Modern man like footprints found, evolution theory in doubt.

[Subduction Zone]

As proof we are wrong about the creation of God being true as Jesus confirmed, you offer an unsupported same state past nature and the house of cards built up on that foundation. Great will be the fall of that house.

And back to your failed argument that you cannot support in any way at all. You forgot to gong yourself again dad.

 

[dad1]

I just cannot see how dad1 or any other creationists at RF cannot learn evolution, when there are so many people have been explaining the same, over and over again, and still remained ignorant on the subject. You cannot believe how many we have to explain to creationists, that evolution and abiogenesis are not the same things. They cannot learn, and they don’t want to learn, because the fear of God and the fear for their souls.

They are the same thing, despite the attempted separation of the embarrassing part of the evo fable about the unprovable first life form. The imaginary first life forms wafted in by imaginary comets, or in an imaginary deep see vent..pond or whatever all are claimed to have evolved in the same way as anything else. I understand why many evos want to distance themselves from the very beginning in the theory of evolution.

 

[dad1]

The footprints in the article? They were probably from a relative of ours, not necessarily an ancestor. For example you probably have an uncle or an aunt. You are related to them but not (hopefully) descended from them.

That other apes besides man has come out of Africa is not controversial at all.

So you can rule out early humans then? How?

 

[dad1]

Well yeah, but there's more to it than just being wrong. They have waaaaaaaaaay more at stake than we do. @Deeje described the sorts of consequences she'd have to face.....loss of friends, loss of family, being "treated like a piece of garbage", total loss of meaning to life.

That's a lot more than just being factually wrong. It's no wonder they behave the way they do. Given the choice between engaging in embarrassing and dishonest behaviors, versus facing the above, for most people it's an easy decision.

The job of God's people is to believe. Part of that is believing Scripture that Jesus verified was totally from God and true. Without His word on what happened, man invents alternative creation stories.They are faith based and also require belief. The issue is what we chose to believe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you can rule out early humans then? How?

I didn't. They could be from an early ancestor, but it is unlikely.

Why do you think that this is a problem for the theory of evolution? You bought the hype of the title but you did not understand the article.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The job of God's people is to believe. Part of that is believing Scripture that Jesus verified was totally from God and true. Without His word on what happened, man invents alternative creation stories.They are faith based and also require belief. The issue is what we chose to believe.

But Jesus never did such a thing. All you have are verses taken out of context that you choose to interpret that way. They could just as easy be allegory, a tool that he used quite often.

By the way, if Jesus actually did so it would be evidence that he was just a man and not the "Son of God". You are in a bit of a Catch 22 when you try to use this argument. You are in essence claiming that Jesus was not God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The job of God's people is to believe. Part of that is believing Scripture that Jesus verified was totally from God and true. Without His word on what happened, man invents alternative creation stories.They are faith based and also require belief. The issue is what we chose to believe.

One more point. People that think rationally cannot choose what to believe. You do realize that you just admitted that your beliefs are irrational, don't you?

 

[dad1]

I didn't. They could be from an early ancestor, but it is unlikely. .

Why?

 

[dad1]

One more point. People that think rationally cannot choose what to believe. You do realize that you just admitted that your beliefs are irrational, don't you?

We do choose. People who are rational know this. They also are aware of it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why?

Because we have quite a few relatives that we did not descend from.

Think of your own family. You have countless relatives that you did not descend from. You have only one line of descent that ended up in you. If there is an old family picture of some unspecified relative of yours by sheer numbers it is more likely to be one that you are not descended from. These are mere footprints. But their location is not in Africa, we can trace a much more recent lineage to our ancestors in Africa. Therefore it is more likely that they are the footprints of a species related to us that left Africa but did not return.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We do choose. People who are rational know this. They also are aware of it.

Simply wrong. Once again this shows a lack of ability to think logically. No matter how hard I try I cannot believe that I can fly by merely flapping my arms really hard. You have your claim one hundred percent backwards.

 

[Deeje]

Funny how evolutionists almost invariably have to rubbish the Bible and Bible believers (personal insults included) in order to make their own fairy tale seem to be more believable. They supposedly have these "mountains" of evidence but when pressed to present it, it will be in their jargon so that no one who isn't indoctrinated with science's version of how things "might have" or "could have" happened.....those without degrees in science can't possibly understand them. So when asked to present their evidence in plain language, without having to resort to jargon, suggestions and conjecture or without basing interpretation of a piece of evidence on beliefs or faith, they are hard pressed to present such evidence. If they did, it would be so easy to spot all the holes...about the size of Texas!

I propose the same challenge to the evolutionists here as I have on other threads.....put up or.......you know what to do.

Where is your evidence that does not rely on supposition...inference...guesswork.....faith.....or belief....lets see it.
Lets see what you have apart from your negative put downs. Shooting the messenger doesn't silence the message.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Funny how evolutionists almost invariably have to rubbish the Bible and Bible believers (personal insults included) in order to make their own fairy tale seem to be more believable. They supposedly have these "mountains" of evidence but when pressed to present it, it will be in their jargon so that no one who isn't indoctrinated with science's version of how things "might have" or "could have" happened.....those without degrees in science can't possibly understand them. So when asked to present their evidence in plain language, without having to resort to jargon, suggestions and conjecture or without basing interpretation of a piece of evidence on beliefs or faith, they are hard pressed to present such evidence. If they did, it would be so easy to spot all the holes...about the size of Texas!

I propose the same challenge to the evolutionists here as I have on other threads.....put up or.......you know what to do.

Where is your evidence that does not rely on supposition...inference...guesswork.....faith.....or belief....lets see it.
Lets see what you have apart from your negative put downs. Shooting the messenger doesn't silence the message.

At best you have merely demonstrated massive ignorance on your part. You have been given evidence. You either ignored it, lied about it, or did not understand it. Assuming that the concept of evidence is beyond you, the most generous assumption that I could give you, I offered to discuss the nature of evidence with you so that you did not repeat this error..

Why does even discussing the nature of evidence scare you?

 

[dad1]

Because we have quite a few relatives that we did not descend from.

Think of your own family. You have countless relatives that you did not descend from. You have only one line of descent that ended up in you. If there is an old family picture of some unspecified relative of yours by sheer numbers it is more likely to be one that you are not descended from. These are mere footprints. But their location is not in Africa, we can trace a much more recent lineage to our ancestors in Africa. Therefore it is more likely that they are the footprints of a species related to us that left Africa but did not return.

What makes them not human but 'related to us'?

 

[dad1]

Simply wrong. Once again this shows a lack of ability to think logically. No matter how hard I try I cannot believe that I can fly by merely flapping my arms really hard. You have your claim one hundred percent backwards.

There were huge birds we have fossils of that really would make no sense in this present nature. They could not get out of the water, or would need a hill to jump off of to fly. Your claims of a same state past don't fly. They quack.

 

[dad1]

Funny how evolutionists almost invariably have to rubbish the Bible and Bible believers (personal insults included) in order to make their own fairy tale seem to be more believable. They supposedly have these "mountains" of evidence but when pressed to present it, it will be in their jargon so that no one who isn't indoctrinated with science's version of how things "might have" or "could have" happened.....those without degrees in science can't possibly understand them. So when asked to present their evidence in plain language, without having to resort to jargon, suggestions and conjecture or without basing interpretation of a piece of evidence on beliefs or faith, they are hard pressed to present such evidence. If they did, it would be so easy to spot all the holes...about the size of Texas!

I propose the same challenge to the evolutionists here as I have on other threads.....put up or.......you know what to do.

Where is your evidence that does not rely on supposition...inference...guesswork.....faith.....or belief....lets see it.
Lets see what you have apart from your negative put downs. Shooting the messenger doesn't silence the message.

Just remember their golden rules. Evidence is whatever they say it is, and there is no creator.

 

[Deeje]

At best you have merely demonstrated massive ignorance on your part. You have been given evidence. You either ignored it, lied about it, or did not understand it. Assuming that the concept of evidence is beyond you, the most generous assumption that I could give you, I offered to discuss the nature of evidence with you so that you did not repeat this error..

Why does even discussing the nature of evidence scare you?

So do we respond with actual evidence or do we respond with the usual put downs and excuses for not providing them? What on earth do I have to be scared of? Your unsubstantiated evidence? You've got to be kidding.

You claim that we are blind, or ignorant....and yet we see an even more serious form of blindness and ignorance in godless evolutionists.....a complete loss of spirituality. When that quality dies in a person, it is very hard to regenerate it once they have convinced themselves that it is superfluous. Yet spirituality is what God uses to communicate with his human creation. Do you understand why the Creator might not want to show you or teach you anything? The godless have no qualities that he desires....science is your religion and science heavyweights are your gods......their writings are your scripture. You have as much of a belief system as we do.

When the time comes to account to the Creator...(as I believe we all will)....you will understand why he rejects the godless for citizenship in the earthly society he proposes for the future. This life is a test of our suitability and how we demonstrate our ability to use our free will wisely....for the benefit of others rather than ourselves.

You don't have to believe that of course......but what if its true? Who has the most to lose in this argument?
You guys can't even voice an honest opinion in your own circles because you would lose all credibility with your peers and the science community. Scared? I think we know whose scared.....the ones who can't or won't present their plain English evidence that macro-evolution ever happened. Give us the simple truth and we will evaluate it honestly...and with the same scrutiny that you give the Creator and his scriptures.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What makes them not human but 'related to us'?

Humans did not exist that far back.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There were huge birds we have fossils of that really would make no sense in this present nature. They could not get out of the water, or would need a hill to jump off of to fly. Your claims of a same state past don't fly. They quack.

What do you mean"would really make no sense"? Species do go extinct when they can no longer compete with other species. That does not imply a "different state".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just remember their golden rules. Evidence is whatever they say it is, and there is no creator.

Wrong again dad. You simply believe in a false version of God. The fact that evidence tells you that you are wrong does not eliminate all God's.