Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[shmogie]

They've died off. Why isn't your great-great-great cousin still alive today?


Do you think scientists aren't aware of them?

If they were successful creatures, evolved to survive, why did they die off ? Why did they need to further evolve ?

 

[shmogie]

And you know this .... how? Proteins are the building blocks of life.

Living organisms are made up of chemicals.

Aristotle's spontaneous generation is nothing at all like what we mean today when we talk about abiogenesis. No mainstream scientist is proposing today that complex life forms arise fully formed out of the air or mud or a pond or whatever.

Understood, however, science today proposes that a living organism was formed out of air, or mud, or a primal sea, or whatever. The difference being the one word, "complex"

 

[shmogie]

Please, apparently you have no spark of humor in you, and your accusatory and judgemental tone proves you to be very insecure. I know the argument, I was injecting a little fun into it. I question the presence of fossilized intermediate stages, please reference a publication where I could explore the evidence. You sir (madam) need to untwist your underwear a little and lighten up. Your not so subtle indirect name calling serves no purpose but to expose you as arrogant and schoolyard childish. They left the sea, they returned to the sea, after being terrestrial animals. That is YOUR position, and regardless of niche filling and competition, it is an inane reach way too far to logically to succeed.,

People of your way of thinking routinely make sarcastic and flippant remarks about what people of my thinking believe. When the roles are reversed, you go to the name calling because your system of thought has been "disrespected:" and you take it, and make it, personal. Get over it

 

[Shadow Wolf]

They produce more chemicals.

What do you think we are? DNA and RNA are chemicals. Neuro-transmitters are chemicals. Conception all the way to death is nothing more than a series of chemical reactions.

and life cannot exist when bombarded by UV light.

Ever been sunburned?

 

[SkepticThinker]

People of your way of thinking routinely make sarcastic and flippant remarks about what people of my thinking believe. When the roles are reversed, you go to the name calling because your system of thought has been "disrespected:" and you take it, and make it, personal. Get over it

Psst ... you're talking to yourself.

 

[johnhanks]

Please, apparently you have no spark of humor in you, and your accusatory and judgemental tone proves you to be very insecure. I know the argument, I was injecting a little fun into it.

It can be quite hard to distinguish the absurdities creationists post when they're trying to be funny from their regular output.

I question the presence of fossilized intermediate stages, please reference a publication where I could explore the evidence.

You will find readable accounts here and here.

They left the sea, they returned to the sea, after being terrestrial animals. That is YOUR position, and regardless of niche filling and competition, it is an inane reach way too far to logically to succeed.,

The vertebrates that "left the sea" were the earliest amphibians, some 370 million years bp. (known transitional fossils are numerous, and becoming more so); the return to the sea that you refer to occurred less than 50 million years bp. A lot had happened in between...

 

[SkepticThinker]

Fine for certain chemicals under certain conditions. Those conditions are not always present, and life cannot exist when bombarded by UV light. So, the certain conditions existed, chemical compounds may have been produced under those conditions, THEN, an ozone layer appeared to protect life that was being produced by the ozone layer that didn't exist when the chemical compounds were being produced. Further, unless the chemical compounds were produced exactly in the correct state and conditions needed, they would be destroyed by oxygen., Really ?

And ...?

 

[johnhanks]

Where are they TODAY ?

A and N are still around. The rest are extinct, like almost all other life forms that have existed.

my general response is, So ?

Yes, I thought it might be. But it was you, wasn't it, who asked for "ape like creatures in the intermediary stages, or just about human"?

Have you ever seen the skull of a person with acromegaly ?, hydro encephalitis, micro enciphalitis ?, the disease the elephant man had ?, Neanderthals ? Different species of Primates ?

Some, yes. None of them is remotely like Homo habilis. Don't you find it a startling coincidence that the only fossils recovered from these epochs are all of people suffering these rare conditions?

 

[shmogie]

A and N are still around. The rest are extinct, like almost all other life forms that have existed.
Yes, I thought it might be. But it was you, wasn't it, who asked for "ape like creatures in the intermediary stages, or just about human"?
Some, yes. None of them is remotely like Homo habilis. Don't you find it a startling coincidence that the only fossils recovered from these epochs are all of people suffering these rare conditions?

