Evolution controversy erupts

Professor Baxter said:
No, I am saying you are stupid or possibly insane to believe that the story of Noah was the least bit accurate or should be considered when attempting to understand human history or that of other life. Clearly there was no worldwide flood. There is no proof that humans ever lived all in one location that could be effected by a normal flood.

Science is wrong about what?
Click to expand...

People who are raised ACTUAL Christians and don't use it to strong arm politics know that Christianity is based on "Faith". This Faith is why it's so hard to be an actual Christian. God doesn't show presence on the earth directly, god shows presence through the people.

So this notion that Bill O'Reilly has that "Christ could not have talked on the cross at that point" in his book and this notion that Noah couldn't have built an Ark are all talking points. But if you believe in Christ and believe he parted seas, walked on water, cured the sick, and raised the dead...........I don't understand the basic questions of "an ark that held all the animals of the world" I think if you are open minded to Christ as the son of god you are open to anything, because God can do anything.

Put more basically, Evolution is seen in our common animals/mammals even in their single life span. HELL we are witnessing EVOLUTION in politics right now. Changes happen when the smart people see the need for change and pass that change to their children/offspring.

Guess what. God can even EVOLVE. And through the people, as god is known to power, god will win.

But I'm pretty sure god didn't endorse this healthcare for everyone thing. God was pretty brutal. He stated "He who does not work, will not eat". So CLEARLY all these Wal_Mart workers without health Insurance are Sloth????????
 
Professor Baxter said:
Clearly there was no worldwide flood. There is no proof that humans ever lived all in one location that could be effected by a normal flood.
Click to expand...

I agree there was no world wide flood......however, unless you believe there are more than one line of evolution that resulted in modern humans, it is unavoidable that at one time, all humans lived in one location.......obviously, at one point in time all humans slept in one bed........

so what is it, besides believing in "shit happens" do you also believe that identical random shit happens frequently?..........
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I agree there was no world wide flood......however, unless you believe there are more than one line of evolution that resulted in modern humans, it is unavoidable that at one time, all humans lived in one location.......obviously, at one point in time all humans slept in one bed........

so what is it, besides believing in "shit happens" do you also believe that identical random shit happens frequently?..........
Click to expand...

No, it is not obvious that "at one point in time all humans slept in one bed." LOL.

I have explained to you multiple times that speciation happens within a population not to one individual. That is, there was not one female homo erectus that gave birth to the first homo sapien. Instead it is believed that one group of homo erectus or all populations of homo erectus slowly evolved into what is now typed as homo sapien, which has evolved as a group and/or in separate groups since.

I have also asked you multiple times to explain how you believed speciation was supposed to occur but you have done nothing but dance around it.

I think you are trapped by bad Platonist ideas about ideal forms. You think there has to be some bright red line between homo erectus and homo sapien and one individual that was an ideal first example. You don't understand that the differences are not that significant and at the edges are less than what one would expect to find within current populations of homo sapiens.

It is not obvious that all humans lived in one location. It is obvious that they have been spread out over a large geographic area since at least 115,000 years ago. So either you believe in a worldwide flood, that this story of a flood was accurately passed in unwritten form over >115,000 years or you just believe the story is pure myth or fiction.

I don't really understand why you feel the need to claim that the flood actually happened while also claiming that the biblical account of it and many other things contains significant factual errors. You are a very odd and irrational cultist.
 
Last edited:
Rana said:
I always ask children when they make a remark about someone's looks, would you tell it to the persons face?

Would you tell your brethren that his sloping forehead makes him look like a Neanderthal?

I sincerely doubt it.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the children say "there's that wierd lonely lady asking really dumb questions again" after you walk away.

Do parents shuffle their kids away when they see you coming?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
did this skull originate before or after the flood?.....
Click to expand...

I am supposed to put a date on a fictional event? The best guess from a believer put it at less than 6000 years ago, so.... it was before. Maybe you can give a us a ballpark that is not some vague copout chosen only because you hope it can be easily retrofitted to your idiotic hypothesis? So far you have only indicated that it happened before humans spread out over the world. As I have been trying to point out to you, that would make it at least 100,000 years ago and maybe as much as 2 million years ago. Honestly, you are way better off with the 6000 years ago, but you are insistent on some of the facts of the bible being accurate while rejecting others and there is no apparent rhyme or reason as to which should be which.
 
Anti-Party said:
People who are raised ACTUAL Christians and don't use it to strong arm politics know that Christianity is based on "Faith". This Faith is why it's so hard to be an actual Christian. God doesn't show presence on the earth directly, god shows presence through the people.

