Replies

Those aren't proof of anything.

Neither are drawing of a theory.

This is just the same old stuff, over and over and over and over again.

monkey skulls and human skulls, different races of humans does not prove evolution and transitional fossil record.

Walk into any bar and look at peoples heads. Some look like neadrathals. Jack Van ipe's wife Roxella looks like an alien. look at the Indian decendants of the Inca's in south America.

Somehow I knew you were going to post that "collection". (Sigh)

Later, time to go home.

You said that evidence (and there's plenty more like it) didn't exist. You said there isn't any.

Now you say it doesn't mean anything. That's not the same thing.

You said it doesn't exist. It does. Tomorrow, you'll be back again saying it doesn't exist. That doesn't look very honest from here.

But that's always the way it goes. Here, yet again,

Tap-Dancing Science-Denier declares that the fossil record lacks instances of things changing in an orderly series from some Thing A to Thing Z. As this kind of evidence is to be expected, the lack of it must weigh against evolution having happened. By the very statement of this objection we are invited to believe the Tap-Dancing Science-Denier would accept such evidence IF ONLY IT EXISTED but the thing is it doesn't exist.
Someone who disagrees demonstrates many instances well known in the literature of fossil series intermediate in form and time between some Thing A and some Thing Z.
The Tap-Dancer then declares fossil series evidence to be irrelevant. How do we know ... various things? The dates of the fossils? Whether fossil A lies exactly on the ancestral line of fossil B?
But wasn't the evidence valid when it was supposedly missing?

Somehow I knew you were going to post that "collection". (Sigh)

So you're a liar.

This is just the same old stuff, over and over and over and over again.

monkey skulls and human skulls, different races of humans does not prove evolution and transitional fossil record.

From your comments it looks like nothing will convince you of any aspect of evolution. Not fact, not well-supported theory, and certainly not anything anyone on these threads has to say. We post good pictures of the fossil record leading to Homo sapiens and you reply "monkey skulls and human skulls, different races of humans does not prove evolution and transitional fossil record."

The experts, who have examined the actual fossils, can clearly distinguish not only the human skulls but the various transitional species back several million years. And you know, not a one of them is a monkey skull. New and Old World monkeys split off many million years earlier.

I think your mind is made up and no evidence will even be considered. I also think that is pretty sad, because Homo sapiens didn't get where we are today by this kind of behavior.