The Evolution of Early Homo in One Image

[james bond]

Science builds and marches on undaunted while fearmongers clutch their pearls and continue looking only backward, seeking solace from endless "study" of old fantasies, written by people who plainly knew nothing of what carefully practicing science has revealed to us since. Nothing's more beautiful than an open, optimistic mind. The reason we cherish young, "innocent" children above all.

Yours is not science as nothing backs it up. I asked and all I have gotten are graphs made with graphics software and a wiki article. You treat me like a fearmonger, but I am just saying that atheists, ags and sinners invoke the Wrath of God as spelled out in the Bible. Anyway, I doubt any of you would do anything as I've shown and demonstrated much of the evidence using science, i.e. how science backs up the Bible. I've used facts, reasoning, historical truth, scientific experiments and the Bible, but many of you think it's religion and like to threaten me. Just look at the SAF and POS newcomer post whom I don't even know. He's crazy as a loon, too.

 

[Hollie]

Yours is not science as nothing backs it up. I asked and all I have gotten are graphs made with graphics software and a wiki article. You treat me like a fearmonger, but I am just saying that atheists, ags and sinners invoke the Wrath of God as spelled out in the Bible. Anyway, I doubt any of you would do anything as I've shown and demonstrated much of the evidence using science, i.e. how science backs up the Bible. I've used facts, reasoning, historical truth, scientific experiments and the Bible, but many of you think it's religion and like to threaten me. Just look at the SAF and POS newcomer post whom I don't even know. He's crazy as a loon, too.

Science does not "back up" the Bible. That is precisely why you have presented no facts, reasoning, historical truth or scientific experiments to support your false claims.

What facts, reasoning, historical truth or scientific experiments "back up" a flat earth, talking snakes, etc.?

 

[Grumblenuts]

You treat me like a fearmonger, but I am just saying that atheists, ags and sinners invoke the Wrath of God as spelled out in the Bible.

Do you really imagine we're somehow unfamiliar with all that? That beating that poor, long dead horse could still serve some useful purpose? It just causes us to feel embarrassed for you and sorry for the horse.

many of you think it's religion and like to threaten me.

Invoking "the Bible" is obviously being religious. Who threatened you here and how?

 

[james bond]

Do you really imagine we're somehow unfamiliar with all that? That beating that poor, long dead horse could still serve some useful purpose? It just causes us to feel embarrassed for you and sorry for the horse.

Invoking "the Bible" is obviously being religious. Who threatened you here and how?

That isn't my argument though. It's SCIENCE BACKS UP THE BIBLE. I have the scientific evidence and experiments. You have none. I suppose it's Satan who keeps you locked in and attracted to evolution (EVIL-ution) and that the Bible is religion. However, there isn't anything that shows evidence of Satan except EVIL, but we easily accept it on a daily basis. That graph is a joke in terms of science (abu afak is a joke in regards to science; he's afraid to discuss here with me), but more and more people fall for it as PROPHECIZED.

 

[james bond]

Science does not "back up" the Bible. That is precisely why you have presented no facts, reasoning, historical truth or scientific experiments to support your false claims.

What facts, reasoning, historical truth or scientific experiments "back up" a flat earth, talking snakes, etc.?

Today's TALKING SNAKE are people like you who think evolution (EVIL-ution) is science.

I'd love to see Ms. EVIL-ution wriggling in pain like a worm on a hook being prepared to be tossed into HELL...

Or Mr. EVIL-ution:

"An amazing graphic of the last 7 Million years of Mostly-Homo to Human evolution, encompassing many crucial factors.
Again, progression/descent with modification... including those survived with mutations favorable to the current conditions of the/their environment. (savannah, woodland, forest, etc)"

abu afak is like RUSSIA INVADING UKRAINE with this sh*t posting in the SCIENCE FORUM.

 

[james bond]

I'm going back to WEARING A MASK in real life as a few of the atheist posters here post like they're COVID-19.

 

[james bond]

Do you really imagine we're somehow unfamiliar with all that? That beating that poor, long dead horse could still serve some useful purpose? It just causes us to feel embarrassed for you and sorry for the horse.

Invoking "the Bible" is obviously being religious. Who threatened you here and how?

As for the religious part. If what you think I state is THREATS from me, it's not. It's a WARNING about the wrath of God. If it does bother you, then it's good. It may make you think twice about evolution and its consequences. If I argued that it's Satan leading you using evolution, then it wouldn't be the main message. Again, the main message is science backs up the Bible. The warning is for the consequence of siding with evolution. Satan plays a part, but he isn't the warning.

 

[Cougarbear]

And you're not? Conversion?

