Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Where did we come from? Prehistoric fossils may rewrite human evolution (LOL!)
The Verge ^ | April 11, 2013 | Amar Toor

Posted on 04/14/2013 9:54:40 AM PDT by GodAndCountryFirst

A collection of prehuman skeletons has sparked intrigue and debate in the scientific community, eliciting calls to redraw — or at least reconsider — mankind's evolutionary map.

On Friday, an international team of researchers will publish their latest findings on Australopithecus sediba — a uniquely puzzling prehuman species that lived nearly 2 million years ago. Led by Lee Berger, a paleoanthropologist at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa, the research reveals new insights about the way Au. sediba walked, chewed, and moved, lending support to Berger's claim that the species is a direct human ancestor.

Experts have long identified Homo habilis as the most likely ancestor to Homo erectus — the precursor to modern man — but Berger’s research points to an alternate lineage. Au. sediba predated Homo habilis by nearly 100,000 years, according to some estimates, and its "mosaic" blend of ape and human qualities suggests a different evolution from human ancestors (known as hominins) to our own Homo genus.

(Excerpt) Read more at theverge.com ...


TOPICS: Religion; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: evolution; god; science
A libtard I know was VERY interested in this. I could not help but laugh. Every time they think they got that evolution thing nailed down, they find new stuff that blows apart their shaky theories. Then they have to scramble to explain it and re-work the theory. But nobody has disprove the Bible yet! The TRUTH of Genesis is still solid and still consistent!
1 posted on 04/14/2013 9:54:40 AM PDT by GodAndCountryFirst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Just read Dr. Berlinksi’s book: “The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Scientific Pretensions”. The witty mathematician tears apart the “thinking” of the evolutionary Marxists who are irrational.


2 posted on 04/14/2013 10:03:53 AM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst
Humans are devolving.


3 posted on 04/14/2013 10:03:56 AM PDT by South40 (I Love The "New & Improved" Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Dad said he traded a three-legged cat for me.


4 posted on 04/14/2013 10:10:35 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Amen!


5 posted on 04/14/2013 10:11:41 AM PDT by onthelookout777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3002861/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2999243/posts


6 posted on 04/14/2013 10:13:59 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: South40

I bet that existed back then, liberal cavemen who sat around all day and refused to hunt then complained: “Gorg have more deer meat than me” and the tribal elder “ Bargack Obomo” who took the deer meat from Gorg and redistributed it.


7 posted on 04/14/2013 10:17:03 AM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (Someday our schools will teach the difference between "lose" and "loose")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

That’s the nature of science. When you get more information, you have to integrate it and recalculate. Religion doesn’t allow any new information, so there’s never any question of reconsidering your conclusions.


8 posted on 04/14/2013 10:28:51 AM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
Bttt

I'll add this:

"Without a doubt, the ultimate Black Swan is whatever it was that permitted merely genetic human beings to emerge into full humanness just yesterday (cosmically speaking), some 50,000 years ago. .....

"....once man consciously enters the sensorium of time and space, he is implicitly aware of both Absolute and Infinite, and therefore Love, Truth, Justice, Beauty, Virtue, and Eternity. These are the things that define man, not his genome. ....."

Creation Myths of the Tenured

A religion that cannot encompass science is not worthy the name, while a science that cannot be reconciled with religion is not fit for human beings.

9 posted on 04/14/2013 10:33:35 AM PDT by Matchett-PI (It's a single step from relativism to barbarism, low information to Democrat, ignorance to tenure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda
tribal elder “ Bargack Obomo” who took the deer meat from Gorg and redistributed it.

Obomo would not have been successful taking it himself. They would have kicked the crap out of him. No. Obomo somehow persuades the women and masses of inferior men to gang up and steal the deer meat. Then it is redistributed. The stronger men are outnumbered and leave the clan and migrate out of Africa. They go on to form mighty tribes that eventually grow into major countries. They leave behind the Obomo clan in Africa that continues to grow soft and is decimated within a year.

10 posted on 04/14/2013 10:45:44 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

http://www.ufocasebook.com/tinyalienchile.html

11 posted on 04/14/2013 10:56:59 AM PDT by Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America (PRISON AT BENGHAZI?????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

lol exactly


12 posted on 04/14/2013 11:03:26 AM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (Someday our schools will teach the difference between "lose" and "loose")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst; Physicist; knarf

I started the creationist threads here

and I find it hilarious

ANOTHER rewriting of science to fit a theory, instead of their theory fitting the science

IN THE BEGINNING, GOD...


