If Darwinism is true, there ought to be specimens of that in-between species between ape and human...

[Infallible Arbiter]

Stop with the 6000 year lie almost no one actually believes that the bible does not establish a time line discernable by man.

Since time was created on the 4th day, how asinine to think Earth is 6000 years old .

 

[Quasar44]

Humans are 1 percent different than chimps
Imagine another 1 percent difference in genes for brain development
Their kids could do calculus in their head

 

[Quasar44]

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

God would be happier if apes had ruled.
At least they wouldn't nuke the whole place.

I am sure we have thousands of planets ruled by dinosaur like creatures

 

[Dadoalex]

Where are they?

Why?
We knew there were black holes long before anyone discovered one.
Because it has not been found does not mean it is not there.
Even if never found its only impact is that evolution remains a theory.

"Darwinism"is in best case the start of a special form of biological research over long times and distances - and in worst case only an explanation for everything and nothing or just simple another word for racism. But biological evolution means you have biological parents. This is no theory. Everyone has parents. A mother and a father. And they all came from a first cell - or better to say from a first cause (which was uncaused, otherwise it would not had been a first cause). And who survived for example because he was adopted and had learned from his social parents "to fit" will not find the compete motor for the own survival in the own genetical structure.

Nonresponsive.

What means this arrogant answer?

It means that the collection of words you assembled is absolute nonsense as a response to the proposition that just because we haven't found it doesn't mean it doesn't exists.

Perhaps you should go back and reread the thread. Maybe knowing what the thread is about would help you structure responses that make sense.

 

[Hollie]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

 

[the other mike]

I am sure we have thousands of planets ruled by dinosaur like creatures

"Spock to Kirk. ....don't go near the water....over."

Captain KIrk-- " Spock. You're breaking up....Spock...aaahhh!!"

 

[Hollie]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

In other words, hard evidence that is undeniable except to those whose feelings are hurt. The evidence for evolution is vast and compelling while the notion of a 6,000 year old planet being supernaturally created by partisan gods is promoted without evidence by charlatans.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

In other words, hard evidence that is undeniable except to those whose feelings are hurt. The evidence for evolution is vast and compelling while the notion of a 6,000 year old planet being supernaturally created by partisan gods is promoted without evidence by charlatans.

you keep arguing about something almost no one believes. As to your "evidence" it clearly states in the opening paragraph they can not actually prove the claim because it is fragmentary and broken with multiple points not in existence.

 

[cnm]

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

Ah. You mean evidence?

Correct.

 

[cnm]

As to your "evidence" it clearly states in the opening paragraph they can not actually prove the claim because it is fragmentary and broken with multiple points not in existence.

Evidence is what science does. Proof is for maths.

 

[Hollie]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

In other words, hard evidence that is undeniable except to those whose feelings are hurt. The evidence for evolution is vast and compelling while the notion of a 6,000 year old planet being supernaturally created by partisan gods is promoted without evidence by charlatans.

you keep arguing about something almost no one believes. As to your "evidence" it clearly states in the opening paragraph they can not actually prove the claim because it is fragmentary and broken with multiple points not in existence.

How can there be evidence of something that doesn’t exist?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

In other words, hard evidence that is undeniable except to those whose feelings are hurt. The evidence for evolution is vast and compelling while the notion of a 6,000 year old planet being supernaturally created by partisan gods is promoted without evidence by charlatans.

you keep arguing about something almost no one believes. As to your "evidence" it clearly states in the opening paragraph they can not actually prove the claim because it is fragmentary and broken with multiple points not in existence.

How can there be evidence of something that doesn’t exist?

Your own LINK ADMITS in the first paragraph last sentence that they do not have any thing more then disjointed unconnected evidence not actually linked to each other.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

I believe this planet was seeded by outsiders just as we will seed planets that have no life on them.

Every thousand years or so they return to observe the results.

On one of their latest visits they observed humans, being much like themselves and decided to offer a helping hand. To do this they implanted new ideas in our minds that stimulated new theories that developed into the industrial world we live in today.

I also believe they are among us today.

Once we stop eating the flesh of other living things, they will reveal themselves. If, and only if we do not destroy ourselves before them.

Just a thought

Can you put me in touch with your "pharmacist"?

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Where are they?

 

[the other mike]

 

[Hollie]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

In other words, hard evidence that is undeniable except to those whose feelings are hurt. The evidence for evolution is vast and compelling while the notion of a 6,000 year old planet being supernaturally created by partisan gods is promoted without evidence by charlatans.

you keep arguing about something almost no one believes. As to your "evidence" it clearly states in the opening paragraph they can not actually prove the claim because it is fragmentary and broken with multiple points not in existence.

How can there be evidence of something that doesn’t exist?

Your own LINK ADMITS in the first paragraph last sentence that they do not have any thing more then disjointed unconnected evidence not actually linked to each other.

I re-read the link and found no statement about “they do not have any thing more then disjointed unconnected evidence not actually linked to each other.”

That seems to be an expression of your hurt feelings.

What I did find in the article is the statement, Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.”

Strange, that. Your commentary is contradicted by the evidence. Why would the gods leave evidence such that “there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.”, if, as you claim, there is no evidence?

Could it be the gods have played a cruel joke on you?

Why would the gods leave such fossil evidence dating back millions of years on a 6,000 year old planet?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

In other words, hard evidence that is undeniable except to those whose feelings are hurt. The evidence for evolution is vast and compelling while the notion of a 6,000 year old planet being supernaturally created by partisan gods is promoted without evidence by charlatans.

you keep arguing about something almost no one believes. As to your "evidence" it clearly states in the opening paragraph they can not actually prove the claim because it is fragmentary and broken with multiple points not in existence.