No, the sampling is tiny. Neanderthals were a species of human, they weren't apes, or stupid. They were most like absorbed into humanity by interbreeding, There can be differences within the species, so, why can't the alleged intermediate humans, simply be humans, and the alleged intermediate primates, simply be primates ?

 

[shmogie]

And you know this .... how? Proteins are the building blocks of life.

Living organisms are made up of chemicals.

Aristotle's spontaneous generation is nothing at all like what we mean today when we talk about abiogenesis. No mainstream scientist is proposing today that complex life forms arise fully formed out of the air or mud or a pond or whatever.

 

[PackJason]

If you hate homosexuals, then you are a bigot.

If you vindicate your bigotry with your religion, then you are a bigot and a coward.

 

[shmogie]

Allow one of your beliefs to make the point perfectly clear. Harvard biochemist and Nobel laureate, George Wald; "When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities : creation or spontaneous generation., There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but that leads to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds, we therefore choose to believe the impossible, that life arose spontaneously by chance "

 

[shmogie]

If you hate homosexuals, then you are a bigot.

If you vindicate your bigotry with your religion, then you are a bigot and a coward.

Hmmmm. Nobody here hates homosexuals, nobody here is a bigot. So your remark has no place here, it is irrelevant.

 

[johnhanks]

No, the sampling is tiny.

That doesn't help your case: highly anomalous cases like acromegalous or microcephalous individuals are less likely still to be present in a very tiny sample.

Neanderthals were a species of human, they weren't apes, or stupid. They were most like absorbed into humanity by interbreeding,

Probably not stupid, agreed; as much apes as we are. The "absorption into humanity" is much argued about, but has little bearing on fossil evidence for hominin evolution.

There can be differences within the species, so, why can't the alleged intermediate humans, simply be humans...

Because they are nothing like any extant humans. Homo habilis had a brain bigger than any non-human ape's, but way below the human range; there are abundant H. erectus and H. ergaster fossils dating between about 1.9 million and 70 000 years b.p., and again brain size is typically well below the modern human range. Just think, all those weirdly microcephalous individuals happening to get fossilised, while not one of their normal human contemporaries managed it.

... and the alleged intermediate primates, simply be primates ?

They simply are. As are we.

 

[shmogie]

And ...?

And, an illogical, extremely complex and virtually impossible chain of events. At some point a state of equilibrium must be reached. A state where these alleged processes are being reversed faster than they occur

 

[PackJason]

Hmmmm. Nobody here hates homosexuals, nobody here is a bigot. So your remark has no place here, it is irrelevant.

If you don't think there are a lot of people who hate homosexuals, then you're delusional.

 

[shmogie]

That doesn't help your case: highly anomalous cases like acromegalous or microcephalous individuals are less likely still to be present in a very tiny sample.
Probably not stupid, agreed; as much apes as we are. The "absorption into humanity" is much argued about, but has little bearing on fossil evidence for hominin evolution.
Because they are nothing like any extant humans. Homo habilis had a brain bigger than any non-human ape's, but way below the human range; there are abundant H. erectus and H. ergaster fossils dating between about 1.9 million and 70 000 years b.p., and again brain size is typically well below the modern human range. Just think, all those weirdly microcephalous individuals happening to get fossilised, while not one of their normal human contemporaries managed it.
They simply are. As are we.

Once again, the sampling is tiny, tiny enough to say that any other representative fossils of the general have not been discovered, If you have a partial skeleton, or two, how is it possible to claim these as representative of an entire population ? Anomalies are anomalies

 

[shmogie]

If you don't think there are a lot of people who hate homosexuals, then you're delusional.

They aren't here, if you think they are you are delusional

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, the sampling is tiny. Neanderthals were a species of human, they weren't apes, or stupid. They were most like absorbed into humanity by interbreeding, There can be differences within the species, so, why can't the alleged intermediate humans, simply be humans, and the alleged intermediate primates, simply be primates ?

How about you go through the fossils for us, and let us know which ones are strictly humans and which ones are strictly apes/monkeys/gorillas.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Allow one of your beliefs to make the point perfectly clear. Harvard biochemist and Nobel laureate, George Wald; "When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities : creation or spontaneous generation., There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but that leads to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds, we therefore choose to believe the impossible, that life arose spontaneously by chance "

Good for him. Doesn't make it true.

I can't even find a source for this quote. Do you have one?

Edit: I just found it on the TalkOrigins quote mine page. Turns out it is not a quote.