Posted on 12/21/2005 6:22:46 AM PST by truthfinder9
One of biggest paradigm shifts in origins in recent years is when genetics and morphological studies began to show that Neanderthals and humans weren’t related. Sure, a lot of Darwin Fundies around here don’t know that because they get all of their science from the talking point lists of their Fundamentalist Leaders. So this is probably a big shock too, science is also showing that man is not related to any hominids including apes.
In the groundbreaking book, Who was Adam?, biochemist Fazale Rana examines the scientific research that is overturning Darwinian Fundamentalism. Here, using peer-reviewed research that the Darwin Fundies claim doesn’t exist, Rana shows man is unique and designed.
And he details the latest findings on the fossil record, junk DNA, Neanderthals, human and chimp genetics. There's more science here than most Darwin Fundies have ever read, but this will be the next great paradigm shift.
“The parallels between Genesis and the latest scientific data are profound...” - John A. Bloom, Ph.D., professor of physics, Biola University
On Rana’s previous book, Origins of Life:
“Evolution has just been dealt its deathblow. After reading Origins of Life, it is clear that evolution could not have occurred.” - Richard Smalley, Nobel Laureate, Chemistry, 1996, professor of physics and astronomy, Rice University
Real science by real scientists. According to Darwin Fundies this doesn't exist, but here it is.
With regard to science, yes.... Life in general, on the other hand, is another question.
>>>Then you're not listening. Speciation -- a basic concept of the theory of evolution --- explains how one population splits in two, with one branch evolving in one direction (in this case into humans) and the other in another (in this case into chimpanzees and bonobos). You should do a little reading about speciation before you come on this thread and tell us that scientists have given you no answers.>>>
Scientists have given no answers as to the aspect of HUMANS. Why do HUMANS and no other creature CONTINUE to grow intellectually, while other species remain just as primitive as they were 1,000,000 years ago? Maybe they change physically to adapt to their environment, but humans continue to expand.
>>>You are assuming that man is the "end goal" of evolution. Two genera (ex: australopithicus, pan) no matter how closely related would never end up evolving in to the same descendant species.>>>
I am not. I assuming that man is the only species that continues to grow intellectually, while other species remain primitive.
a bare planet...
Hardly an apt description of the cooling earth, churning with all kinds of complex molecules, bubbling with volcanic activity, rained on by fires and meteors from the sky.
It was a very busy place.
There are a lot of things Genesis doesn't say, but that doesn't stop people from trying to use it as a science book.
By the way, if you don't know the age of the earth, you are rejecting physics as well as biology.
How am I rejecting anything by saying "I don't know"? Even real scientists often don't agree on things so what's the big deal?
If your mispelling was intentional, I applaud your subtle genius. If not, it's still funny.
Two answers that are mutually exclusive:
A purely scientific view may be that the ability to intellectually expand is an emergent property from evolution. At a certain point, a species evolves the ability to intellectually expand. We are the only species on this planet to have evolved that capability.
Alternately (and non-scientfically) the ability to intellectually grow is the gift that God gave man and was the specific act created us in His image. Evolution is how we took our physical form. The gift of intellect is our creation.
Today's Lesson: IRONY
and Darwin is not a religious figure.
Touche on that bit of sarcasm.
Wolf
That is a statement of faith, not science.
I don't agree. You should always be able to provide a rational explanation for "why". If you can't it suggests you are arguing dogma.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
I'd just as soon rely on appeal to authority on that one. Even if there were scientific evidence against it, I wouldn't want to live any other way. If that's dogma, so be it.
Many people are related to their cousins, but not descended from them. Further back in time there was a common ancestor to be "descended" from, but two creatures can be related without one being descended from the other.
Well, the answer is that it's more complicated than that. Human brains are big, but they haven't gotten any bigger in a long time, because if they were bigger, infants' skulls couldn't fit through a woman's pelvis. And women can't have significantly larger pelvises and still be able to walk bipedally. Now that may no longer be the case given the widespread availability of caeasarian sections, but we'll see.
Having a large brain is always a trade-off -- with only a limited amount of body mass available, you have to allocate a certain percentage to the digestive system, to muscle mass, etc. These percentages go up and down in response to selective pressures.
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.