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.
If those frauds or error were exposed quickly then there wouldn't been any problem .. but what makes me worried is that it took so many years before it did .
There were entire generations that graduated carrying some wrong concepts .
Some fabricated fossils endorsed by scientists for so many years and were taught at college and presented into museums all over the world !!!
Again they took so many years before they were exposed.
So I've come to a certain philosophy ....
Anything real and truthful doesn't need falsify evidence to prove it ... right ?
But if that happen then it tells you immediately that there is something wrong here !!
Or at least we have to be careful before accept anything as a fact .
The solution "from my humble point of view" is to bring everything to logic ...a simple logic that doesn't require a scientist to apply .
The truth is always simple .
I do not deny the theory of evolution ,in fact it does describes and explains a very important aspects of diversity of modern species ,history and nature of life on Earth in the most simple & wonderful way .
I said that before and will repeat it again and again ...
but I have some reservations about some of those aspect .
I think I have the right to my opinion .
It's a great thing that you question science, because that's the very spirit of science. You should always ask questions and verify things for yourself. Science is not about dogmas. It's about theories and conclusions which are tentative. There are also lots of errors in science (as you correctly point out), especially when something is very new and cutting-edge.
Also, science does not have any real "authorities." Sure, there are certain personalities like Newton, Darwin and Einstein who are admired because of the transformational nature of their discoveries. However, even their theories are put to the test, modified and fine-tuned.
On t.v. last night they had a show called "The History of the world in two hours." In it they confidently assert that all life began as a one celled amoeba. Then these amoebas got together and figured they wanted to be dual celled amoebas and so one. The "scientists" then stated that these amoebas got together and became fish. They said "our ancestor the fish" telling us that humans are directly from fish. I'm not making this up. Then these fish, as least some of these fish I guess didn't like the ocean and so they somehow (the didn't tell us how) sprouted legs and arms and crawled out of the ocean. Then these "scientists" told us these fish, which came on land became chimps and they said "our ancestors the chimps" thus telling us we, humans, came from chimps. Then they talked all about how grasslands all of a sudden came on the earth and the chimps, while walking on all fours could not see above the grasses so they learned to walk on two legs so they could see above the tall grasses. Somehow (they don't tell us how) these chimps wanted to grow bigger so they could REALLY see above the grasses so they became apes and the scientists then said on the show "our ancestor the ape . . ." thus telling us that all humans come from apes. Here is a handy dandy chart detailing this:
Here's another:
Notice how the picture tells a thousand words. It looks part human part ape as if we somehow metamorphised from apes.
So the myth is thus: amoeba to fish to chimp to ape to human. I purposely left out all the in-between steps. The chart above does that for you. If this is at all sensible to you, that we really come from a fish, may I suggest . . . well, I'm not allowed to say what I think or this post might get deleted.
What I find interesting is that these scientists cannot, by their own science PROVE these bald assertions that we evolved from an amoeba to a fish to a chimp to an ape to a human. No, not even a teeny bit of scientific evidence. Yet the evolutionists castigate the Christian for believing in God creating mankind as a mature man and mature woman. It is true Christians cannot PROVE God did this anymore than evolutionists can PROVE we came from an amoeba. I just wish they would quit denouncing us for believing the way we do when after all they are just as guilty as believing in something unprovable.
Typically, you persist in making gross over-exaggerated leaps that simply do not exist. You could have watched the "Wat Darwin Never Knew" video which I'll assume you will refuse to watch.
But it all can't be explained in a mere two hours either. That does not make you and instant expert that a true Evolutionary biologsit, with perhaps 4 or 5 years of intense genetics & research under his or her belt, .
If you were to watch that video, with at least a partially open mind, you'd perhaps come away with a slightly improved and new perspective, assuming that if you are capable of being at least a little open-minded. But as usual, you simply provide us with an ancient graphic from the late 1800s as PROOF of what we think now. And as is typical for your usual grossly oversimplified, and thus seemingly improbable concepts, here is, again, one of your usual absolute statements:
"Then these amoebas got together and figured they wanted to be dual celled amoebas and so on. The "scientists" then stated that these amoebas got together and became fish. They said "our ancestor the fish" telling us that humans are directly from fish."
Yup: through a very long process, one that is fully supported by the fossil and remnant and living records, show the inevitable and step-wise progress of some hind & fore-limbs, the existence of typical and identical bone-numbers and relative positions, and that we did that we did thus emerge from early aquatic organisms. But NEVER did a fish give birth to a human overnight after first "deciding" to do it!
If we default to your Insta-Poofy silliness, oddlythat idea cannot predict what we actually do find out in both the fossil and the DNA records, while our logical version (Hoo-rray for logic,) does exactly that.
And yet again, you're left with ancient egg on your face. De-javu, all over again!
What unmitigated trash-headed drivel you produce! Absent even a scintilla of any rational thought or compelling ideas!
Frankly, this dumpster-diving anecdotal stuff is not even worth comment,, other than it continues to clearly show us all your grossly deficient level of comprehension, plus what it is you clearly need to portray about science and Evolutionary facts. What, did your matronly science teacher slap you in front of everyone, and permanently scar your fragile psyche, Eusebius?
Typically, you persist in making gross over-exaggerated leaps that simply do not exist. You could have watched the "Wat Darwin Never Knew" video which I'll assume you will refuse to watch.
But it all can't be explained in a mere two hours either. That does not make you and instant expert that a true Evolutionary biologsit, with perhaps 4 or 5 years of intense genetics & research under his or her belt, .