13 posted on 04/14/2013 11:06:04 AM PDT by RaceBannon (Telling the truth about RINOS, PAULTARDS, Liberals and Muslims has become hate speech)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady
That’s the nature of science. When you get more information, you have to integrate it and recalculate. Religion doesn’t allow any new information, so there’s never any question of reconsidering your conclusions.

Science should not hold fast to one theory and then just twist all "new information" so that the same tired old theory "still works".

Religion doesn't allow new information? How about miracles? How about healing through prayer? From a religious standpoint, such events are new information which confirm how the world is supposed to work. But a materialist will cross their arms, shake their head, and say "That new information is bogus. The world doesn't work that way. It doesn't. It doesn't. It doesn't."

From where I sit, what you just posted is pure projection: Religion takes new information and gets stronger, while science never reconsiders its conclusion, it just manipulates data so that the new inputs don't threaten the agreed upon position.

14 posted on 04/14/2013 11:14:17 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The ballot box is a sham. Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Abstracting information from their environment is what made Adam and Eve the first humans.


15 posted on 04/14/2013 11:16:21 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
No, religion is very selective. If someone has an illness, and you pray for them and they are healed, that's "evidence of God." But if they die, is that evidence against God? No, of course not, they say. It's just that, well, "God works in mysterious ways." You only allow the circumstances that support your pre-existing belief.

In other words, if your pre-existing belief is that everything is God's will, then of course everything that happens is covered. So there is no new information.

16 posted on 04/14/2013 11:24:05 AM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady

I disagree. Judaism and most branches of Christianity have incorporated information form science quite well, if however laboriously.

The Vatican Observatory houses one of the best meteorite collections in the world. And many notable scientists have been and are believers.

Personally, I know of no instance where Torah at least, is not comportable with science.


17 posted on 04/14/2013 11:28:22 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady

If my belief system were that, so long as I pray for someone, then that person will never, ever die .. then I guess you would have a point. There would be a lot of tremendously old people walking around. But there aren’t. The fact that, in the end, everyone does die, does not in any way provide “evidence against God”.


18 posted on 04/14/2013 11:32:50 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The ballot box is a sham. Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady; ClearCase_guy

And no “miracles” for amputees to grow back appendages.

Science is the best hope for limb regeneration. No amount of praying has seen anyone grow back an arm. Their god hates amputees, huh?


19 posted on 04/14/2013 11:39:36 AM PDT by James C. Bennett (An Australian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
The fact that, in the end, everyone does die, does not in any way provide “evidence against God”.

Exactly. There is nothing you would accept as "evidence against God," which is what I mean when I say that no new information is ever incorporated. The standing belief that everything is God's will means nothing is ever new. That's why religion and science have two different names. The latter must account for new information. For the former, there is no such thing.

20 posted on 04/14/2013 11:43:05 AM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

I didn’t say that religion and science were mutually exclusive, I said they were different.


21 posted on 04/14/2013 11:44:05 AM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady
I'm not sure I agree with how you are phrasing that, but the core statement seems clear enough, and is one I will not take issue with. Science wants to discuss one thing, and religion is largely focused on something different.
22 posted on 04/14/2013 11:54:46 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The ballot box is a sham. Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Yes, exactly. That’s why the OP’s remarks are invalid: he’s suggesting that science fails because it doesn’t operate like religion. I’m saying they are two different things.


23 posted on 04/14/2013 12:00:44 PM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Just read Dr. Berlinksi’s book: “The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Scientific Pretensions”. The witty mathematician tears apart the “thinking” of the evolutionary Marxists who are irrational.


I love that book.

It’s not so much an attack on evolution as it is an attack on how secular scientists are changing the rules of science to fit their secularism.


24 posted on 04/14/2013 12:11:23 PM PDT by Zeneta (No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Not another rewrite!!!?? The ink isn’t dry on the last rewrite of a rewrite of a.......


25 posted on 04/14/2013 12:29:21 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst
A collection of prehuman skeletons

Wait, are you saying that you got the Skeletons of Michael Moore, Helen Thomas, Robert Byrd and other LIBERALS??

How did you remove the skeletons from the live people??

26 posted on 04/14/2013 12:35:20 PM PDT by ExCTCitizen (Rand Paul/Ben Carson should be the 2016 Ticket!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady

Science and the scientific method operate under very strict rules. This is, of course a necessary construct in order to advance the understanding of virtually everything.

