Human appearance on earth.

[dblack]

According to science man is 5 to 7 million years old. Don't ask for proof though cause al they can ACTUALLY prove is 400000 years. And don't ask for them to explain a 2 million year fudge factor either.

it is all conjecture, guesses and assumptions. You know, science.

LOL - Science is stoopid!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

According to science man is 5 to 7 million years old. Don't ask for proof though cause al they can ACTUALLY prove is 400000 years. And don't ask for them to explain a 2 million year fudge factor either.

it is all conjecture, guesses and assumptions. You know, science.

LOL - Science is stoopid!

Haha, right. It's all just guesses. When he typed his comments on his quantum mechanical machine and hoped that electromagnetic theory and relativity theory would guide them to our eyes, he figured it was just a roll of the dice, whether they would work or not.

Give me a break...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Here you admit what you keep claiming isn't true.

Don't make people ask you to explain yourself. Make your point, and be specific.



Then, if you have your big boy pants on, answer the question I asked you:

Evolutionary theory makes the claim that all species have a common ancestor. Humans and mice. Humans and elephants. Humans and starfish.

Why are you focused on monkeys and apes? Do you think .... Oh just maybe ... it's because they look more like humans than do mice, or starfish?

God used what was available on the Planet he created. So of course materials are similar among species. Evolution exists with in a species Mammals do not evolve into 2 different species. There is no proof of that anywhere.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

God used what was available on the Planet he created. So of course materials are similar among species.

So, just admit he used evolution to create the species. Why is that so hard?

What is happening here is that your are restrained by the dogma of your iron aged religion, i.e., the silly details of its creation myth, taken literally.. This isn't about theism, your intransigence and denial of all the evidence is because of DOGMA.

Evolution exists with in a species Mammals do not evolve into 2 different species.

False, and you just failed a 7th grade science quiz.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

God used what was available on the Planet he created. So of course materials are similar among species.

So, just admit he used evolution to create the species. Why is that so hard?

What is happening here is that your are restrained by the dogma of your iron aged religion, i.e., the silly details of its creation myth, taken literally.. This isn't about theism, your intransigence and denial of all the evidence is because of DOGMA.

Evolution exists with in a species Mammals do not evolve into 2 different species.

False, and you just failed a 7th grade science quiz.

Again post proof or ADMIT your theory is nothing more than a guess and assumptions.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Again post proof

I did the first time you asked. And you ignored it. Also, if you had any actual curiosity, you would already have looked it up yourself.

Why are you being such a huge *****, and avoiding my question? Are you afraid your horseshit won't stand up, if you have to stand and answer questions about it? Sure seems like it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Again post proof

I did the first time you asked. And you ignored it. Also, if you had any actual curiosity, you would already have looked it up yourself.

Why are you being such a huge *****, and avoiding my question? Are you afraid your horseshit won't stand up, if you have to stand and answer questions about it? Sure seems like it.

You DID NOT provide Proof, in fact you STATED science doesn't do PROOF.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You DID NOT provide Proof, in fact you STATED science doesn't do PROOF.

Right, I provided evidence. Long ago in this thread, I delineated the difference. But you ignored that, in favor of continuing to use your stupid and wrong word: "proof". So, I decided it was more efficient just to ignore your repeated error, going forward. And now you try to lay your stupid error at MY feet? Come on, grow up.

And answer my question, you sissy.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You DID NOT provide Proof, in fact you STATED science doesn't do PROOF.

Right, I provided evidence. Long ago in this thread, I delineated the difference. But you ignored that, in favor of continuing to use your stupid and wrong word: "proof". So, I decided it was more efficient just to ignore your repeated error, going forward. And now you try to lay your stupid error at MY feet? Come on, grow up.

And answer my question, you sissy.

Until you provide something other then guesses assumptions and inference I will stand by my position.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Until you provide something other then guesses assumptions

I did, and you ignored it. You never clicked the link and didn't read a single word of it. So your opinion of it means exactly jack shit.

But, this is your game, after all. Unable to make any good argument and unable to account for the evidence, you have to stomp your feet and act like a frustrated little child. Really, at this point, I am only responding to you in order to demonstrate this.

No, you will never answer my question. Yes, I know this. Yes, I will keep asking it anyway, just to make you keep dancing. You get your questions answered and your request met, directly, then you ignore everyone else's. Because you have no choice but to do so.

 

[toobfreak]

According to science man is 5 to 7 million years old.