If you were to watch that video, with at least a partially open mind, you'd perhaps come away with a slightly improved and new perspective, assuming that if you are capable of being at least a little open-minded. But as usual, you simply provide us with an ancient graphic from the late 1800s as PROOF of what we think now. And as is typical for your usual grossly oversimplified, and thus seemingly improbable concepts, here is, again, one of your usual absolute statements:
"Then these amoebas got together and figured they wanted to be dual celled amoebas and so on. The "scientists" then stated that these amoebas got together and became fish. They said "our ancestor the fish" telling us that humans are directly from fish."
Yup: through a very long process, one that is fully supported by the fossil and remnant and living records, show the inevitable and step-wise progress of some hind & fore-limbs, the existence of typical and identical bone-numbers and relative positions, and that we did that we did thus emerge from early aquatic organisms. But NEVER did a fish give birth to a human overnight after first "deciding" to do it!
If we default to your Insta-Poofy silliness, oddlythat idea cannot predict what we actually do find out in both the fossil and the DNA records, while our logical version (Hoo-rray for logic,) does exactly that.
And yet again, you're left with ancient egg on your face. De-javu, all over again!
What unmitigated trash-headed drivel you produce! Absent even a scintilla of any rational thought or compelling ideas!
Frankly, this dumpster-diving anecdotal stuff is not even worth comment,, other than it continues to clearly show us all your grossly deficient level of comprehension, plus what it is you clearly need to portray about science and Evolutionary facts. What, did your matronly science teacher slap you in front of everyone, and permanently scar your fragile psyche, Eusebius?
rifleman, I didn't exaggerate anything. I was merely relating what the so-called evolutionist scientists were stating. If you have a problem, I suggest you take it up with your own evolutionists who represent your evolution.
You say this:
Quote:
Yup: through a very long process, one that is fully supported by the fossil and remnant and living records, show the inevitable and step-wise progress of some hind & fore-limbs, the existence of typical and identical bone-numbers and relative positions, and that we did that we did thus emerge from early aquatic organisms. But NEVER did a fish give birth to a human overnight after first "deciding" to do it!
I never said a fish did give birth to a human. I said they became chimps. Of course there are, according to your unproven myth, more steps in between the fish to chimp stage. I just didn't feel the need to give you the whole two hour step by step breakdown. That is why I posted the chart. Remember, it is by YOUR evolutionist scientists. I did not misrepresent their views. If you think I am wrong then you must think your own evolutionists are wrong.
rifleman, you do not have any fossil records that chimps ultimately come from fish any more than you have fossil records that humans come from apes.
P.S. I don't have a "fragile psyche." It is rock solid, thank you.
Frankly, this dumpster-diving anecdotal stuff is not even worth comment,, other than it continues to clearly show us all your grossly deficient level of comprehension, plus what it is you clearly need to portray about science and Evolutionary facts. What, did your matronly science teacher slap you in front of everyone, and permanently scar your fragile psyche, Eusebius?
Exactly why I made no comment...I have been told that feeding trolls is not a good thing....By the way, the exif data of the illustration esibus posted reveals this... http://chuck.severnchristian.org/ima..._evolution.jpg
Exactly why I made no comment...I have been told that feeding trolls is not a good thing....By the way, the exif data of the illustration esibus posted reveals this... http://chuck.severnchristian.org/ima..._evolution.jpg
Here is the site the photo was lifted from... CEMEW Home Page
Of course. The way Eusebius works is to grossly misrepresent evolution theory and then tell us to go argue with the evolutionists.
He ignores all the evidence and picks on what we cannot show evidence for (read 'prove') and then pretends that this eliminated ALL the evidence and evolution has no more going for it than God - belief.
We have seen how it's been tough overcoming Lionheart's evident prejudice against the very idea of Evolution, but he does listen. Credit to him, he does listen. Eusebius takes denial to a whole new level.
BTW, all 4-legged animals come from fish. The PBS video I posted shows how.
Showing a bunch of ape skulls does not a human make. You can show a million different ape skulls but it does not undeniably PROVE humans come from apes.
I am still waiting for your undeniable PROOF humans come from fish. Please, it must be undeniable proof or don't waste my time or intelligence.
Of course. The way Eusebius works is to grossly misrepresent evolution theory and then tell us to go argue with the evolutionists.
I didn't grossly misrepresent your evolutionary theory/myth. I was merely re-stating what your own evolutionary scientists were stating where humans came from They started out with the single celled amoeba to the dual and so on. Then they finally got to the fish, then to land animals then to chimps then to apes then to humans. I can't help it you don't believe your own scientists. LOL!
By the way, it was your evolutionist scientists in that show that said that when the grasses came on the earth the chimpanzees could not see above the tall grasses and so they began to walk on their hind legs and from this they evolved. I'm not making this stuff up. They said it, not me. I'd be embarrassed to be associated with them if I were you. Not a shred of evidence to support their claims but yet they said this stuff as if it were scientific FACT. Then they made the jump to apes and from apes to humans. They know no shame.
Showing a bunch of ape skulls does not a human make. You can show a million different ape skulls but it does not undeniably PROVE humans come from apes.
I am still waiting for your undeniable PROOF humans come from fish. Please, it must be undeniable proof or don't waste my time or intelligence.
Actually you are correct in saying that humans did not come from apes....Humans ARE apes.
Actually you are correct in saying that humans did not come from apes....Humans ARE apes.
Speak for yourself!
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.
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.
