Lice offer clues to origin of clothing

USA TODAY ^ | 8/18/2003 | Tim Friend

[demlosers]

Human body lice appear to owe their origin to the invention of clothing, and the types that reside on our bodies appear to have hitchhiked along as modern humans migrated out of Africa about 100,000 years ago.

Mark Stoneking and colleagues at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, made the connection between the origin of clothing and the rise of human body lice by checking so-called molecular clocks found in the cells of all living creatures.

[DittoJed2]

LOL! You were in the Army for 18 months in Turkey so that makes you an expert on the origin of religions? I'm sure the libraries in Turkey are just full of works sympathetic to Christianity. LOL! PS- sir, I have a Masters degree in History and a Masters degree in Theology and have studied them as well.

[ThinkPlease]

quotes snipped

Might I ask where you got those quotes from? I would like to determine the context of each quotation by each individual. Context is important, don't you think? The lack of references listed in your quotations is disturbing, after all, it's hard for me to determine where those quotations came from with out a reference. They could have been made up out of nothing, for all I know...

[DittoJed2]

Oh, I would LOVE to see you trying to pick apart William Lane Craig. This should be amusing!

William Lane Craig is Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, California. He lives in Atlanta, Georgia, with his wife Jan and their two teenage children Charity and John. At the age of sixteen as a junior in high school, he first heard the message of the Christian gospel and yielded his life to Christ. Dr. Craig pursued his undergraduate studies at Wheaton College (B.A. 1971) and graduate studies at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (M.A. 1974; M.A. 1975), the University of Birmingham (England) (Ph.D. 1977), and the University of Munich (Germany) (D.Theol. 1984). From 1980-86 he taught Philosophy of Religion at Trinity, during which time he and Jan started their family. In 1987 they moved to Brussels, Belgium, where Dr. Craig pursued research at the University of Louvain until 1994.

Note, Trinity Evangelical Divinity is not a conservative . It's the same school Al Gore went to.

[DittoJed2]

Check the internet. They are all out there with the references.

[Right Wing Professor]

She's since converted to Catholicism, but we still attend Mass on Saturdays because she's convinced me that that is the Sabbath prescribed in the Bible.

That Saturday evening mass change was useful in more than one way, then.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Why did the Jewish people NOT accept Jesus as the Jewish Messiah? I have some ideas, but from what I understand, the Jewish Messiah, and the Christian Messiah are 2 different things.

Way off topic on this thread, and likely to get contentious, but I'll try a quick answer.

In Hebrew, the word mashiach, transliterated in English as "Messiah," means literally "he who has been annointed." In the pre-exilic books of the Bible (e.g., Samuel, Kings, etc.), the word is just a synonym for 'the king,' and has no supernatural connotations. At the time of the Babylonian Exile (586 BCE), the dynasty founded by King David, which had ruled Judea for centuries, was swept away; the Jews longed for a restoration to their homeland (which came 70 years later under the Persians), and a restoration of the Davidic monarchy (which the Persians did not allow). "The Messiah" then came to be seen as "the Return of the King"-- a legitimate heir to the Throne of David who would free the Jews from their subjugation to foreign rulers.

In Rabbinic theology, the coming of the Messiah took on more miraculous features-- the Messiah would gather all the Jews from around the world, end war, etc.-- but the Jewish idea of the Messiah remained essentially a political concept.

You can read more here (an Orthodox Jewish perspective).

[ThinkPlease]

Check the internet. They are all out there with the references.

Excuse me? You're the one making the wacky claim about what SJ Gould said and didn't say. Did you tell the members of your Masters Thesis committee the same thing when you handed in your thesis without any references inside?

[whattajoke]

I can't believe you actually posted that list of quotes. I've ignored all your nazi and bible nonsense, but I can't ignore you posting ridiculously out-of-context, essential lies.

There are also plenty of websites clueing [edited for the sake of the agreement] like you in on the origins and context of those quotes you never even bothered to read yourself.

Will you be shocked or shamed once you learn that none of those quotes mean what you wish they meant.