That's correct...45 years ago

 

[Cougarbear]

In a mere 30 years, populations change. There's no reason why anatomy can't change dramatically in 30k years or 3 million years. I think the biggest problem the hyper-religious have with evolution is that so much of science and biology contradicts biblical tales and fables. There is the FACT that species change. There is a predictable range of genetic variation in a species, as well as an expected rate of random mutations. It's really comical how the religious will accept that ''kinds'' can evolve, even though they can't even define what a ''kind'' is, and they must limit evolution of ''kinds'' to a mere 4,000 years since the flood myth. But they can't accept anything more than that. They give no reason for this fabricated limitation.


Western Christians have invented their gods in their own image just as the Hindu's have done, just as the Greeks gave done, etc., etc. Christianity simply carried on the traditions of finding a level of comfort in gods that shared their physical characteristics.

You are assuming that your evidence points to change in species. Such as wolves to dogs. Perhaps they were made that way 6,000 years ago and only those on the Ark survived 4,500 years ago. You are also assuming that apes evolved into mankind. There is no scientific 100% proof that they did. Especially since our mankind is 6,000 years old is all. If there were others with similar characteristics, they still are not of Adam and Eve's fold. Which all humans today are.

 

[fncceo]

That's correct...45 years ago

That's why we no longer let kids eat lead paint chips.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are assuming that your evidence points to change in species

100% wrong.

That's how things work in your religious nutter circles. This your confusion.

Scientists follow the preponderance of evidence. In this case, it is overwhelming and all mutual supportive.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You are assuming that your evidence points to change in species. Such as wolves to dogs. Perhaps they were made that way 6,000 years ago and only those on the Ark survived 4,500 years ago. You are also assuming that apes evolved into mankind. There is no scientific 100% proof that they did. Especially since our mankind is 6,000 years old is all. If there were others with similar characteristics, they still are not of Adam and Eve's fold. Which all humans today are.

You didn't learn that flavor of Science and Technology in public school.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

I could be that Genesis is correct

Unfortunately Genesis has some pretty serious problems with the order of things. Genesis has land plants before fish and even has plants showing up before the sun does.

and that once life was flourishing in the waters, that God place there,

If Genesis had that order right it would have been helpful. But instead Genesis has fish showing up later than trees.

Then, mankind with living souls or spirit children of our Heavenly Parents.
Both theories and/or beliefs cannot be proven since they are observable of past history.

Actually the fossil record is pretty clear on the big stuff and it doesn't match when various things appear in the Bible.

 

[Hollie]

You are assuming that your evidence points to change in species. Such as wolves to dogs. Perhaps they were made that way 6,000 years ago and only those on the Ark survived 4,500 years ago. You are also assuming that apes evolved into mankind. There is no scientific 100% proof that they did. Especially since our mankind is 6,000 years old is all. If there were others with similar characteristics, they still are not of Adam and Eve's fold. Which all humans today are.

There was no ark, no global flood and the planet is not flat.

 

[Hollie]

Today's TALKING SNAKE are people like you who think evolution (EVIL-ution) is science.

I'd love to see Ms. EVIL-ution wriggling in pain like a worm on a hook being prepared to be tossed into HELL...

Or Mr. EVIL-ution:

"An amazing graphic of the last 7 Million years of Mostly-Homo to Human evolution, encompassing many crucial factors.
Again, progression/descent with modification... including those survived with mutations favorable to the current conditions of the/their environment. (savannah, woodland, forest, etc)"

abu afak is like RUSSIA INVADING UKRAINE with this sh*t posting in the SCIENCE FORUM.

“I'd love to see Ms. EVIL-ution wriggling in pain like a worm on a hook being prepared to be tossed into HELL...”


lovely.

I think ISIS is hiring. They can provide an outlet for your pathology.

 

[Cougarbear]

That's why we no longer let kids eat lead paint chips.

I'm glad you aren't doing that anymore. I never did.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm glad you aren't doing that anymore. I never did.

*yet can't quite pass 7th grade science

 

[Cougarbear]

100% wrong.

That's how things work in your religious nutter circles. This your confusion.

Scientists follow the preponderance of evidence. In this case, it is overwhelming and all mutual supportive.

No it's not. You are prejudging the evidence that it has to fit your narrative. There's no evidence. No missing links anywhere. Not even for wolves.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are prejudging the evidence that it has to fit your narrative.

No. That is how you circle of nutters works. Science is quite the opposite. Surely this very childish error by you is part of why you don't understand anything about science.

 

[Cougarbear]

No. That is how you circle of nutters works. Science is quite the opposite. Surely this very childish error by you is part of why you don't understand anything about science.

Science is not. You are observing information in the past. You weren't there. So, you are being subjective to your own prejudices and create a fake theory.