Do You Believe We Came From Monkeys?

[LittleNipper]

Again, the main argument for radiometric dating is the faith-based theory of uniformitarianism and the long, long, long ages necessary for evolution. You admit that radiometric dating does not work in water and that it would be reset in a local flood. Thus, why not a global flood?

I admit it doesn't work in water? When did I say something like that?

And I just showed you an excellent article that tells you the technique has been used many many times and has proven quite reliable, You dwell on a few cases where results have been erroneous and say that makes the technique invalid. Sorry, doofus. You are very very confused.

Sure the companies who do it will find plenty of reason, as in $$$$s and other monies, because radiometric dating is expensive and profit making. What you do is completely ignore the uniformitarianism that is it based on and that evolution needs long, long, long ages for it to work. Since you admitted it doesn't work in water, the global flood would reset the radiometrics. The global flood is not uniformitarianism, but catastrophism as I mentioned. The proof is in the pudding.

Evidence 1: Fossils of sea creatures high above sea level due to the ocean waters having flooded over the continents - We find fossils of sea creatures above sea level on all the continents.

Evidence 2: Rapid burial of plants and animals - We find fossil graveyards with beautifully preserved marine life.

Evidence 3: Rapidly deposited sediment layers spread across vast areas - Its found across continents and in-between.

Evidence 4: Sediment transported long distances - Sediment from one area found across the country.

Evidence 5: Rapid or no erosion between strata - Continuous deposits of one layer over another. This can be shown experimentally.

Evidence 6: Many strata laid down in rapid succession - The shape of the strata shows that it formed rapidly before becoming hard or else it would show breaks.

Thus, the radiometric data is over before it could start. The global flood reset all the clocks and the relatively modern items found in millions and billions of years layers or trees vertically running through various layers show the millions and billions of years layers of evolution from radiometric dating are wrong.

Can I just put you down as a faith-based evolution believer and not someone interested in real science? If I was a faith-based evo believer, then I would keep an open mind when presented with such contrary evidence, investigate to the best of my ability and figure it out for myself.

You are delusional and totally confused and post nonsense.

See ya later, Ace.

And you believe what exactly? How do you know? And what comfort does that give you?

Elieve it or not, some people do not need magical religion for comfort.

Yes, and they don't need sex, and tattoos, and drugs, and booze, and escapist entertainment or be the center of attention ----- if one is a Child of GOD --- one can be joyfully fulfilled...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I admit it doesn't work in water? When did I say something like that?

And I just showed you an excellent article that tells you the technique has been used many many times and has proven quite reliable, You dwell on a few cases where results have been erroneous and say that makes the technique invalid. Sorry, doofus. You are very very confused.

Sure the companies who do it will find plenty of reason, as in $$$$s and other monies, because radiometric dating is expensive and profit making. What you do is completely ignore the uniformitarianism that is it based on and that evolution needs long, long, long ages for it to work. Since you admitted it doesn't work in water, the global flood would reset the radiometrics. The global flood is not uniformitarianism, but catastrophism as I mentioned. The proof is in the pudding.

Evidence 1: Fossils of sea creatures high above sea level due to the ocean waters having flooded over the continents - We find fossils of sea creatures above sea level on all the continents.

Evidence 2: Rapid burial of plants and animals - We find fossil graveyards with beautifully preserved marine life.

Evidence 3: Rapidly deposited sediment layers spread across vast areas - Its found across continents and in-between.

Evidence 4: Sediment transported long distances - Sediment from one area found across the country.

Evidence 5: Rapid or no erosion between strata - Continuous deposits of one layer over another. This can be shown experimentally.

Evidence 6: Many strata laid down in rapid succession - The shape of the strata shows that it formed rapidly before becoming hard or else it would show breaks.

Thus, the radiometric data is over before it could start. The global flood reset all the clocks and the relatively modern items found in millions and billions of years layers or trees vertically running through various layers show the millions and billions of years layers of evolution from radiometric dating are wrong.

Can I just put you down as a faith-based evolution believer and not someone interested in real science? If I was a faith-based evo believer, then I would keep an open mind when presented with such contrary evidence, investigate to the best of my ability and figure it out for myself.

You are delusional and totally confused and post nonsense.

See ya later, Ace.

And you believe what exactly? How do you know? And what comfort does that give you?

Elieve it or not, some people do not need magical religion for comfort.

Yes, and they don't need sex, and tattoos, and drugs, and booze, and escapist entertainment or be the center of attention ----- if one is a Child of GOD --- one can be joyfully fulfilled...

Did you just impky that Christian's don't partake in those things? Or that the ones who do are doing it wrong?

And if you don't like those things...hey, good for you. Amazing, you're the one person on the planet who has no vice. It is truly an honor to have met such a one of a kind.

 

[RWS]

Well, people who deny all their vices, tend to end up doing things on the secret side that shock all of us.

And they're the worst of them all.

 

[zaangalewa]

We didn't. We evolved from a common ancestor.

Exactly so

That's why we share 55% of our biological information with bananas.

 

[james bond]

I've discovered that bears are better bipedal than apes. Does that mean that we came from bears now ha ha ha ha?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I've discovered that bears are better bipedal than apes. Does that mean that we came from bears now

No, and what a ridiculous question. Scientists understand covergent evolution,even if you don't.

 

[Asclepias]

I've discovered that bears are better bipedal than apes. Does that mean that we came from bears now ha ha ha ha?

We share a common ancestor someone down the line.

 

[zaangalewa]

I've discovered that bears are better bipedal than apes. Does that mean that we came from bears now

No, and what a ridiculous question.

Why ridiculous?

Scientists understand covergent evolution,even if you don't.

Covergent? Who understands this? The changes in genetical information are nearly always a pure accident and cause in this way often the "death of the not-fittest". But if under millions of accidents happens an accident who produces the "survival of the fittest" then this is nothing else than the "survival of the survivor" - a tautology. Sure survives the survivor - long enough to give the new genetical information to the own breed. Do you think it will happen one day that human beings will change their genetical structure so they will be able to survive abortions? That's nonsense, isn't it? Do you think it are genetical structures which force people to do abortions? .. Good grief .. the theory of evolution has nothing to do with the daily life of human beings - nor is this theory able to replace rules and ways how to live in harmony with god. Human begins have a right to live, also a right to survive in their mothers wombs - and we should respect in general gods creation - specially all and every life of planet Earth.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why ridiculous?

Sorry, not ridiculous, for someone who knows less than nothing about the toooc. But yes, rather ridiculous for a functioning adult attempting to discuss the topic.

And yes, we understand conversation evolution.

 

[zaangalewa]

Why ridiculous?

Sorry, not ridiculous, for someone who knows less than nothing about the toooc. But yes, rather ridiculous for a functioning adult attempting to discuss the topic.

And yes, we understand conversation evolution.

You understand what? Biological evolution needs genetic structures. Everything else where someone is using the word "evolution" - 'evolution of cars' for example - the word 'evolution' has absolutely nothing to do with "Darwinism" (the biological theory of evolution). Darwinism in context with human beings (=social Darwinism) is indeed nothing else than only a pseudo-scientific form of racism.

 

[james bond]

Well, people who deny all their vices, tend to end up doing things on the secret side that shock all of us.

And they're the worst of them all.

Are you hinting that Christians are the worst hypocrites of them all? Christians probably know about Jesus as the final judge or being like Jesus, so may avoid such things as extramarital sex, drugs, gambling and sideshows. Don't get me wrong, I'm not being a prude. I understand vices can be pleasurable and a break from working all the time. Yet, these situations apply to everybody.

People are usually looking for thrills and taking foolish chances. Or indulging in hedonism. Atheism gives its practioners a chance to do it and be the worst of them all. What's to stop them? They may be the ones ruled by Satan and wouldn't even know it. It could happen to anyone, but having the right attitude and learning about these things usually helps one to avoid those types of situations and vices.

 

[james bond]

Why ridiculous?

Sorry, not ridiculous, for someone who knows less than nothing about the toooc. But yes, rather ridiculous for a functioning adult attempting to discuss the topic.

And yes, we understand conversation evolution.

The similarities with apes to humans were they're mammals, primates and are bipedal. However, it's only hypothesis that some apes became bipedal based on fossils and footprints. That's forensics. We do not see them as bipedal or through observational science. Thus, I pointed out that bears are bipedal more than apes. They're mammals although not considered primates. However, creation science does not classify mammals as "primates" and such. That's from ToE. If we go strictly by bipedalism, we find other mammals and animals do a better job of being bipedal or quadripeds being bipedal.

 

[zaangalewa]

Why ridiculous?

Sorry, not ridiculous, for someone who knows less than nothing about the toooc. But yes, rather ridiculous for a functioning adult attempting to discuss the topic.

And yes, we understand conversation evolution.

The similarities with apes to humans were they're mammals, primates and are bipedal.

