The discussion is about a hominid fossil, so naturally the subject of evolution and common descent came up.
When someone posted that interbreeding between species (humans and neanderthal specifically) was necessary for (human) evolution I pointed out that this was incorrect.
Having found yourself unable to advance your “god” vs “atheist” strawman that you presented as your initial gambit, you now try to thread hijack to make this about my attitude.
Sorry. It isn't about my religion. I am Christian. And it isn't about my attitude or the likelihood that I will point out that statistically the more educated you are the less likely you are to be a creationist.
It is about a hominid fossil.
Now evolution as a theory provides a model wherein this find can be discussed and evidence compiled and information learned.
Creationism provides nothing. There is no mechanism to differentiate between the “they are all deformed humans or apes” or the “they were their own species of ape” creationists. It leads nowhere, to nothing.
Science is a useful and predictive model that produces value.
Creationism isn't.
Nuff said.
How can I ‘make it about you’ when all I/we had were your replies to go on?
//that interbreeding between species (humans and neanderthal specifically) was necessary for (human) evolution I pointed out that this was incorrect//
The components and data points of the theory have changed so over time there is apparently not much that needs to be ‘correct’ inorder for the theory to work.
Evolution as a model means that like all other models it may be later discarded as false. Does lead to nowhere sound familiar? So as a scientist I would not be wedded to its veracity.
Well you ended where you began, with a diatribe on ‘creationists’ that was your strawman. Just understand that is not required to see the weakness in evolutionary beliefs.