1.4 Million-year-old Fossil Human Bone Closes Evolution Gap </div>

Scientific Computing ^ | 12/16/2013 - 5:36pm | University of Missouri-Columbia

[CatherineofAragon]

It’s a massive, huge, monumental hoax. And all you are giving me is the usual hype as to why it just HAS to be true. (I guess that’s fine, because I don’t have the time to get sucked deeper into a crevo thread. I know how they go, and I’m trying to do stuff around here).

For millennia, the fact that God created us and everything around us was accepted as fact (as it should be). Then Darwin came along, and the secular world started jumping for joy that FINALLY they had an explanation that didn’t involve God. And you want ME to prove MY point? Ridiculous.

But after all this time, and all the desperate struggle to finally prove evolution-—complete with fake fossil hoaxes-—it still hasn’t been done. But oh, it’s monumental! It’s massive! It’s hugh and series!

You say it’s hard. Well, only if you’re twisting yourself into pretzels, trying to shoehorn God’s miraculous creation into an atheistic theory. That’s why evolution is not, and never will be, proven. You’re butting your head against a stone wall.

Seeing the hand of God all around you, and in your breathtakingly complex body, is a simple, beautiful, eminently sensible thing.

[Fuzz]

“For millennia, the fact that God created us and everything around us was accepted as fact (as it should be).”

And you rejected my center of the universe, flat earth analogy? Outrage! ;)

[CatherineofAragon]

Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh...which proves what?

Evolution and creationism are mutually exclusive. Evolution says that man is a recent arrival on the scene; countless millions of years were filled with bloodshed and death before he showed up.

On the other hand, the Bible teaches that suffering and death were introduced into humanity AFTER man’s fall. Also, Jesus Christ said that man was created “at the beginning.”

I’ll take the Lord’s word over Ann’s or Rush’s.

[CatherineofAragon]

I know, you had a bad experience with religion. I hope you rethink that someday.

[central_va]

I got your bone right here....

[Fuzz]

Thanks. Condescension always works. Bless your heart.

[CatherineofAragon]

That wasn’t condescension. I was sincere. Sorry you took it that way.

[Fuzz]

It could be both sincere and condescending. I only feel comfortable commenting on the latter.

[Matchett-PI]

"which proves what?"

Proves exactly what was said in their own words, instead of second & third-hand reports of what was said, that's all.

[CatherineofAragon]

Okay, thanks.

[PapaNew]

Yup, well you’ll have to argue with the Designer about that. (Possible the original design didn’t need a dump - it came after the owner (not Designer) screwed up.)

[Matchett-PI]

"Evolution and creationism are mutually exclusive"

For the second time, I'll as you which theory of evolution are you talking about?

[Fuzz]

But Adam and Eve ate before they screwed up their relationship with god, otherwise they wouldn’t have eaten the apple in the first place. Where’d it go?

[PapaNew]

Your Darwinist theory doesn’t stand up in the forum of ideas (or in court - it would soon be thrown out for lack of evidence) because 1) the sheer tonnage of evidence for intelligent design and 2) the sheer lack of evidence for transference between animal groups, absolutely essential for Darwinist evolution.

[PapaNew]

Purpose evident in intelligent design is not disproved by your conclusion that the Designer is “cruel” because of your interpretation of certain circumstances.

[whattajoke]

Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. Okay.

Neither of them said anything (in those quotes anyway) that goes against anything the theory of evolution says.

I do enjoy that they riled out the YEC though.

[Matchett-PI]

"ID is an idea much, much older than evolution and the scientific method.."

Yes. There's a big diffference between "intelligent design", and "Intelligent Design"

[Matchett-PI]

Me too! :)

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

Contrast that with the common sense and overwhelming evidence of intelligent design.

I loved this sentence from a recent article, discussed elsewhere, supporting intelligent design: "There is no general agreement among advocates of intelligent design as to exactly where, when, or how design was manifested in the history of life." You'd think that with such overwhelming evidence, there'd be some modicum of agreement on those things. And people wonder why ID isn't taken seriously as a scientific theory!

[whattajoke]

I'm disappointed in you.

It’s a massive, huge, monumental hoax.

LOL. I made the joke to Fuzz that you would say that and you actually did. LOL.

I don’t have the time to get sucked deeper into a crevo thread

Me neither. But I thought it was important enough to pursue. That's why I merely asked that you provide me the "simple" links to the scientists "leaving evolution" you assured me exist and then tried to simplify our discussion as much as possible by asking you to pick any single one part of your body (or whatever) that gives you the most evolutionary trouble. All you have to do is type one word, really, as long as it's specific.

For millennia, the fact that God created us and everything around us was accepted as fact

I've come to realize, unfortunately, that you don't really go back further than 6 or 10 of them. Which really derails any serious discussion of anything having to do with biology, chemistry, astronomy, geology, paleontology, etc.

Also, For many millennia before the time of those who wrote the bible, it was also a fact that [insert deity here] created "us and everything around us." What an absurd line of thinking. Are you going to tell me that the natural sciences were all wrapped up when the bible was written? By illiterate shepherds?

You're on a device of some sort typing at me. That was created by scientists through many incremental advances over the last 200 years or so. Please cite the bible verse that explains the Internet.

Then Darwin came along,

Surely you realize Darwin was hardly alone and in fact wasn't the first to formulate the basis of what became the theory of evolution. Are you under the impression that Darwin's writings were the end of the work on the theory? That is certainly not the case.

complete with fake fossil hoaxes-

Ah yes. All 5 of them out of the tens of thousands. Ask yourself, who proved they were hoaxes? Creationists… or scientists? I'll help: Science proved them fake.

n atheistic theory.

Inasmuch as the Theory of gravity is atheist. Or the germ theory. You are correct, scientific theories have no room for the supernatural by definition. Doesn't really make them "atheistic" at all, but whatever.

That’s why evolution is not, and never will be, proven.

you've heard this before but, scientific theories are never proven by definition.

Seeing the hand of God all around you, and in your breathtakingly complex body, is a simple, beautiful, eminently sensible thing.

Aha! Finally, we get down to it! Another one arguing from incredulity! Congratulations. The thing is, evolution created all of that which you find so beautiful. And it IS beautiful and complex and incredible. Which is why evolution is so incredible.

So, getting back to the exercise which you are strangely avoiding for some reason, Look at your complex and wonderful body. Pick something complex and wonderful. Type it to me. Why is that so hard?