http://www.eitb24.com/portal/eitb24/noticia/en/sci/tech/most-complete-skeleton-ever-found-3-3-million-year-old-girl-fossi?itemId=B24_11029&cl=%2Feitb24%2Fnuevas_tecnologias&idioma=en
2006-09-22 11:01:20 · 11 answers · asked by Wurm™ 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Hey jojo, did you even read it? Here you go.
"Zeresenay said she belonged to the Australopithecus afarnesis species, which includes Lucy, and is thought to be an ancestor to modern humans."
2006-09-22 11:13:13 · update #1
Okay, maybe that wasn't the best example to have picked for an article. Here's some more.
http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official_s&ncl=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ffile%3D/c/a/2006/09/21/MNGDFL9LOU1.DTL
And as far as the words "suppose", at least they aren't frothing at the mouth saying "absolute" like all the folks who blindly take some book written by man to be some kind of "absolute" all encompasing truth.
2006-09-22 11:19:09 · update #2
They would say that the scientific machines are innacurate and that a lot of guessing takes place.
2006-09-22 11:05:45 · answer #1 · answered by Tofu Jesus 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nothing new. Notice all the "supposedly" words in the article. I climbed trees when I was a kid too, so I guess that makes me the missing link.
2006-09-22 18:09:43 · answer #2 · answered by parepidemos_00 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Look where it was found, ETHIOPIA, I don't doubt one of their ancestors were discovered.
It still doesn't prove evolution.
My Bible STILL says Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God CREATED.....
Thats all I need to know.
2006-09-22 18:09:25 · answer #3 · answered by creeklops 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Even cold hard facts cannot penetrate the veil of ignorance that all creationists have.
2006-09-22 18:09:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
this article seems very poorly written, so it seems to me that someone is trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
besides, it proves NOTHING in reference to evolution.
i say it's a big load of malarkey.
~*amber*~
2006-09-22 18:09:01 · answer #5 · answered by A Light to Burn All the Empires♥ 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i knew when i read that story that question was coming , did you look at that fossil ? the head looks like a frigen monkey head and i bet that's what it is a dam monkey and not even a human , that's my answer to you
2006-09-22 18:07:15 · answer #6 · answered by jojo 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
my response is, how can you prove carbon dating is accurate if no one was alive 3.3 million years ago to help us prove it's accuracy?
2006-09-22 18:05:05 · answer #7 · answered by Nikki 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
hmmm
1. work of god to test our faith
2. work of satan
3. not real
4. hoax (same as not real)
5. i dont understand it so its evil.
2006-09-22 18:02:55 · answer #8 · answered by johnny_zondo 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ok, so what does this actually prove?
2006-09-22 18:05:32 · answer #9 · answered by dyke_in_heat 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Is it a homotode?
2006-09-22 18:11:29 · answer #10 · answered by Rustic 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