That's a bit of a stretch. The earliest hominims appeared in the geologic record in the late Miocene, about 7 million years ago.
The earliest bipeds appeared about 4 million years ago.
The earliest found record of stone tool use was about 3.5 million years ago in the Middle Pliocene, thus beginning the paleolithic "stone age."
Earliest fossil evidence of the use of fire and cooking was about 1.5 million years ago in the Calabrian Pleistocene.
Our earliest Homo ancestors appeared soon after.
Anatomically modern humans along with speech look to have appeared in the late Ionian, about 250,000 years ago leading into the first appearance homo neanderthalensis.

 

[harmonica]

You DID NOT provide Proof, in fact you STATED science doesn't do PROOF.

Right, I provided evidence. Long ago in this thread, I delineated the difference. But you ignored that, in favor of continuing to use your stupid and wrong word: "proof". So, I decided it was more efficient just to ignore your repeated error, going forward. And now you try to lay your stupid error at MY feet? Come on, grow up.

And answer my question, you sissy.

Until you provide something other then guesses assumptions and inference I will stand by my position.

.....I have asked you to provide your theory/specifics/explain how god created man...have you responded to that?

 

[james bond]

People, rocks, and fossils cannot be millions of years old. It is an error in assumption. People, rocks, and fossils all age through weathering, chemical reaction, and mechanical processes. Humans wear out. Rocks crumble and become dust. Fossils turn back to carbon. The millions and billions of year of Earth is a sky fairy myth. It's a shame so many people fall for the false science and don't use common sense. Our Earth is thousands of years old fits the evidence.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

People, rocks, and fossils cannot be millions of years old

False. Please confine your religious diatribes to the religion section. This is the science section.

 

[james bond]

People, rocks, and fossils cannot be millions of years old

False. Please confine your religious diatribes to the religion section. This is the science section.

Has nothing to do with religion, but the processes that I just mentioned. You can't get past your false assumptions because what I just posted is observable, testable, and falsifiable. It's science and common sense since we can see it happen. Don't tell me that a person's joints aren't as good as they were when young because they have been in use for years due to mechanical processes. What an nonsensical person you are .

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Has nothing to do with religion, but the processes that I just mentioned.

That's a shameless lie that fools exactly nobody. Why are you like this? Embarrassing.

 

[james bond]

Has nothing to do with religion, but the processes that I just mentioned.

That's a shameless lie that fools exactly nobody. Why are you like this? Embarrassing.

Look at when they put Lucy on tour. Scientists didn't want her shown to the public due to fear of destruction. If her fossils were outside, buried in the ground, and exposed to weathering. surface pressure, and chemicals leaching into the ground and rocks, it would've been even more strenuous. Rocks last for some time, but they aren't indestructible. I would think they last around a few thousand years before crumbling. No one can test a million years, but yet you believe in this ridiculous notion. It is due to the sky fairy and myth of macroevolution. Nothing is observable. It is difficult to observe one thousand years. Look at our history and we still continue to argue what happened a few generations ago.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Until you provide something other then guesses assumptions

I did, and you ignored it. You never clicked the link and didn't read a single word of it. So your opinion of it means exactly jack shit.

But, this is your game, after all. Unable to make any good argument and unable to account for the evidence, you have to stomp your feet and act like a frustrated little child. Really, at this point, I am only responding to you in order to demonstrate this.

No, you will never answer my question. Yes, I know this. Yes, I will keep asking it anyway, just to make you keep dancing. You get your questions answered and your request met, directly, then you ignore everyone else's. Because you have no choice but to do so.

You did not link to a single Proven point of anything. there is no physical proof that a single Mammal species has EVER evolved into 2 or more entirely different species. All there is is guesses assumptions and inference from other stuff.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You did not link to a single Proven point of anything

False. I linked to a conclusive study of two mammal species showing their divergence and their ancestor. But you wouldn't know that, because you are an embarrassing little mental midget who begged for the link, then never opened it. Not that you could have understood it anyway.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You DID NOT provide Proof, in fact you STATED science doesn't do PROOF.

Right, I provided evidence. Long ago in this thread, I delineated the difference. But you ignored that, in favor of continuing to use your stupid and wrong word: "proof". So, I decided it was more efficient just to ignore your repeated error, going forward. And now you try to lay your stupid error at MY feet? Come on, grow up.

And answer my question, you sissy.

Until you provide something other then guesses assumptions and inference I will stand by my position.

.....I have asked you to provide your theory/specifics/explain how god created man...have you responded to that?

The bible tells you how he did it, ever read it?