Apes and human beings have a common ancestor. Bears and human beings have a common ancestor. Bananas and human beings have a common ancestor. Saint Francis would call them just simple brother ape, sister bear and mother banana.

However, it's only hypothesis that some apes became bipedal based on fossils and footprints. That's forensics. We do not see them as bipedal or through observational science.

What? The hand is a print of the trees - same our understanding of space, time and trust in physics. And we learned to go on two feet in the trees too.

Thus, I pointed out that bears are bipedal more than apes.

Bears are beside human beings the only plantigrades. And I guess god loves as well bears and human beings.

They're mammals although not considered primates. However, creation science does not classify mammals as "primates" and such.

"Primates are mammals" is correct.

That's from ToE. If we go strictly by bipedalism, we find other mammals and animals do a better job of being bipedal or quadripeds being bipedal.

Okay. You seem to be in the lucky situation that you don't have problems. God bless you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Darwinism in context with human beings (=social Darwinism) is indeed nothing else than only a pseudo-scientific form of racism.

I don't care what your mangled definition of Darwinism is. Neither do scientists, nor does it have any bearing on the theory of evolution.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Bears are beside human beings the only plantigrades

Besides: rabbits, rodents, raccoons, skunks, and more.

And besides plenty of species in the fossil record.

 

[zaangalewa]

Darwinism in context with human beings (=social Darwinism) is indeed nothing else than only a pseudo-scientific form of racism.

I don't care what your mangled definition of Darwinism is. Neither do scientists, nor does it have any bearing on the theory of evolution.

An what's the evolutionary reason now for your illusion you would know only a little about me and my knowledge about the theory of evolution so you have to be aggressive, because you seem to think the reality will become this what you think if you will win whatever you like to win? I say: When I tell you as a German not to do such a nonsense ('social Darwinism'), because the Nazis did this nonsense too, then I guess it came the time for you to start to think whether you take yourself serious.

 

[zaangalewa]

Bears are beside human beings the only plantigrades

Besides: rabbits, rodents, raccoons, skunks, and more.

And besides plenty of species in the fossil record.

Perhaps I made a wrong translation of the German word "Sohlengänger". Only human beings and bears are "Sohlengänger". All others run practically on their "Zehen oder Zehenspitzen" (toes or tip toes). What we see as a "knee" (which goes in the wrong direction) is normally the heel. Example: A rabbit runs not by touching the ground with the heel. Bears and human beings are doing so.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Darwinism in context with human beings (=social Darwinism) is indeed nothing else than only a pseudo-scientific form of racism.

I don't care what your mangled definition of Darwinism is. Neither do scientists, nor does it have any bearing on the theory of evolution.

An what's the evolutionary reason now for your illusion you would know only a little about me and my knowledge about the theory of evolution so you have to be aggressive, because you seem to think the reality will become this what you think if you will win whatever you like to win? I say: When I tell you as a German not to do such a nonsense ('social Darwinism'), because the Nazis did this nonsense too, then I guess it came the time for you to start to think whether you take yourself serious.

Not a word of my post spoke to anything about you. Ideas don't have feelings, so lighten up.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Bears are beside human beings the only plantigrades

Besides: rabbits, rodents, raccoons, skunks, and more.

And besides plenty of species in the fossil record.

Perhaps I made a wrong translation of the German word "Sohlengänger". Only human beings and bears are "Sohlengänger". All others run practically on their "Zehen oder Zehenspitzen" (toes or tip toes). What we see as a "knee" (which goes in the wrong direction) is normally the heel. Example: A rabbit runs not by touching the ground with the heel. Bears and human beings are doing so.

Rabbits do, indeed, walk and stand on the heels of their feet. As do the other animals listed. That is why they are catagorized as plantigrade

 

[james bond]

Bears are beside human beings the only plantigrades

Besides: rabbits, rodents, raccoons, skunks, and more.

And besides plenty of species in the fossil record.

Perhaps I made a wrong translation of the German word "Sohlengänger". Only human beings and bears are "Sohlengänger". All others run practically on their "Zehen oder Zehenspitzen" (toes or tip toes). What we see as a "knee" (which goes in the wrong direction) is normally the heel. Example: A rabbit runs not by touching the ground with the heel. Bears and human beings are doing so.

Rabbits do, indeed, walk and stand on the heels of their feet. As do the other animals listed. That is why they are catagorized as plantigrade

It goes to show that just because they're plantigrade doesn't mean they're related.