Remarkably complete’ 3.8-million-year-old cranium of human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

[tas8831]

The toe has to reach up to scratch a worm's ankle.

Wow, that was a clever one.

But you go ahead and keep calling ToE a religion, if that helps you feel better about how inadequate the foundation for your ancient middle eastern beliefs are.

You are getting more boring than usual. Unless you can be a man and produce something beyond your sad slogans and dodges, I'm not going to waste my time on you for a bit.

 

[tas8831]

Science has no means whatsoever to test anything spiritual actually.

A world-wide flood was just a spiritual hallucination?

As for your false claim that I think radioactive decay fluctuated in the old world..no. Prove their was any decay process at all then?

LOL!

Amazing...

So Jehovah did not institute entropy until 'the fall' or some such nonsense?

Romper Room called - they need the clown back.

 

[dad]

Because there are no findings.
But nice cop out.

There are no physical finding for spiritual things. Strawman.

More like a desperate scientifically -illiterate religionist that tries to pretend that things were different in Yahweh's day so as to rescue his failing faith.

If your so called science religion was no illiterate and ignorant of what nature was like in the days of the fathers, you might have some point.

 

[dad]

Wow, that was a clever one.

But you go ahead and keep calling ToE a religion, if that helps you feel better about how inadequate the foundation for your ancient middle eastern beliefs are..

OK. TOE is belief based, and this fact is evidenced by the absolute demonstrated inability of you or anyone else to show it is anything else.

 

[dad]

A world-wide flood was just a spiritual hallucination?

LOL!

It was orchestrated and conducted by a Spirit of course. Who do you think opened the windows of heaven, and the founts of the deep, and brought the animals to the ark, and gave the ark design to Noah and told him when the waters would come? Who closed the huge door of the ark? Who arranged the waters to be taken away? Etc etc.

Amazing...

So Jehovah did not institute entropy until 'the fall' or some such nonsense?

Romper Room called - they need the clown back.

So you thought entropy was responsible for how radioactive decay works? Tell us more! Maybe you think entropy will exist in heaven too? Keep us posted.

 

[nPeace]

Like established religions the TOE has a solid following.

Man I wish RF allow a max of three winner ratings to post. (Any mods listening? )
Here ya go...

Precisely!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Man I wish RF allow a max of three winner ratings to post. (Any mods listening? )
Here ya go...

Precisely!

You can't be serious. But thanks for illustrating a fact. Creationists do not understand the concept of evidence. That allows them to perpetuate the false claim that evolution is a belief, when it is the only conclusion that anyone has been able to rationally conclude from the evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It was orchestrated and conducted by a Spirit of course. Who do you think opened the windows of heaven, and the founts of the deep, and brought the animals to the ark, and gave the ark design to Noah and told him when the waters would come? Who closed the huge door of the ark? Who arranged the waters to be taken away? Etc etc.


So you thought entropy was responsible for how radioactive decay works? Tell us more! Maybe you think entropy will exist in heaven too? Keep us posted.

Then why did your God lie by planting false evidence that the Flood never happened?

 

[nPeace]

You can't be serious. But thanks for illustrating a fact. Creationists do not understand the concept of evidence. That allows them to perpetuate the false claim that evolution is a belief, when it is the only conclusion that anyone has been able to rationally conclude from the evidence.

None of the things you are saying have taken place; you are making them up out of your own imagination.. . .(Nehemiah 6:8)

Spoiler: Thoughts of man

Blue whale - Wikipedia
The family Balaenopteridae is believed to have diverged from the other families of the suborder Mysticeti as long ago as the middle Oligocene (28 Ma ago).

Evolution of cetaceans - Wikipedia
The evolution of cetaceans is thought to have begun in the Indian subcontinent, from even-toed ungulates 50 million years ago, over a period of at least 15 million years.

Cetaceans are thought to have evolved during the Eocene or earlier, sharing a closest common ancestor with hippopotamuses.
The two modern parvorders of cetaceans – Mysticeti (baleen whales) and Odontoceti (toothed whales) – are thought to have separated from each other around 28-33 million years ago in a second cetacean radiation, the first occurring with the archaeocetes.

The pakicetids were digitigrade hoofed mammals that are thought to be the earliest known cetaceans, with Indohyus being the closest sister group.

No need for me to write an essay.

I have repeatedly read things like this, including on Evolution 101.
You aren't suggesting that these are written by creationist who have no understanding of the concept of evolution, I hope.
The phylogenetic tree itself is an idea, used to structure theories. Imagine that!

The only thing I find is that they are not honest to use that language at all times, where obviously they don't know, but only believe. That's to me, quite... how should I put it...

The worst part of it, to me, is that Atheist, skeptics, and "believers" and "Christians" hold on to evolution claims, and behave as though they have something that can be rightly called reality... when all they have is nothing more than beliefs.

Then despite knowing that their so called evidence - their "reality" constantly is demonstrated to be... a belief... they stand unmoved.

Spoiler: What men thought

Evolution of cetaceans - Wikipedia
It was initially thought that the ears of pakicetids were adapted for underwater hearing, but, as would be expected from the anatomy of the rest of this creature, the ears of pakicetids are specialized for hearing on land. However, pakicetids were able to listen underwater by using enhanced bone conduction, rather than depending on the tympanic membrane like other land mammals. This method of hearing did not give directional hearing underwater.

Recent studies showcase that ambulocetids were fully aquatic like modern cetaceans, possessing a similar thoracic morphology and being unable to support their weight on land. This suggests that complete abandonment of the land evolved much earlier among cetaceans than previously thought.

The pelvic girdle in modern cetaceans were once thought to be vestigial structures that served no purpose at all. The pelvic girdle in male cetaceans is different in size compared to females, and the size is thought to be a result of sexual dimorphism.

Again, no need for me to write an essay.

Why?
Imo, There is an eagerness to establish the idea of evolution from one universal common ancestor. So, the science "experts" must know the truth. Not the religious science fanatics, that don't see enough evidence for the belief - the "reality" of evolution. They have an agenda.

Even if they were to claim they know, it would not change the fact they don't.

 

[Subduction Zone]

None of the things you are saying have taken place; you are making them up out of your own imagination.. . .(Nehemiah 6:8)

Spoiler: Thoughts of man

Blue whale - Wikipedia
The family Balaenopteridae is believed to have diverged from the other families of the suborder Mysticeti as long ago as the middle Oligocene (28 Ma ago).

Cetaceans are thought to have evolved during the Eocene or earlier, sharing a closest common ancestor with hippopotamuses.
The two modern parvorders of cetaceans – Mysticeti (baleen whales) and Odontoceti (toothed whales) – are thought to have separated from each other around 28-33 million years ago in a second cetacean radiation, the first occurring with the archaeocetes.

The pakicetids were digitigrade hoofed mammals that are thought to be the earliest known cetaceans, with Indohyus being the closest sister group.

No need for me to write an essay.

I have repeatedly read things like this, including on Evolution 101.
You aren't suggesting that these are written by creationist who have no understanding of the concept of evolution, I hope.
The phylogenetic tree itself is an idea, used to structure theories. Imagine that!

The only thing I find is that they are not honest to use that language at all times, where obviously they don't know, but only believe. That's to me, quite... how should I put it...

The worst part of it, to me, is that Atheist, skeptics, and "believers" and "Christians" hold on to evolution claims, and behave as though they have something that can be rightly called reality... when all they have is nothing more than beliefs.

Then despite knowing that their so called evidence - their "reality" constantly is demonstrated to be... a belief... they stand unmoved.

Spoiler: What men thought

Evolution of cetaceans - Wikipedia
It was initially thought that the ears of pakicetids were adapted for underwater hearing, but, as would be expected from the anatomy of the rest of this creature, the ears of pakicetids are specialized for hearing on land. However, pakicetids were able to listen underwater by using enhanced bone conduction, rather than depending on the tympanic membrane like other land mammals. This method of hearing did not give directional hearing underwater.

Recent studies showcase that ambulocetids were fully aquatic like modern cetaceans, possessing a similar thoracic morphology and being unable to support their weight on land. This suggests that complete abandonment of the land evolved much earlier among cetaceans than previously thought.

The pelvic girdle in modern cetaceans were once thought to be vestigial structures that served no purpose at all. The pelvic girdle in male cetaceans is different in size compared to females, and the size is thought to be a result of sexual dimorphism.

Again, no need for me to write an essay.

Why?
Imo, There is an eagerness to establish the idea of evolution from one universal common ancestor. So, the science "experts" must know the truth. Not the religious science fanatics, that don't see enough evidence for the belief - the "reality" of evolution. They have an agenda.

Even if they were to claim they know, it would not change the fact they don't.

LOL!! Thanks for confirming my claim. You not only do not understand the concept of evidence, you do not understand how scientists present their ideas either. I am serious when I point out that you have a very low level of scientific literacy. You cannot refute that which you do not understand. All that you can do is to illustrate your own ignorance.

For example you do not even know what the term "vestigial organ" means. The pelvis girdle of whales is vestigial. Just put them on land and see if they can walk using it. You are making Kent Hovind's mistake of thinking that "vestigial" means "useless". That is incorrect. Vestigial means that it no longer can perform the organ or structure's original function.


Tell me, why are you so afraid to learn what is and is not evidence in the world of the sciences? Is it so that you can continue to unjustly claim that there is no evidence for evolution? One of the reasons that the definition was accepted by scientists is because scientists are people too. They too will unjustly claim that an observation "is not evidence". And that does not have to be about evolution. It can be about any topic in science. By coming up with a clear and concise definition of evidence they avoid that sort of denial.

Understanding the concept of evidence will make you a better debater. Then we can work on scientific manners of speech. You might lose your mythical beliefs, but if your beliefs are incorrect shouldn't you change them? If I found my beliefs to be incorrect I would change. I have done so more than once in the past. I will probably change my mind on some topics in the future as more evidence and information comes out.

 

[nPeace]

LOL!! Thanks for confirming my claim. You not only do not understand the concept of evidence, you do not understand how scientists present their ideas either. I am serious when I point out that you have a very low level of scientific literacy. You cannot refute that which you do not understand. All that you can do is to illustrate your own ignorance.

For example you do not even know what the term "vestigial organ" means. The pelvis girdle of whales is vestigial. Just put them on land and see if they can walk using it. You are making Kent Hovind's mistake of thinking that "vestigial" means "useless". That is incorrect. Vestigial means that it no longer can perform the organ or structure's original function.


Tell me, why are you so afraid to learn what is and is not evidence in the world of the sciences? Is it so that you can continue to unjustly claim that there is no evidence for evolution? One of the reasons that the definition was accepted by scientists is because scientists are people too. They too will unjustly claim that an observation "is not evidence". And that does not have to be about evolution. It can be about any topic in science. By coming up with a clear and concise definition of evidence they avoid that sort of denial.

Understanding the concept of evidence will make you a better debater. Then we can work on scientific manners of speech. You might lose your mythical beliefs, but if your beliefs are incorrect shouldn't you change them? If I found my beliefs to be incorrect I would change. I have done so more than once in the past. I will probably change my mind on some topics in the future as more evidence and information comes out.

Perhaps I did point this out to you before, but maybe not directly.... Or perhaps I did.
Did you take time to read the post carefully, or did you rush and skip through it, and grab one or two lines to comment on?
Whatever the case, apparently you missed entirely what was said.
With you, I'm used to it though.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Perhaps I did point this out to you before, but maybe not directly.... Or perhaps I did.
Did you take time to read the post carefully, or did you rush and skip through it, and grab one or two lines to comment on?
Whatever the case, apparently you missed entirely what was said.
With you, I'm used to it though.

No, I did not rush through. That you broke the Ninth Commandment by relying on equivocation fallacies is not a proper excuse for the falsehoods and personal attacks you made upon others. This is why you can't afford to learn what is and what is not evidence. You would recognize your posts for the kids that they are if you did so.

Don't worry, I understand your errors quite well. The only nice thing about them is that elementary school level errors can be dismissed with a handwave.

 

[nPeace]

No, I did not rush through. That you broke the Ninth Commandment by relying on equivocation fallacies is not a proper excuse for the falsehoods and personal attacks you made upon others. This is why you can't afford to learn what is and what is not evidence. You would recognize your posts for the kids that they are if you did so.

Don't worry, I understand your errors quite well. The only nice thing about them is that elementary school level errors can be dismissed with a handwave.

We should make a song entitled " you can't afford to learn what is and what is not evidence", produced by... guess who.
Only problem is, that would be the song and chorus - a one liner.

No. It is quite evident that you entirely missed what was being said.
There is no supporting evidence for the theory of evolution.

Bye. You are now officially on my ignore list.... temporarily... again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We should make a song entitled " you can't afford to learn what is and what is not evidence", produced by... guess who.
Only problem is, that would be the song and chorus - a one liner.

No. It is quite evident that you entirely missed what was being said.
There is no supporting evidence for the theory of evolution.

Bye. You are now officially on my ignore list.... temporarily... again.

And you know why? Because you won't ever learn from your errors.

I understood your post. You did not understand your error and falsehoods, that you is why you really should take a few minutes to learn.

Your last line is a clear falsehood. A statement like that at the Dover trial with or have risked a perjury charge.

Edit: And the Ostrich Defense is never very impressive.

 

[Darkstorn]

No. It is quite evident that you entirely missed what was being said.
There is no supporting evidence for the theory of evolution.

I didn't miss you perpetuate this lie.

Bye. You are now officially on my ignore list.... temporarily... again.

Ah, your typical argumentation method. I guess you do it often enough for it to have lost its impact for you. Well, it still feels like you running away.

So, you also failed the part where you're supposed to defend your religion with the best of effort, instead of worst.

 

[nPeace]

I didn't miss you perpetuate this lie.



Ah, your typical argumentation method. I guess you do it often enough for it to have lost its impact for you. Well, it still feels like you running away.

So, you also failed the part where you're supposed to defend your religion with the best of effort, instead of worst.

Not sure what you think you didn't miss.
If you think you didn't miss, then you certainly can tell me what I am saying was missed.

For sure, I know I don't run away from anything, or anyone - never have.
I know what I don't put up with when I think I have had enough, and it has nothing to do with an argument.
So if you think you have all the facts in this matter, which I can see you don't, I have no authority over what you want to think.

I also have no idea what you think my argument methods are... whatever that means. I don't think it would be the same as some I have seen here.
Also, I don't know what defending my religion has to do with anything, including this thread.

What does religion have to do with "Remarkably complete’ 3.8-million-year-old cranium of human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia"?

 

[Darkstorn]

Not sure what you think you didn't miss.
If you think you didn't miss, then you certainly can tell me what I am saying was missed.

For sure, I know I don't run away from anything, or anyone - never have.
I know what I don't put up with when I think I have had enough, and it has nothing to do with an argument.
So if you think you have all the facts in this matter, which I can see you don't, I have no authority over what you want to think.

I also have no idea what you think my argument methods are... whatever that means. I don't think it would be the same as some I have seen here.
Also, I don't know what defending my religion has to do with anything, including this thread.

What does religion have to do with "Remarkably complete’ 3.8-million-year-old cranium of human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia"?

"Blablabla."

The important part was that you said that there "is no supporting evidence for the theory of evolution." This is a lie. You're literally making the claim that there are no evidences for it whatsoever. That's a lie. This thread is some of that evidence, you're in it.

 

[sealchan]

Like established religions the TOE has a solid following.

...and so does Star Trek.

 

[nPeace]

"Blablabla."

The important part was that you said that there "is no supporting evidence for the theory of evolution." This is a lie. You're literally making the claim that there are no evidences for it whatsoever. That's a lie. This thread is some of that evidence, you're in it.

Okay. The first line paints me a picture of why you are here.

I am not the only one who says this, and yet your first post starts here, on me. Why?

 

[dad]

...and so does Star Trek.

Great. Poor man, he seems to think that he can escape into outer space from the sin and problems he caused here.