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

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070919/sc_nm/human_ancestor_dc

2007-09-19 11:45:07 · 10 answers · asked by Love #me#, Hate #me# 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

not epicurious----thanks for saving me the trouble.

2007-09-19 12:02:02 · update #1

paul---"all mutations are destructive"---you are uneducated.

2007-09-19 13:31:55 · update #2

john---if you don't believe in science then please swear off of everything science has contributed to society right now or you're a hypocrite.

2007-09-19 13:33:47 · update #3

cdjack---i believe there were past global warmings......please post a link to verify your claim of archaeological proof of the worldwide flood as spoken of in the bible. No Christian promotional sites please.

2007-09-20 08:18:34 · update #4

10 answers

I think most of the Creationists will not click on your link. Anyone who believes in creationism, something based on ZERO evidence, over evolution is a lost cause. It's the prime definition of ignorance. Creationism is something these people WANT to believe. They will never consider the other side no matter how much evidence there is.

God could come flying out of the sky today and proclaim "I had nothing to do with designing humans. You all evolved into what you are today over millions of years of adaptation and EVOLUTION"........and religious nuts would still deny it.

2007-09-19 12:42:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

How do scientists know these creatures had any offspring? and how do they know they were genetically different or beneficially mutated if they did? Fossil evidence constitutes no proof of evolution and there have been no intermediary fossils of any kind found ever. It's all a pipe dream called naturalism--not science. They'll keep digging up some ape/monkey/human looking bones which are very similiar in one respect or another and call them a link when they have nothing but a great leap of imagination to substantiate it. Sheer waste of time and money and a falsehood on the history and origins of mankind. When they come up with just ONE fossil of a half-reptile, half-bird or any other intermediate life form, then they may have something...until then, it's all just a lot of hype. There should be millions of them out there if evolution were true. Don't hold your breath though because genetically, it can't happen. There's no known mechanism to add useful genetic information---all mutations are destructive and constitute a loss of genetic information or restructuring of existing genetic information. Some studies recently have shown that the increase in human genetic disorders may lead to our own extinction in less than 50 years if not checked somehow.

2007-09-19 19:32:34 · answer #2 · answered by paul h 7 · 0 3

Well I think it is interesting. I really think they ought to make darn certain that they found what they claim because they said they found it in a fossil rich area it couldn't it be that the bones are actually from 2 different individuals at 2 different times? perhaps and Australopithecus and a modern human dying at the same place? Im sure they already thought about all that though lol

2007-09-19 18:59:13 · answer #3 · answered by Lorena 4 · 0 0

I think it's a hoot how some people pick and choose what to believe in archeology. You believe this, but discount archaeological evidence of the flood or of past global warming as a natural event. You can't have it both ways. I'm a creationist but I welcome the science presented, as always. The problem now, is all the pseudo scientists reading more into the discovery than what is actually there. Good science sticks to the facts, and does not desperately try to prove preconceived notions.

2007-09-19 20:45:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

Another fine example of making the bones say what you want. And you believe this? I find it curious that transitions are only found in what can be interpreted through a worldview. Here we are, years later and life covering the earth, and there isn't one example of a transition. But - we can see it in something we know absolutely nothing about? Come on. Think!

2007-09-19 19:28:47 · answer #5 · answered by JohnFromNC 7 · 0 3

Silly short primitive hominids!

Yah she will have to see the fossils herself (which she never will) and thinks the hominid fossil record is incomplete (she's never researched the fossil record in her life). She has good reason to assume these fossils don't provide "good" evidence due to her Ph.D. in anthropology.

2007-09-19 18:54:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Sisterzeal made me giggle.

Yep, just as expected we are filling in the gaps.

2007-09-19 18:58:03 · answer #7 · answered by meissen97 6 · 1 0

science, just a bunch of mumbojumbo, aint that right

2007-09-19 18:54:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

One more piece of the puzzle.

2007-09-19 19:02:50 · answer #9 · answered by novangelis 7 · 2 1

I'd have to see that skeleton for myself. the other missing links have proven to be well.......very incomplete and do not provide sufficient evidence of anything.

2007-09-19 18:53:09 · answer #10 · answered by sisterzeal 5 · 1 5

fedest.com, questions and answers