Evolution is a Big Lie

[Iti oj]

Okay, so once again that's a refusal to answer the question, and you totally ignored what I posted with the 15 million year old monkey skull causing the ancestry dates to come into doubt. Thank you very much.

I did not see that. can you relink it? and i have repetitively answered your question but it has not been good enough for you. well guess what its good enough for the majority of scientist. their is plenty of evidence and im already at 7 million years ago. fine 25 million years ago we split of from our old world monkey ancestor so we havbe had 25 million years to lose a tail and for a feww to change. this is not my opinion but scientific fact found in the fossil record as well as biological and genetic evidence.

edit these are very conservitive dates btw many one double them

 

[Shermana]

No, you didn't answer the question at all. All you did was repeat the standard model of how long they think one species passed to the next, without even bothering to discuss the why part. I reposted the link, it should be on the last page. I'm not asking for how long the concensus of scientists think it took to get from one species to another. Do you even understand the complexity of the transition to arched feet?

PW says it would take 2 million years to develop arched feet, she at least bothered to answer the question, though this would be extremely lightning fast for such a transition with all the specific muscles and bones. I'd like to know why she thinks Apes lost their tails too.

Did you even read the link I posted or what I quoted from the article on the study of Bipedalism which you initially said backed your claim? They have no clue! There is extreme disagreement on the very basics.

 

[painted wolf]

OLDEST MONKEY SKULL

Also posted on last page.

What is the point you are trying to make with this article?

So does anyone want to actually answer the question of how long it would take to develop the highly complex arched foot and lose the tail?

Edit: THank you for the respectful reply PW, I'll look into that, there's disagreement on what exactly Lucy's findings suggest. There's the question of why apes lost their tails to begin with.

You're welcome.

I'm not talking about Lucy... There are dozens of individuals of Australopithecus in several species. The most recently discovered; Australopithecus sediba has multiple individuals that are nearly complete, including important parts of the feet.

wa:do

*edit: 2 million years isn't that lightning fast for a body part under such strong selective pressure. Though, I double checked on the date for Ardi and it looks like they go back to 4 mya... so my bad, I shorted the time by half. :bonk:
But the arch was already well developed by the Australopithecines, if not fully like ours yet.

As for losing a tail, it's no big thing and it's been done in primates several times... clearly tails aren't necessary for getting around. At least not for Old world monkeys and Apes. Because you don't need a tail, there really isn't anything that means you need to keep it.

 

[camanintx]

Perhaps you'd like to actually quote something from it that conclusively debunks what I posted and quoted from.

Your premise was that "quantized redshifts are proving that the Earth may in fact be in the location where everything first originated and spread from." As I quoted from the paper, "the existence of redshift periodicity among galaxies is not well established" and that "earlier results are based on a very small fraction of objects extracted from the large databases." I would say that fulfills both of your requirements. :slap:

 

[Iti oj]

No, you didn't answer the question at all. All you did was repeat the standard model of how long they think one species passed to the next, without even bothering to discuss the why part. I reposted the link, it should be on the last page. I'm not asking for how long the concensus of scientists think it took to get from one species to another. Do you even understand the complexity of the transition to arched feet?

PW says it would take 2 million years to develop arched feet, she at least bothered to answer the question, though this would be extremely lightning fast for such a transition. I'd like to know why she thinks Apes lost their tails too.

It does not matter what we think but what we know we know we had at least 25 million years for these changes to happen, maybe 2-7 for the foot to change... my opinion does not matter, im not suggesting that the currently accept school of thought is wrong why would i post anything but what is scientifically accepted. Evolution is science im just a laymen whose studied it for years. i don't see you having a valid argument at all. what are you upset im not speaking out of my *** but fact checking my posts? Do you want me to make things up? Want me to guess? you say their was not enough time i showed you how much time their has been. what about m,y response dont you get? what don't you like about it? is science not good enough for you?

 

[Shermana]

PW Can you link to the Australopithecus sediba finding that has the bones in question?

