Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oldest biped skeleton discovered - new evolution record, 1.2 millions added in one day
http://cooltech.iafrica.com/science/421933.htm ^ | Mon, 07 Mar 2005

Posted on 03/07/2005 3:19:42 PM PST by Truth666

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 581-593 next last
To: metacognative
How do you know I'm a creationist?

How long have you been posting on these threads? I know it's against Creationist tenets to connect the dots (because it might lead to eternal damnation), but us evo types are under no such onus.

181 posted on 03/09/2005 5:40:29 AM PST by Junior (FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
People only become "fools" if there is a superior source of morality and wisdom to compare them too! Since material science cannot countenance morality and wisdom drawn from morality and subjective experience, the charge of "fool" has no business coming from the mouth of an "objective" person such as your-self! As a matter of fact, a truly objective person could make no moral decisions about anything at all!

You're extremely confused.

182 posted on 03/09/2005 6:11:18 AM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: metacognative; Junior; Long Cut; shubi; AntiGuv; Doctor Stochastic; ThisLittleLightofMine; ...
Another Mad as the Hornet!? How do you know I'm a creationist? Are you an evolved Mutant X? Telepathy?

Or maybe he just reads your posts, like this one from yesterday in this same thread:

Oldest biped skeleton discovered - new evolution record, 1.2 millions added in one day
  Posted by metacognative to Ichneumon
On News/Activism 03/08/2005 8:05:35 AM CST · 84 of 181

You fanatical darwinites want to shut off debate and teach children your crazy myth is dogma. And anyone who questions is automatically a 'creationist'. Well, I do believe that this universe was created. And I don't believe it built up without Intelligent Design.
And, one more thing, I don't care whether you're happy about my doubts. So lump it!

My condolences on your tragic case of selective amnesia.

Read my initial quote about dishonesty, confusion and intolerant dogmatists.

Read my posts documenting your shameless slanderous lies (#1, #2). So speaking of "dishonesty, confusion and intolerant dogmatists", check out the mirror.

183 posted on 03/09/2005 6:12:40 AM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Junior
I know it's against Creationist tenets to connect the dots

...or even remember or acknowledge what they have posted the day before on the same thread...

184 posted on 03/09/2005 6:13:22 AM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: reagandemo

Carbon dating does not go beyond about 50,000 years.

Try to know something about science before posting again.


185 posted on 03/09/2005 6:22:46 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Zhangliqun

"Something other than pure apes and pure humans should have evolved in the last 7 million years (or whenever the first modern apes appeared) that would still exist today."

Humans are apes. The Family Hominidae includes all the great apes.

Your statement is so confused, it shows a complete lack of understanding of the biological process of evolution.
Go to Patrick Henry's list of links and study a bit.


186 posted on 03/09/2005 6:25:09 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Do you have scripture that would point to this? Did not God create Adam from the dust of the ground? God created life repeatedly He states this through His Word and Jesus testifies to this in the New Testament.
187 posted on 03/09/2005 6:33:24 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

Your jist trine to estabalish a theocracy lite.


188 posted on 03/09/2005 6:37:01 AM PST by johnb838 ("You Have Ruled, Now Let Us See You Enforce" Need some wood?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Have you ever read The Descent of Man by Charles Darwin?

I agree that there is no conflict between God and science. God never changes but science continue to "evolve".

As for those from AIG misinterpreting the Bible....where is that from and what are the "misreading".
189 posted on 03/09/2005 6:46:28 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

Why are you posting this to me? I am not on your PING list for EVOLUTION....LOL.


190 posted on 03/09/2005 6:48:57 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Humm got up on the wrong side of the bed I see. And you have a very nice day. ;-)
191 posted on 03/09/2005 6:51:02 AM PST by reagandemo (The battle is near are you ready for the sacrifice?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: johnb838

Again I say WHAT???? You obviously have issues....LOL.


192 posted on 03/09/2005 6:54:09 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

Yes I have the Scripture. But it is not simple. Why take the Adam account over Gen 1? Why interpret "adamah" as dust? It might mean molecules.

Taking the Bible literally makes Ch 1 & 2 conflict. This is not a very good impression of God's work, imo.


193 posted on 03/09/2005 6:59:58 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: metacognative
I know what Dennett meant and I stand by my interpretation.

If what you "know" about what he "meant" is accurate, then why can't you provide anything which actually supports your interpretation. Why have you had to resort to fabricating bogus "quotes" so far in order to dishonestly "support" your interpretation?

Clearly, your "knowledge" of Dennett's alleged "hidden meaning" is actually based only on your own bigotry and self-delusions.

I hope this upsets you. Call more names, it hurts so good.

There's nothing quite like the spectacle of a creationist who is *proud* of shocking people with his dishonesty.

If you don't believe creation happened..where did the universe begin and organization start?

Your lame attempt to divert the subject from your own slanderous dishonesty is fooling no one.

194 posted on 03/09/2005 7:00:35 AM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

AIG gets both the theology and science completely wrong. They do this on purpose to extract money from dupes who are ignorant of science. One thing they get wrong is young earth and interpreting "yom" as a 24 hr day. Gen 2:4 insists on indefinite period as the correct translation.

God may not change, but a comparison of the OT and NT would not confirm that if taken literally.


195 posted on 03/09/2005 7:03:07 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: reagandemo

Nope, just trying to fight ignorance. Why post nonsense and then be cheerful about it?


196 posted on 03/09/2005 7:06:03 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: gcampbell
" What other theory would you recommend? Evolutionary science is pretty central to the study modern biology and genetics."

How about "....we don't yet have a workable theory?"

197 posted on 03/09/2005 7:07:25 AM PST by cookcounty (LooneyLibLine: "The ONLY reason for Operation Iraqi FREEDOM was WMD!!" ((repeat til brain is numb))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
If what you "know" about what he "meant" is accurate, then why can't you provide anything which actually supports your interpretation. Why have you had to resort to fabricating bogus "quotes" so far in order to dishonestly "support" your interpretation?

I wonder if Dan Rather is a creationist. He seems to have all the dishonest attributes. Maybe we should think of creationism as "a Dan Rather-style report on Darwin."

198 posted on 03/09/2005 7:08:16 AM PST by PatrickHenry (<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: js1138; ThisLittleLightofMine
We have observed horizontal or descending evolution. Intelligent Design scientists call this, adaptation and destructive mutations or devolution.

It is all about complexity.

I have a running challenge to find me the name of a respected biologist regestered as a supporter of ICR, whose published research does not support evolution.

Your perspective has run amok.

199 posted on 03/09/2005 7:18:28 AM PST by bondserv (Sincerity with God is the most powerful instigator for change! † [Check out my profile page])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Junior

Well, further information is of no use to someone who knows all the answers already...but I'm studying Bergson/Lamarck lines of thought. Although I don't avoid people like Philip Johnson or Duane Gish, as you do.


200 posted on 03/09/2005 7:18:49 AM PST by metacognative (eschew obfuscation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 581-593 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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