I asked this question in biology, and got no creationist answers...so maybe this is a better forum?
According to creationists, apes and humans are different "kinds". At this link there is a picture of 14 skulls...1 is a modern ape, 1 is a modern human skull. What are the other skulls - ape, or human? How do you draw the line?
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/hominids.html
2006-09-15 04:31:58 · 14 answers · asked by Zhimbo 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Some additional details:
Sample "H" is known to have used stone tools, "primarily hand axes and cleavers".
http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/erg.html
Does that change your view?
2006-09-15 05:24:12 · update #1
they'r all apes. Flail my flesh and you will find an ape underneath. This then is the modern version: homo sapien.
2006-09-15 04:38:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Most of them aren't complete enough for me (as a non-bone man) to tell the difference. I'm sure an expert would give a better answer, but for the ones where there is enough bone mass to tell:
A=ape
B=ape
C=ape
D=ape
H=ape
I=ape
J=ape
L is hard to tell, because I'm not sure if the discollored sections are filled in or of those are actually part of the bone mass.
M and N are both human, and if I (as a non-bone man) were to guess, I would guess that N is an Asiatic and M is African.
2006-09-15 04:42:00 · answer #2 · answered by Sifu Shaun 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see 14 skulls. Some could be human. Some could be ape. A common designer is just as good of a rational as a common origin in this sense.
Think of it this way. If you see one building and you know the architect. You see a similar building, is it not reasonable to assume they might were created by the same person? Commonalities among species is just as much of an argument for creationism as it is for evolution. It just depends on how you interpret the observations.
2006-09-15 04:37:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
the different skulls are neither modern ape nor modern guy. they are our precursors. Evolution would not state that guy got here from apes, it states that in some unspecified time sooner or later some time previous, we shared a effortless ancestor. Skulls are extra complicated than they look. they are separated into many diverse areas, are available in diverse sizes w/ diverse sized mind circumstances, and so on. those are a number of the valuable houses that motives them to be categorized as diverse species. in accordance to the position the skulls were discovered, researchers can be sure an approximate age of the skulls. once you line them up so as of age, you will see that a progression of valuable houses in the direction of modern guy.
2016-11-27 00:31:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think only Homo Sapiens are human, maybe 4 million years old max. Neanderthals are not, Australopithecus is not, From Lucy, the earliest know human fossil, read some of the books by Loius Leakey maybe
2006-09-15 04:35:31 · answer #5 · answered by kurticus1024 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This website should be good to show that evolution is the truth, but you know creationists are not very sensible people and they reject every evidence that is shown to them, because they think they must trust the Bible more than their own senses. This is what I found out in every discussion I had regarding these matters.
2006-09-15 04:40:15 · answer #6 · answered by Elly 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I draw the line between apes and humans.
2006-09-15 04:34:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Haiku
Fossils are studied
Trying to word this nicely
Not in Genesis!
2006-09-15 04:34:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What does it matter....God created man apart from the ape. That is the plain and simple truth, who cares about fossils.
2006-09-15 04:34:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
How did you get my brothers skull out of his head.
2006-09-15 04:33:43 · answer #10 · answered by drpsholder 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