The scientific method is bound to “materialism, reductionism etc”, it is bound to what can be observed, tested and repeated”. The interpretations of those discoveries have implications and should fit within the construct of the whole of a particular theory. When the interpretations upset the whole or current narrative of the theory, something needs to give.

Creationists point out the inconsistencies and repeated re-interpretations as a failure of the theory. And evolutionists will tell you that this is how science works.

Objectively, there’s something wrong.

New evidence should support the theory, not make it more complicated. So much more complicated that they are willing to invoke the “super-natural” or “meta-physics” in order to resolve or save the theory.


27 posted on 04/14/2013 12:42:51 PM PDT by Zeneta (No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady
amen, sister
28 posted on 04/14/2013 12:43:09 PM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda
I bet that existed back then, liberal cavemen who sat around all day and refused to hunt then complained: “Gorg have more deer meat than me” and the tribal elder “ Bargack Obomo” who took the deer meat from Gorg and redistributed it.

LOL

29 posted on 04/14/2013 1:05:08 PM PDT by ExCTCitizen (Rand Paul/Ben Carson should be the 2016 Ticket!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady

Some very good friends of mine were driving across a CO mountain pass in winter that has a very dangerous stretch with lots of avalanches. Usually lose at least one car a year, and nobody has ever survived being swept off the road into the canyon.

They stopped and prayed before driving across the stretch. An avalanche hit and swept them off the road. They survived and eventually climbed out.

They believed their survival was a miracle provided by God in response to their prayers.

I pointed out that if they hadn’t stopped to pray, they would have been past the dangerous stretch before the avalanche hit.

My comment was not appreciated.


30 posted on 04/14/2013 1:18:27 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

LOL. That reminds me of the story about the construction worker who falls several stories from a scaffold. He breaks most of the bones in his body, but miraculously lives. He wakes up in traction in the hospitial, and the doctor tells him, “You’re a lucky man”.

He says, “I don’t feel lucky”.


31 posted on 04/14/2013 2:03:25 PM PDT by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Zeneta

Basically, the Leftists are lying-—their premises are all “assumptions” but they treat it as “truth” which it is not-—just a “theory”.

At. Least Christians admit when they use “faith”.

He does tear apart a lot of the “myth” of evolution.


32 posted on 04/14/2013 3:28:07 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Berlinski, is not to be played with.

“How many physiological changes are necessary to move a “cow like” animal to a whale ?”

What’s the number?

50, maybe 100,000 changes ?

Let’s weigh that against randomness and generational populations.

The math does not work.


33 posted on 04/14/2013 4:05:19 PM PDT by Zeneta (No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Well if you are a christian you know where you came from.


34 posted on 04/14/2013 4:55:08 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda

I read an interesting story once.

Some whalers went ashore and stayed with a group of Inuit (Eskimos) up North way back in the 1860s.

One day, Sarquaq, who was the best hunter and nominal village leader, killed a walrus.

As he began handing out portions to his neighbors, the whalers commented, using an interpreter, that Sarquaq was a very kind and generous man.

When it was translated, he laughed heartily and said, “You do not understand. By whips, one makes dogs, and by GIFTS, one makes slaves.”

Sarquaq saw his distribution of meat as a means to keep himself in a position of power and influence, not as charity.

Some things don’t change.


35 posted on 04/14/2013 4:56:06 PM PDT by darth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Omg! Science is based upon evidence and can change in light of new evidence! Obviously an inferior system to never changing what you think no matter how much evidence accumulates!


36 posted on 04/14/2013 4:59:30 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
I pointed out that if they hadn’t stopped to pray, they would have been past the dangerous stretch before the avalanche hit.

LOL! Exactly!

37 posted on 04/14/2013 5:09:39 PM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: darth
Sarquaq saw his distribution of meat as a means to keep himself in a position of power and influence, not as charity.

Some things don’t change.

Well, except that the meat belonged to Sarquaq. Today's power and influence comes from redistributing what is OURS!

38 posted on 04/14/2013 6:58:35 PM PDT by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed &water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

Good observation.


39 posted on 04/15/2013 7:30:12 AM PDT by darth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: GodAndCountryFirst

Their age dating math leaves a lot to be explained as well.

101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth


40 posted on 04/25/2013 5:48:39 AM PDT by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady

For me Einstein [ a real scientist ] trumps Darwin [ not really any advanced degrees in scientific thought nor original ideas ] every which way. See gravitational time dilation for another perspective regarding how old starlight may not actually be that old.

Or better yet read the book ‘Starlight and Time’ by Russell Humphreys.


41 posted on 04/25/2013 5:53:59 AM PDT by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson