it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
The only thing you have shot is your foot! Your mis-quoting, dismissing your own people, shows your intent. I have given Names, dates and much more, and still you cannot admit there is other information to consider.
Last post.....
However, I will rethink your claim that you came from an Ape. You really got me thinking.
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
Your chart is fact, right? Love the question marks. All based on sound science, right?
What? You are not acquainted with the Savanna theory? Holy shit! No wonder we are having trouble connecting. You don’t know the main stream theory, Sorry, now I see why we are not connecting. Man, do some research! Don’t discredit your own people! Or, Do you believe in the new “pop Evolution” theories going around and around?
Straw man, yea, right........
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
JanH:
Throwbacks? Have you not been reading my posts?
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
“”“3) The second law of thermodynamics does not contradict evolution anymore than it contradicts the forming of snowflakes or the development of a fetus into a baby. It is true that on the whole thermodynamics means that at the end there will ultimately be entropy, but until then there are pockets of reduced entropy. This is caused by energy sources, such as the sun. If the earth was a closed system, then everything would wind down into complete entropy, but since the sun provides energy, the earth is a pocket of reduced entropy. They second law of thermodynamics has been refuted as an objection against evolution a long time ago. People who hold to this belief understand neither Evolution nor thermodynamics.”
Rubbish, your comparing snow to evolution is a red herring. A renowned Evolutionist, Buckminster Fuller, remarked “Evolution is an eddy in the second law of thermodynamics.” The fact remands that the complexity to man (the top) to the single cell (the bottom) should be reversed, in evolution.
Also, to not understand the connection regarding “common ancestor” shows your ignorance of the subject. I refer you to my last postfor the awnser.
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
Here is some info on your own "beliefs" that you say I don’t understand. Please note the connection of Apes to Neanderthals. Also, why the divergence of the lines if we come from the same source? Time to make up a new fact, right? DNA shows that there is NOT a line....be
What is currently the most accepted theory of human evolution?
Todayís most accepted theory is the "Savannah-based theory" first proposed by Raymond Dart in 1924. This theory proposes that hominids evolved as some apes moved from the shrinking lush forests onto the surrounding Savannah. As a result of these apes moving from the food rich environment of the forests to the drier environment of the Savannah certain adaptations (Neanderthals) evolved which were advantages to the new environment. Some of these adaptations include: bipedalism, lack of hair, and increased fat. Bipedalism would be advantages to these Savannah apes as they could uses there newly freed hands to gather food, which can be scarce, and carry it over long distances while looking for the next meal. Similarly increased fat also have aided these Savannah apes with food storage. The loss of hair was often described as advantages as it may help to cool the ape.
So what are the problems with the Savannah-based theory?
AAT proponents argue that if early hominids did evolve on the Savannah then there should be multiple examples of other Savannah animals which have evolved similar adaptations and characteristics of hominids. The problem is that there are not any such animals which display similar characteristics of hominids. A second problem AAT proponents point out is that the Savannah based theory fails to even attempt to explain many characteristics of humans and how those may have evolved on the Savannah
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
REM:
Why disstort? I never said "they are" N are apes. However, the information (dated 1995) shows both types in the same evo tree.
Notwithstanding, if you know your own “beliefs,” you would know that the “common ancestor” theory is contradicting to your evo beliefs. However, you are the silent one.
Also, all you have done is generalized and make many quick statements, however with no “meat.”
Answer:
1. What makes a fact? Tell us, just don’t sit there and name call. Is evo a fact, or, as you put it both fact and theory (what ever that means!)?
2. Explain why the “common ancestor” just can’t be right when talking evo?
3. What are your comments on the second law of TD? And its contradiction to EVO?
Please give us some substance. Your trying to just discredit without any substance is getting old, and an old trick at that.
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
"""in spite of the incredible fossil evidence """"
Proof? So far, the fossils shows a large pattern of life, all at once, not the chain from apes to man.
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
JanH:
You are sooo funny. Chill, this is not 911. You can make the attacks without any proof of claim. All I have provided is some information that should be considered before you put all creation in your tiny box, all wrapped up with a great explanation.
Here are my points:
1. Evolution is not a fact. All college bound persons, or persons of letter know what has to take place before a “fact” is a Fact.
2. I presented information that we could have came from a common ancestor like an Adam and Eve. And that so far, DNA shows a different path than you would like to believe.
3. Life is a miracle. Evolution runs contrary to the second law of thermodynamics, which, for you JanH, is that energy naturally flows from a state of lesser organization, from a state of higher differentiation to a state of lower differentiation.
Open your minds.........
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
JanH:
Sir, you lack knowledge! I have the “chart” that is approved for class work that does show the progression from ape to man and the neanderthals are in the progression. However, the chart was approved in 1995, if the “facts” have changed again, please let us know what the new facts are? Boy you can give the WT a run for their money when it came to what is a fact and what is not!
Truth is hard to take uh?
it seems this whole debate, (creation v/s evolution) iz coming to the fore again, along with (religion v/s state) debate.
my sister iz a producer for pbs & haz a documentary coming up on the scopes or (monkey trial), & i think little haz changed.. i am non-religious, but i can't help laughing when arguements are made claiming man & monkeys share common ansesters, although a few individuals on my wifes side make me wonder.
i am not saying, i have the answers, but man iz just so radicaly different from animals!
“OK Escargot, now read the article. Then read what you said above. Then read the article again. Then read what you said above again. Then look back and forth very quickly between the two, slap yourself on the forehead and say "D'oh!"”
Nice try, I stated, from memory, that we have a common ancestor and that we did not come from “apes.” this is in line with the article. It blasts the evo’s theories that we came from tribes throughout the earth and we did not have a common ancestor (Adam & Eve) but evo from Apes on down.
Really, your uniformed comments without any “facts” is what needs to be addressed. D'oh!