Of course not.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Regarding your post. Hitler was in NO WAY a Christian. He utterly rejected his Catholic upbringing and HATED Christianity in every way. Christianity was responsible for bringing down the "Blonde Beast" he so wanted to resurrect.

He hated the teaching of Jesus such as "the meek shall inherit the earth" NOTHING could be further from what Hitler believed.

There is no evidence Hitler ever set foot in a church (for anything but funerals, weddings of others) after he was a young man. He was an Occultist through and through. He worshipped POWER.

[Right Wing Professor]

I would drop it too if I were you.

A few notes for you personally, my little troll. First of all, brandishing your alleged MS degree doesn't impress me in the least; I teach at a university. I've spent considerable time in the last 30 years studying Naziism and the Holocaust; I've visited death and concentration camps and the Prague Jewish museum; I've read everything from Shirer to Goldhagen; I've lived in Germany. I know that no reputable scholar would make the connection you're making. I'm dropping this out of respect for others; not out of fear of your 'credentials'. If you doubt this, start a separate thread in the backroom on the origins of National Socialism, and we can go into detail about the relative contributions of different 'philosophies' to the history of 1933-1945 Germany.

[Dimensio]

It has no basis for moral teaching other than preference.

Nor does gravitational theory. You are insisting that it is either nihilistic evolution or Biblical creationism, but that's a false dichotomy. You are so stuck in your false dilemma that you refuse to admit that evolution does not rule out the existence of a god as a moral lawgiver.

Evolution makes no claims as to the existence of a moral lawgiver. That it doesn't correspond exactly to you preferred creation myth doesn't matter -- your creation story isn't the only one out there, and it's not the foundation for everyone's moral beliefs.

[DittoJed2]

I have no clue what your point is since I already said several things contributed to Hitler's philosophy. Your "trolling" comments are hilarious.

[DittoJed2]

Evolution is making claims that supposedly explain life as we know it. The evolutionary hypothesis therefore is a bit different than the law of gravity.

[DittoJed2]

Your the one asking for the sources. I actually got the quotes from several sources. If you copy a portion of a particular quote and do a google search, you will probably find the source.

Incidentally, this is not a Masters Thesis and your are not a member of the Masters Thesis board. I do not recall where the rules of Free Republic insist that all postings conform to Turabian's manual of style.

[DittoJed2]

Please explain where I posted something out of context? Proof please.

The context that I posted them in is that they were quotes by actual evolutionists who remain evolutionists in spite of what their quote said. I did not say that these folks were on the verge of dumping the evolutionary hypothesis at or even close.

Good grief, never realized the truth would hurt evolutionists so bad.

[BMCDA]

I think you can start here ;)
http://www.layevangelism.com/bastxbk/sections/sect-7/sec7-5-15.htm

[Right Wing Professor]

Your declining my challenge to discuss the issue on a separate backroom thread, and your continued posting of irrelevant material to the present thread, is noted. It is clear your intent here is to disrupt discussion of scientific material relative to evolution. Other posters should act accordingly.

[DittoJed2]

Give me a break! It absolutely amazes me how you all have the audacity to tell other posters what to do and when they don't do it you start hurling baseless allegations. Nobody is stopping anyone from discussing the "scientific support for evolution found in lice." Furthermore, your pathetic attempts to silence me or stop my influence on the main portion of Free Republic will not work for I am not intimidated by your tactics and frankly wasn't posting for you in the first place. I said what I said and backed it up. In response, I've received the same old same old name calling, bullying, and sheer unadulterated arrogance from a small group of evolutionists. I posted in response to posts to me. You all engaged me. I did not engage you on this thread, now you are crying foul. Well B-O-O-H-O-O. So sorry that you can not deal with the legitimate topic of the philosophical implications of Evolution.

[Dimensio]

Evolution is merely an attempt to explain the current diversity of life on earth based upon observed evidence. You have still not shown how evolution makes any claims regarding the existence of lack thereof of a moral law giver.

[PatrickHenry]

PatrickHenry remains aloof!