Posted on 06/02/2005 2:06:01 PM PDT by dread78645
Excuse me, but isn't it a proven medical fact that men have one fewer rib bones than a woman?
You're kidding, I hope?
Not a failure at all, friend. Let me ask you this: if you were in a car accident and lost a leg, and then had children, would all of your children be born without a leg? Then why does one infer that all men after Adam would have one less rib? Use a little logic...it goes a long, long way.
Not that men really have to have one less rib, no. But think if they did, what a wonderful "confirmation" it would be. I mean, men don't have more and some people claim it anyway.
Ah, VR, I'm glad you are here.
i have a question that will make the creationists yelp for joy, but I think it needs some attention.
The area of human evolution is an area I know only rudimentary things about. There is much empahsis on braincase size on both sides.
1. I take it that it is not only the brain case size (volume) that is used to show lineage, but also what parts of the braincase are increasing?.
2. i ask this because of the common observation like this one: My neighbor on one side has a St. Bernard - really big and really stupid. My neighbor on the other side has a chihuahua, small yappy, but quite "smart". Considering the anatomy of a dog (all the same muscles, bones, etc. for both large and small dosg - is there increased nervous tissue in a large dog?), it seems that a chihuahua's brain would be capable of operating a St. Bernard. What's all that extra brain material doing in the St.Bernard? I think it's sawdust, my neighbor won't let me do an autopsy on that St. Bernard while he's still alive.
I would like to replace my "Warning bad Dog" sign with "Warning bad T-Rex"
Let the Japanese do the cloning.
They will ultra-miniaturize & "bonsai" them (down to, say 100-150 pounds, with bug eyes and a puggish snout) for the pet trade.
Intelligence and brain size only correlate roughly. Dante's brain capacity was on the small size. (OTOH, I'm reading Divina Commedia in English and not finding it all that hot.) While Neanderthals had bigger overall brains than Cro-magnon Man, the regions enlarged were somewhat different. Whales and elephants have big brains, too. They're pretty smart in absolute terms but not particularly in proportion to brain size.
68 million year old "soft tissue"....frankly anyone that believes that I'd put them in the Flat Earth Society group.
Not again!! This theory is never going to fly.
Wouldn't be the claim of most Creationists who know their science. Frankly, the whole idea of 'confirmation' is a bit humorous. What confirmation more does one need than one's faith? Your belief system dictates what you do with the evidence before you--what presuppositions you bring to the table and how you then interpret the same set of evidence. Evolutionists come with their own theory and belief system and it dictates the way they approach science in the same way that Creationists approach science using a different standard.
Day 5.
It's important in science.
Evolutionists come with their own theory and belief system and it dictates the way they approach science in the same way that Creationists approach science using a different standard.
Real science adjusts theories and expectations to fit observation. At times, creationists claim it does not do this, but of course it does. In fact, when it does, creationists cackle and whoop over how "Science has changed its story AGAIN." There's a site IIRC called Creation-Evolution Headlines which does little other than search out every controversy, unexpected result, sour note, or new question uncovered and trumpet it as proof that science is all a house of cards ready to tumble.
Creationism simply throws out all the observations it thinks of as challenging Holy Writ. Thus far, that list includes biology ("Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" -- Theodosius Dobzhansky), geology (supports old Earth, no one global flood), paleontology (supports evolution and an old Earth), nuclear chemistry (supports radiometric dating), astronomy (supports an old universe), etc. Oddly enough, most of the people who buy this worldview will also say, "I love science! I just don't believe in evolution."
No; Day Zero.
An unknowable length of time before Day 1, which came after the end of the First Age.
World which was; Second Age, World which is; Third Age, World which shall be. Yet Earth abides.
Capitalized as if it were a title because it is. Also a statement already true in 1973 and far more so now.
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.