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

To: Thatcherite

As far as im conserned they could all be apes. we really dont know for sure now do we?


135 posted on 04/14/2005 1:40:12 AM PDT by Echo Talon (http://echotalon.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]


To: Echo Talon
As far as im conserned they could all be apes. we really dont know for sure now do we?

If ToE is not true we ought to be able to easily tell for sure. After all we can do it for all modern skulls. Why can't you (or to be more fair, a evolution-rejecting scientist skilled in the art, like the scientists in the article) tell? There's no such thing as an intermediate, right? Every modern skull we look at, we can tell if its human or not-human. Why can't we reliably do that for fossils? The fossil record overwhelmingly indicates gradual change over time, right back to the smallest and oldest fossils we can find from hundreds of millions of years ago.

138 posted on 04/14/2005 1:48:51 AM PDT by Thatcherite (Conservative and Biblical Literalist are not synonymous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]

To: Echo Talon

The point is, that according to creationism there is a wide gap between humans and apes. According to creationism, if I show you a creature, it should be no problem for you to tell me if it's an ape or a human. The point is that CREATIONISTS disagree as to whether these creatures are apes or humans, thus falsifying the idea that there should be no problem distinguishing apes from humans.


192 posted on 04/14/2005 6:31:30 AM PDT by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]

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