't it. Well, I'm sorry, but such is reality at times.
Edit: PS: I really have nothing against Mormons or any other Christians or non-suicidal/homicidal religions... and I truly make an effort to not laugh at the colorful ways by which they're trying to teach their morals and principles to others... Peace?
I think people who are religious have chosen their religion. Whether or not they have made a rational and informed choice in another story.
Agnostics and atheists do not choose. They simply remain in a natural state till given reason to be otherwise.