How can there be evidence of something that doesn’t exist?

Your own LINK ADMITS in the first paragraph last sentence that they do not have any thing more then disjointed unconnected evidence not actually linked to each other.

I re-read the link and found no statement about “they do not have any thing more then disjointed unconnected evidence not actually linked to each other.”

That seems to be an expression of your hurt feelings.

What I did find in the article is the statement, Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.”

Strange, that. Your commentary is contradicted by the evidence. Why would the gods leave evidence such that “there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.”, if, as you claim, there is no evidence?

Could it be the gods have played a cruel joke on you?

Why would the gods leave such fossil evidence dating back millions of years on a 6,000 year old planet?

LOL you can not understand simple english let me help..... the fossils are far from complete, which means a LOT is missing..... the evidence is often fragmentary, which means no actual records exist that they have to guess and infer that connections exist because they don't actually have the fossils or any other method to connect the different supposed species connections..... there is enough to give a good outline of evolutionary history, which means with no actual fossil connections and no actual evidence we will use our fragmentary evidence and make some wild ass guesses.....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Personally I believe god did both create Adam and Eve from scratch and create other people by evolution. Cain had to marry some one as did Adam and Eve's other kids. I just don't see the evidence evolution happened the way science says with out more evidence.

I think it’s pretty clear there will never be enough evidence to convince you of the fact of evolution. The evidence is not in doubt among the relevant science community. There is literally no evidence for the Magical Kingdom of Eden, yet you choose to believe that unquestioningly. What does that say about your objective decision-making skills?

you believe with out actual evidence so don't talk to me about religion.

Your conspiracy theory that there is evidence for biological evolution stands in contrast to the documented evidence.

It is a pattern of behavior for religionists such that you do tend to be anti-science. Evidence really is irrelevant to the religionist because the faith nullifies actual proofs-- a convenient loophole of theistic belief but one endemic to all of them.

I never claimed evidence of adam and eve. I accept that on faith, like you accept the non existent proof of man from ape like creature on faith.

I have no need for faith in the process of biological evolution. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith isn't a tool-- it is a belief. Faith is not a path to knowledge -- else, if the item is known, it no longer needs faith. If one can be said to "know Adam and Eve existed as supernatural creations 6,000 years ago" -- then of what need is there for evidence? How does anyone provide evidence of the supernatural.

On the other hand, iological history can be source with reasoned, supported arguments from well-considered, peer reviewed scholars. Faith? Well, I think I'll let the more courageous souls here trailblaze that watery path across the sea. When it comes to "evidence of things unseen" ... the examples devolve quickly into personal experience,The facts support it.

I have already provided ample evidence of the progression of an ape-like creature to modern human. I don’t need faith to reach conclusions about the supported science.

you can NOT provide actual evidence that an ape like creature from 7 million years ago developed into modern man.

Actually, I CAN provide actual vidence.

Hominid Species

first paragraph....

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

In other words guesses assumptions inference and more guesses.

In other words, hard evidence that is undeniable except to those whose feelings are hurt. The evidence for evolution is vast and compelling while the notion of a 6,000 year old planet being supernaturally created by partisan gods is promoted without evidence by charlatans.

you keep arguing about something almost no one believes. As to your "evidence" it clearly states in the opening paragraph they can not actually prove the claim because it is fragmentary and broken with multiple points not in existence.

How can there be evidence of something that doesn’t exist?

Your own LINK ADMITS in the first paragraph last sentence that they do not have any thing more then disjointed unconnected evidence not actually linked to each other.

I re-read the link and found no statement about “they do not have any thing more then disjointed unconnected evidence not actually linked to each other.”

That seems to be an expression of your hurt feelings.

What I did find in the article is the statement, Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.”

Strange, that. Your commentary is contradicted by the evidence. Why would the gods leave evidence such that “there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.”, if, as you claim, there is no evidence?

Could it be the gods have played a cruel joke on you?

Why would the gods leave such fossil evidence dating back millions of years on a 6,000 year old planet?

already told your dumb ass almost NO ONE believes the earth is only 6000 years old.

 

[zaangalewa]

Where are they?

Why?
We knew there were black holes long before anyone discovered one.
Because it has not been found does not mean it is not there.
Even if never found its only impact is that evolution remains a theory.

"Darwinism"is in best case the start of a special form of biological research over long times and distances - and in worst case only an explanation for everything and nothing or just simple another word for racism. But biological evolution means you have biological parents. This is no theory. Everyone has parents. A mother and a father. And they all came from a first cell - or better to say from a first cause (which was uncaused, otherwise it would not had been a first cause). And who survived for example because he was adopted and had learned from his social parents "to fit" will not find the compete motor for the own survival in the own genetical structure.

Nonresponsive.

What means this arrogant answer?

It means that the collection of words you assembled is absolute nonsense as a response to the proposition that just because we haven't found it doesn't mean it doesn't exists.

Yóu are funny. Nice.

Perhaps you should go back and reread the thread. Maybe knowing what the thread is about would help you structure responses that make sense.

Or perhaps I should throw the information of your amusing statement here into a black hole and ask myselve whether it will come back or not with the Hawking radiation wether this exists or not.

It's by the way very important to make a difference between "theory" and "empiricism". Nothing exists because it is only in someones - or everyones - mind. A "quosl" also not exists in any mind, This means not that a "quosl" exists in reality - except this "quosl" which I created now. So why should a special missing link exist as long as we know nothing about? Your ability to think in logical structures seem also not to be the best, You think it is plausible that such a missing link exist - other think it is not plausible - ¿or is it in the opposit? - whatever. That's all. ... No - that's not all. Every time we'll find a missing link we will get two new missing links.