Seymour Flops
Diamond Member
These evolutionists just luurve announcing the latest "missing link," don't they?
About 1.5 million years ago, a child died near the Sea of Galilee. All that remains of the youngster is a single bone, a vertebra. But that skeletal fragment, first unearthed in 1966 and only now recognized for what it actually is – the earliest large-bodied hominin found in the Levant – changes the story of human evolution.
So keep in mind, they are hanging their hat on one single bone, that was found 55 years ago, but that they have suddenly announced is "the missing link." Here is a photograph* of the fossil:
That is four different angles of the same bone, not four bones. It is only one.
But look at all they claim to "know" from that one bone:
Among other things, that one bone proves for the first time that there were multiple exits by archaic humans from Africa. At 1.5 million years of age, the bone is the second-oldest hominin fossil to be found outside Africa. The oldest date to 1.8 million years ago and were found in Dmanisi, Georgia, and that difference of about 300,000 years proves in and of itself that there was more than one exit.
More? This archaic child in the Jordan Valley and the hominins at Dmanisi were not the same species.
This is absurd, but I await several well thought-out attempts at a reasonable defense of this. Just kidding! I await nothing more than ad hominem attacks (insults for the less literate of you).
*That's a photograph. Why do Darwinists find it so hard to show a photograph of a fossil? I asked them to show me the fossils in a thread of the same title and got several paintings and fill in the gap models, but few if any photographs. Wadup with dat?
About 1.5 million years ago, a child died near the Sea of Galilee. All that remains of the youngster is a single bone, a vertebra. But that skeletal fragment, first unearthed in 1966 and only now recognized for what it actually is – the earliest large-bodied hominin found in the Levant – changes the story of human evolution.
So keep in mind, they are hanging their hat on one single bone, that was found 55 years ago, but that they have suddenly announced is "the missing link." Here is a photograph* of the fossil:
That is four different angles of the same bone, not four bones. It is only one.
But look at all they claim to "know" from that one bone:
Among other things, that one bone proves for the first time that there were multiple exits by archaic humans from Africa. At 1.5 million years of age, the bone is the second-oldest hominin fossil to be found outside Africa. The oldest date to 1.8 million years ago and were found in Dmanisi, Georgia, and that difference of about 300,000 years proves in and of itself that there was more than one exit.
More? This archaic child in the Jordan Valley and the hominins at Dmanisi were not the same species.
This is absurd, but I await several well thought-out attempts at a reasonable defense of this. Just kidding! I await nothing more than ad hominem attacks (insults for the less literate of you).
*That's a photograph. Why do Darwinists find it so hard to show a photograph of a fossil? I asked them to show me the fossils in a thread of the same title and got several paintings and fill in the gap models, but few if any photographs. Wadup with dat?
