Ancient Animal Could Be Human-Ape Ancestor

The Centre Daily Times ^ | Thu, Nov. 18, 2004 | DIEDTRA HENDERSON -- Associated Press

[shhrubbery!]

Pretty picture, but no cigar. Instead of getting into a lengthy argument, I simply refer you to the excellent replies already made to your post by Remedy and Dataman, in your linked thread.

Darwinism and its fraternal twin, Marxism, are quasi-religions: Neither is based in verified scientific fact, despite the protestations of their adherents; and it requires a leap of faith to believe in them. (And, in the case of macroevolution, a lot of circular thinking.)

[ASA Vet]

Or they don't like to admit that human beings are animals, too.

So why waste your time on them at all?

[MEGoody]

"And then there are people who simply won't see any evidence at all for what they don't want to believe."

Exactly my point.

[MEGoody]

"What's your point?"

That this is not an 'ancestor' of modern man at all. Sorry, I thought the point was obvious. Glad you asked for clarification.

[taxesareforever]

The first generation of man was created by God. Successive generations did not mutate and become man of today.

[Dataman]

Pretty picture, but no cigar.

Thanks for the ping. You are correct. If there actually was a substantial link between the lower primates and man, the darwinists would beat us all to death with it. As it is, all they have is pictures, imaginations and materialistic presuppositions.

[Dataman]

I went back and reread most of that old thread. It was entertaining. I don't think Retro is doing himself any favors by linking to it. The evos were not doing very well at all, were they?

[RightWhale]

You can do that in your tagline, then it is always ready for any occasion.

[PatrickHenry]

Darwinism and its fraternal twin, Marxism, are quasi-religions: Neither is based in verified scientific fact, despite the protestations of their adherents; and it requires a leap of faith to believe in them. (And, in the case of macroevolution, a lot of circular thinking.)

A most extra-ordinary post. In a few sentences you've managed to cram in more creationoid nonsense than I've encountered anywhere else. Your grasp of evolution theory approches absolute zero. Which is a great opportunity for you.

If you have any spark of curiousity, I invite you to read my tagline, and then to peruse some of the links that are neatly organized at my homepage.

[shhrubbery!]

Thanks for the compliment. For your information, I'm not a "creationoid," LOL. I'm actually fairly agnostic on this issue. And open-minded.

But Darwinists have failed to convince me of their "science." I'm looking forward to reading some new books about intelligent design -- and I'll take a look a your webpage too when I have more time.

One thing that convinces me I'm right about Darwinism being a quasi- religion, however, is just the sort of replies we see on FR whenever a thread like this is posted : The Darwinists are every bit as over-zealous, irrational, and intolerant as they accuse the creationists of being.

Reminds me of the way the Left projects its own lies, delusions and distortions upon the Right.

[PatrickHenry]

I'm looking forward to reading some new books about intelligent design -- and I'll take a look a your webpage too when I have more time.

You might read a good, recent, general introduction type of book about evolution, before you start in on its opponents. (If you do, you'll be way ahead of most of them.) Your approach to the matter is somewhat like learning about relativity theory by visiting a few "Einstein was a Bozo" websites.

In fairness to yourself, you might also want to learn why mainstream science isn't impressed by intelligent design. Take a look at this:
The Flagellum Unspun: The Collapse of "Irreducible Complexity," Kenneth R. Miller. It's a very good critique of Behe's work.

[Virginia-American]

If there actually was a substantial link between the lower primates and man, the darwinists would beat us all to death with it.

Can you show me a mutation (or a virus embedded in the genome) common to both people and orangutangs that is not also present in gorillas and chimps?

Is that a substantial link? If it isn't, what would be?

[Virginia-American]

The Darwinists are every bit as over-zealous, irrational, and intolerant as they accuse the creationists of being.

Examples, please

[oldtimer]

Did he vote a provisional ballot in Cayuaga County Ohio.

The skerry team needs to know asap!

[RichInOC]

Unless he looked like Dan Dierdorf, I'm not buying it.

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
· Google · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology magazine · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·

[<1/1,000,000th%]

2 more missing links.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Darwinism and its fraternal twin, Marxism, are quasi-religions:...

Marxism actually finds it's roots in Christianity. It started with Thomas More's Utopia, and found expression in the Biblical communism of Americans in the 1800's.