 

[camanintx]

Ummm, what part about us starting as Female chassis didn't you get?

This comes as a surprise because their scripture said man was created first and then "God" caused man to sleep and took from him to make a woman...So how did he start with the woman chassis first...?

Consistency is not a requirement for creationists.

 

[Shermana]

Consistency is not a requirement for creationists.

As I said to DP, if the story says that man was fully formed when he was created, he wouldn't have needed to go through gestation.

 

[painted wolf]

PW Can you link to the Australopithecus sediba finding that has the bones in question?

The Foot and Ankle of Australopithecus sediba

wa:do

 

[Shermana]

The Foot and Ankle of Australopithecus sediba

wa:do

Wa do PW, I wish the article was free, but I will look into that and get back to you later.

 

[painted wolf]

Wa do PW, I wish the article was free, but I will look into that and get back to you later.

So do I! :yes:
But they are getting better about adopting more open access policy.

wa:do

 

[outhouse]

All laws we subject the universe to seems to be limited to the mind of man

not at all. most laws bypass mans thoughts completely.

But not how you were eluding to Boltzmann earlier. order to disorder

 

[Iti oj]

Sher again you ignore my post? then state i do not reply to your questions? as for your link i don't see what point your making with it

 

[Shermana]

I have to go Iti, and you didn't exactly bring anything to the table with your last post. Feel free to quote anything in your rant that you think is worth a reply.

 

[beenie]

**Staff Advisory**

Please keep on topic and refrain from personal attacks or trolling. Keep Rule 1 and Rule 3 in mind while posting. Thank you.​

1. Off-topic personal comments about Members and Staff
Personal attacks are strictly prohibited either on the forums or by private messaging, frubal comments, signature lines and visitor messages. Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff.

3. Trolling and Bullying
We recognize three areas of unacceptable trolling (Please note that these apply to PMs, signature lines, frubal comments, and visitor messages as well, if they are reported):
1)posts that are deliberately inflammatory in order to provoke a vehement response from other users.
2)posts that Target a person or group by following them around the forums to attack them. This is Bullying. Deliberately altering the words of another member by intentionally changing the meaning when you use the quote feature is considered a form of bullying. The ONLY acceptable alteration of a quotation from another member is to remove portions that are not relevant or to alter formatting for emphasis.
3)posts that are adjudged to fit the following profile: "While questioning and challenging other beliefs is appropriate in the debates forums, repeated blatant misrepresentation or continual harassment of other beliefs will not be tolerated."

 

[Iti oj]

Seems we have flamed enough and derailed enough to get a warning lets try restarting our debate then?
Can you make a bullet list of your issues with the theory of evolution?
unless you have a better suggestion on how to restart our debate?

and sorry and thank you ssainhu

 

[gnosticx]

evolution is an ancient iluminati constructed lie.....even they know it is...they tell you in a verbose way that the universe started through an act of love based on intelligent design...THE BIG BANG... its just that teach the slant on the truth of only what they want you 2 believe about came next bydoing what they always do these days... construct the lie by trying to explain a primary physics conception with a secondary physics explanation....

 

[Iti oj]

evolution is an ancient iluminati constructed lie.....even they know it is...they tell you in a verbose way that the universe started through an act of love based on intelligent design...THE BIG BANG... its just that teach the slant on the truth of only what they want you 2 believe about came next bydoing what they always do these days... construct the lie by trying to explain a primary physics conception with a secondary physics explanation....

ummm what? i did not understand what you meant or where you are deriving you opinion from, also how would evolution help the Illuminati? would the opium of the mass support their cause better?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

evolution is an ancient iluminati constructed lie.....even they know it is...they tell you in a verbose way that the universe started through an act of love based on intelligent design...THE BIG BANG... its just that teach the slant on the truth of only what they want you 2 believe about came next bydoing what they always do these days... construct the lie by trying to explain a primary physics conception with a secondary physics explanation....

Uh...what?

 

[outhouse]

repeated blatant misrepresentation

I find that rule being broken on a common basis, which of course leeds to the others being broken