I liked your explanation to the darwinists. Wow, these types come out in Force whenever anyone questions their religion don't they. They are as fanatical as the mad mullahs, forcing their illogical, unscientific beliefs down everyone's throats. God help us if they ever get some believable evidence (rather than the phony embryo drawings, totally random RNA results or fake skulls).
I liked your explanation to the darwinists. Most people are embarrased by showing their ignorance in public.
Wow, these types come out in Force whenever anyone questions their religion don't they.
Yes, like those who have the "religion" of physics, the "religion" of chemistry, the "religion" of astronomy, etc.
They are as fanatical as the mad mullahs, forcing their illogical, unscientific beliefs down everyone's throats. God help us if they ever get some believable evidence (rather than the phony embryo drawings, totally random RNA results or fake skulls).
TToE is science. It meets all the criteria and has the support of millions of scientist around the world. Please prove any of the supporting evidence for TToE is fake.
We who understand TToE fight against willful ignorance. Only in America do we dumb ourselves down and then try to pat ourselves on the back for it.
...or fake skulls You still babbling about fake skulls?
I have challenged you before to document your claims, but all I hear is silence. I must conclude you have no evidence to back your claims. But, lets try once more.
Is this skull fake? If so, how?
Fossil: KNM-ER 3733
Site: Koobi Fora (Upper KBS tuff, area 104), Lake Turkana, Kenya (4, 1)
Discovered By: B. Ngeneo, 1975 (1)
Estimated Age of Fossil: 1.75 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, faunal, paleomagnetic & radiometric data (1, 4)
Species Name: Homo ergaster (1, 7, 8), Homo erectus (3, 4, 7), Homo erectus ergaster (25)
Gender: Female (species presumed to be sexually dimorphic) (1, 8)
Cranial Capacity: 850 cc (1, 3, 4)
Information: Tools found in same layer (8, 9). Found with KNM-ER 406 A. boisei (effectively eliminating single species hypothesis) (1)
Interpretation: Adult (based on cranial sutures, molar eruption and dental wear) (1)
See original source for notes:
Source: http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=33