Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But, if you wish to believe that Lucy and Ricky Ricardo were the real Adam and Eve, so be it. But if you think that, you got some 'splainin' to do.
Lucy of TV fame was not put in Quotes. And of course Australopithecus was not the first Woman (in the sense of female Hominid Ape, but even earlier ones have been found, nor, I believe was she the Nitrochondrial Eve (explosive debating subject) of the evolutionary bottleneck. Which would have been Homo Habilis, perhaps? Ukrkoz was of course merely turning the signpost in the right direction - evolution, not Genesis.
Lucy of TV fame was not put in Quotes. And of course Australopithecus was not the first Woman (in the sense of female Hominid Ape, but even earlier ones have been found, nor, I believe was she the Nitrochondrial Eve (explosive debating subject) of the evolutionary bottleneck. Which would have been Homo Habilis, perhaps? Ukrkoz was of course merely turning the signpost in the right direction - evolution, not Genesis.
No, I was steering the post in currently starting to prevail direction.
Posthumanity.
Mind entering into digital media, becoming practically immortal.
But thank you, Master T.
There is no evolution. It's silly fairy tale for small children. There is development, that there is. But not evolution, as it's generally presented to the crowd.
Please, please, please, let's not hijack thread into evolution discussion. I just returned from 2 week vacation. Don't want to go on one again.
No, I was steering the post in currently starting to prevail direction.
Posthumanity.
Mind entering into digital media, becoming practically immortal.
But thank you, Master T.
There is no evolution. It's silly fairy tale for small children. There is development, that there is. But not evolution, as it's generally presented to the crowd.
Please, please, please, let's not hijack thread into evolution discussion. I just returned from 2 week vacation. Don't want to go on one again.
I know how you feel, but unfortunately the thread topic is suggesting that Mitochondrial Eve validates Genesis and not evolution, so without closing the thread, we can't avoid discussing evolution. But you can solve the problem by departing this thread and taking your evolution -denialist views with you.
Why is this news? We obviously had to have a "prototype" back there somewhere to descend from. Peace
It isn't news (as I'm sure you are aware) but an ongoing debate, and it is (as I'm sure you know) between Evolution and Genssis - literalism. and trotting out Mitochondrial eve as proof of genssis is simply the regular re -presentation of the same old debunked arguments that we find with evolution -denial, as though just saying the same lie again and again will somehow make it true. And I'm sure you don't know the answer to why they do that and neither do I, but I know they keep doing it.
As i understand it, rather more a genetic group. There is also a trace back to a particular male origin but in a different place. research is still going on, so leapongh on this as proving the Eden scenario is premature, never mind anything to do with it at all.
If one understands the Hebrew Torah then it will tell you that Gan Eden was in Ethiopia and not a sollte is...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.