English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Evolution assumes that man dropped out of the trees 1 to 5 million years ago and became fully human approximately 100,000 years ago. Yet archeological records show civilization arising only about 5,000 years ago (based on evolutionary thinking). In other words, by evolutionary reasoning, it took mankind 95,000 years after becoming fully human to figure out that food could be produced by dropping a seed into the ground! It has been estimated by evolutionary anthropologists that the earth could have easily supported 10 million hunter/gatherer type humans. To maintain an average of 10 million people, spread over the entire plane, with an average life span of 25 years, for the last 100,000 years . . . .would mean that 40 billion people had lived and died. Archeological evidence clearly shows that these "stone age" people buried their dead. Forty billion graves should be easy to find. Yet only a few thousand exist. The obvious implication is that people have been around for far less time.

2006-10-06 06:33:27 · 14 answers · asked by Chuck Norris 1 in Science & Mathematics Biology

14 answers

What you are defining as evolution, is not correct.

Evolution states that those creatures which live, live, and those which perish, die. It does not assume that man dropped of the trees 1 to 5 millions years ago, or state when man became fully human.

There are archaeological and written records in the east, dating back over 10,000 years, not 5,000 years as you stated.

Not everyone has always been buried in graves as you suggest. They also have graves for Pharaohs in Egypt, but where are all the graves of the slaves, and the people who went to Davy Jone's locker. And there are billions of graves, not thousands.

The obvious implication, is that you are wrong.

Now if you truly want to anger evolutionists, tell them that you believe that apes evolved from man. They can't prove that didn't happen... (SMILE).

2006-10-06 06:40:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

That is about the least well though out argument against evolution I have ever heard. Lots of animals die every year and you hardly ever find any of them. If you follow your argument, we should be up to our armpits in bones.

You are also making some huge jumps with the size of the population. There is evidence that Humans were seriously in danger of going extinct at least once in that time. Also not all humans buried, some burned the dead, some kept the bodies around, some ate them, some used the bones for decorations. Just because they were buried does not mean that the graves would survive. You can follow mitochondrial DNA lines in the current native populations and follow the migrations around the globe. It took a very long time to find the graves of the pyramid builders even though we knew there were a lot of them and we knew about where they should be. And the list goes on and on.

The reasons you should believe in evolution
-It is the ONLY thing consistant with the fossile record
-The DNA lines follow it. There is a reason Human and Chimpanzee DNA is so close as a small example
-You can see the effects of it casued by man with livestock and crops. There are no wild milk cows, they evolved due to man's selection.
And again I could do this all day

2006-10-06 07:04:22 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

First: Yet archeological records show civilization arising only about 5,000 years ago (based on evolutionary thinking).

that statement? I would need to see you reference lol. Because that is not a true statement. Nor is the average of 25 years.

Also, it is the same thing with the time frame in the bible. hard to believe, isn't it?

Both are theories only - religious and evolution. you can choose what you want to believe..

Quick to think - after 40 million years, you really think bones that are exposed to rock and mineral and oxygen would still be there? lol

2006-10-06 07:00:58 · answer #3 · answered by Vita 3 · 3 0

You bring up an interesting point but the reason why so many graves weren't found is 1) Because they are so old 2) Bodies rot and return to the earth. You know, the whole "ashes to ashes dust to dust" thing.

I don't have an answer because the question is impossible to answer. But consider this, when you start to doubt evolution ask yourself this "Where did God come from?". The answer to that one is just as ridiculous as any Big Bang theory will ever be.

In other words, go with what your gut feeling tells you. I see more scientific evidence supporting the evolution claim than any spiritiual intervention belief ever could.

Just my 2 pennies.

2006-10-06 06:45:33 · answer #4 · answered by Ese Loco 3 · 4 0

Wow some of us were absent during science class. So when you put somebody in the ground....they rot...everything rots eventually. The only thing that saves them is to be come a fossil and that rarely happens because conditions have to be perfect.

Evolution says humans and apes came from a common ancestor...not that we climbed down from the trees.

Also...humans can survive in small groups and alone....so just because there was no civilization...or evidence that we've found that says there was a civilization...doesn't mean that man wasn't there.

Forty billion graves...wow thats cute....stone aged people buried there dead...does that mean they buried them all in the same place??? of course not...maybe they were nomadic...you know in a hunter gatherer sense...Perhaps they had shallow graves and some critter came along and made the carcus's into their next meal...

The evidence you present in your "argument" is pretty lame...go to the library...not your church...and check out a real book on anthropology and one on evolution

2006-10-06 06:42:08 · answer #5 · answered by Franklin 7 · 6 0

Joy C has some good points. Either everything came into existence by accident or by intent. Whatever a person assumes to start with is what they will end up proving.

The Bible has very strong points about biology. All species except hybrids are obviously descended from an original male/female pair with the same number of chromosomes. Also flowering plants and insects came into existence at the same time. Fruit bearing trees have no purpose without animals. And geology shows much evidence of catastrophic activity like a huge flood that formed oil and gas deposits.

Evolutionists can point to apparent large amounts of time in radiometric dating and astronomy. The science of origins is difficult because no one can go back in time to observe what was happening.

2006-10-06 07:16:14 · answer #6 · answered by fiascogrande 2 · 0 2

Your argument is what ??? we can't find 40 billion graves
where humans are buried with in the last 100.000 years
when was the stone age ?? about 12.000 years ago or there about ..are we sure that every tribe buried there dead ..and those who did burie there dead ..are we sure they wear buried deep extending specified distance from the top surface .to preserve them being eaten by wild animals ..or the decay by the elements...
Yes a few thousand graves do exist .doesn't that prove something..dose it mater that time expand could not be more accurate ..it just proves that evolution is in play
with out a doubt ..

2006-10-06 07:43:21 · answer #7 · answered by JJ 7 · 2 0

cutting-edge humanity began to look 50,000 - one hundred,000 years in the past. Agriculture known approximately 20,000 years in the past, and alter into invented independently many situations in many places. some cultures by no potential have been given agriculture in any respect. In a lot of places, skeletons will fall apart to no longer something in a remember of years or an prolonged time. a million. Planetary rings are youthful, information of recent catastrophes. they do no longer seem to be as previous through fact the image voltaic gadget. 2. Comets, in addition, are not the comparable ones right now that have been around tens of millions of years in the past. some threat combination of gravity sends some each and every now after which from the Oort cloud into the "inner gadget." For a at the same time as, it replace into postulated that there replace right into a "planet x" way available that sent them in. 3. Why could the outer planets have cooled off? Gravitational fall down and radiation shop them heat. 4. Gravity keeps stars orbiting in galaxies. Granted, galaxies carry mutually extra useful than thought might propose, that's why cosmologists are considering a fudge element, "unique dark remember." this is not a sturdy rationalization, in spite of the shown fact that it beats the heck out of "youthful Earth Creationism."

2016-12-08 09:36:06 · answer #8 · answered by killeen 4 · 0 0

Mount Everest. Earthquakes. The Grand Canyon. Flu virus.

All are evidence that the earth is very VERY old. Again, where is your evidence of a Global flood? Where is your evidence that God is a prankster that put dinosaur fossils in the ground to trick us?

2006-10-06 07:06:51 · answer #9 · answered by GobleyGook 3 · 4 0

Well, there is the "implication", and then there is the evidence - absolute mountains of it. Don't you think you ought to take a look at the evidence before making up your mind?

2006-10-06 16:56:04 · answer #10 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers