I see some of you trying to set Wilsoncole up against me. It will not work. I have very much respect for the JW's. This is one faith that I have alot of time for.
There is no division beween us in relation to none of your evidence being solid, robust, and is pure straw grabbing. We are solid on this, I am sure.
I am as open to old earth as new earth. I appreciate that all evo modelling is biased. Therefore any version of creationism is yet to be established.
In relation to my evidence...do you really think that I am going to accept the flimsy refutes put up to it or anything for that matter from researchers that cannot agree amongst themselves on major issues eg birds and other links.
It is just that many "toe faith" holders here are religious biggots and outdated in their attitudes as far as the advanced western world is concerned.
ScienceDaily (Feb. 16, 2011) — "Too simple" and "not so fast" suggest biological anthropologists from the George Washington University and New York University about the origins of human ancestry. In the upcoming issue of the journal Nature, the anthropologists question the claims that several prominent fossil discoveries made in the last decade are our human ancestors. Instead, the authors offer a more nuanced explanation of the fossils' place in the Tree of Life. They conclude that instead of being our ancestors the fossils more likely belong to extinct distant cousins.
Fossils may look like human bones: Biological anthropologists question claims for human ancestry
Ardi may be more ape than human : Nature News
So basically this research supports my assertion that many of your fossils, such as Ardi, that are meant to be human ancestors, are nothing more than varieties of non-human primates, some of which are now extinct. It appears that these are arguing woodlands or not and this is the basis of whether or not Ardi is in the human or gorilla line. Seriously, this is commic strip level entertainment.
To top it off they have found what they believe is a human foot bone that these researchers are attributing to Lucy. It was found alone. Lucy has curved fingers for arboreal life, and she supposedly has human like feet for bipedal walking. I have produced other evidence of some evo reserchers suggesting gorilla traits and misrepresentation as a human ancestor. What a mess this poor creature must have been. Your stories are truly fantastic and incredible.
None of Lucy mob were found with feet. They were sketched in. This single bone is your evidence and not found with the rest of any fossil. This in itself appears suspicious to me, regardless of the explanations. Other evidence of human like footprints have been dated same. I propose that this single bone and the footprints are evidence that homo sapiens were already here, fully formed 3mya. and chimppy Lucy was just another non human primate and not anything that was on its way to humanity.
Foot bone suggests Lucy's kin had arched foot, for walking
It is about interpretation of the evidence. Your researchers find clear support for the creation and require a plethora of theoretical assumptions to turn such evidence into an evolutionary support.
Wilsoncole....it does not matter how they flutter, they can never take away the fact that despite all their advances, and ability to produce every effect of nature in the lab, they are unable to create one living cell from non life under controlled laboratory conditions. How much more unlikely is this to happen in the wild? These will fluff about and produce their theoretical evidences, their plethora of maybes and possibly's, their universe is seeded line, and stupid questions 'like what is life' and every aside they can think of, and conveniently forget they have never done it and they cannot do it. They will never do it, because God is the creator of life.