So this notion that Bill O'Reilly has that "Christ could not have talked on the cross at that point" in his book and this notion that Noah couldn't have built an Ark are all talking points. But if you believe in Christ and believe he parted seas, walked on water, cured the sick, and raised the dead...........I don't understand the basic questions of "an ark that held all the animals of the world" I think if you are open minded to Christ as the son of god you are open to anything, because God can do anything.

Put more basically, Evolution is seen in our common animals/mammals even in their single life span. HELL we are witnessing EVOLUTION in politics right now. Changes happen when the smart people see the need for change and pass that change to their children/offspring.

Guess what. God can even EVOLVE. And through the people, as god is known to power, god will win.

But I'm pretty sure god didn't endorse this healthcare for everyone thing. God was pretty brutal. He stated "He who does not work, will not eat". So CLEARLY all these Wal_Mart workers without health Insurance are Sloth????????
Click to expand...

Christ did not part any seas. Not even in the fairy tales.

You are mixing up the context of uses of the word evolution. We are discussing biological evolution which does not happen within ones life and not detectable from one generation to the next.

As I have repeated several times, if you want to stick to pure faith then fine, but don't bring up your fairy tales as some fact for which science needs to account.
 
Professor Baxter said:
Science is wrong about what?
Click to expand...


we recently had a thread in which it was shared that science indicates a dispersal of modern humans from Africa around 65,000 years ago......you now claim that it happened nearly twice as long ago......how is it that science had erred by a factor of two?......
 
Professor Baxter said:
That is, there was not one female homo erectus that gave birth to the first homo sapien.
Click to expand...

really?....so it never happened a first time?.......did it happen on three continents simultaneously?.......how many different lines of homo sapiens do you speculate there were?........are we all even related to each other?.......maybe I'm a homo sapiens republicus and you're a homo sapiens dumbocraticus.......\

that this story of a flood was accurately passed in unwritten form over >115,000 years
Click to expand...

works for me.....seems like the kind of story most kids would have remembered......
 
Professor Baxter said:
The best guess from a believer put it at less than 6000 years ago, so....
Click to expand...

lol.....you consider that a "best guess"...shucks, maybe a "best guess" would be shit happened all over the place and we have a few thousand different strains of homo sapien running around and nobody has a clue who the real human beings are....../grins.....

and maybe as much as 2 million years ago.
Click to expand...

wait....so now you're back to claiming that modern humans were around two million years ago?.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
we recently had a thread in which it was shared that science indicates a dispersal of modern humans from Africa around 65,000 years ago......you now claim that it happened nearly twice as long ago......how is it that science had erred by a factor of two?......
Click to expand...

We did? And just a few post ago you were quoting a Wiki article that homo sapien fossils were found in Israel dating 90,000 years ago?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
really?....so it never happened a first time?.......did it happen on three continents simultaneously?.......how many different lines of homo sapiens do you speculate there were?........are we all even related to each other?.......maybe I'm a homo sapiens republicus and you're a homo sapiens dumbocraticus.......\



works for me.....seems like the kind of story most kids would have remembered......
Click to expand...

Speciation happens within a population. It's not just one individual that suddenly becomes a new species.

Please explain how you think speciation works?

It's is ridiculously implausible to assume there is any accuracy in a 115000 year old story passed down by quite primitive humans that had not yet developed language.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol.....you consider that a "best guess"...shucks, maybe a "best guess" would be shit happened all over the place and we have a few thousand different strains of homo sapien running around and nobody has a clue who the real human beings are....../grins.....



wait....so now you're back to claiming that modern humans were around two million years ago?.....
Click to expand...

This is nothing but strawman bullshit.

The multiregional hypothesis proposed that Homo genus contained only a single interconnected population as it does today (not separate species), and that its evolution took place worldwide continuously over the last couple million years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

It seems to me these bones which lead to the conclusion that there may not have been so many branches within the homo clade tend to add some support for the multiregional hypothesis. But it does not settle it. The debate continues and dishonest fools like you will not add anything to it.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yes we did.....and I pretty certain you were the one promoting it.....
Click to expand...

Maybe you can find a post of mine, take a single line of it to try and distort what I said and I can post the full context to show you are lying again.

I am certain I was not. I am certain I would have listed the range and that 65000 years ago was the minimum. I have been quite generous to your stupid ideas so far and arguing for the accuracy of a supposed 65000 yo myth is unbelievably absurd. But that is too recent to retrofit into your new cults dogma about a local flood because it is not disputed that homo sapiens had spread throughout Africa by 115,000 years ago and into Israel by 90,000 years ago.
 
Professor Baxter said:
This is nothing but strawman bullshit.

The multiregional hypothesis proposed that Homo genus contained only a single interconnected population as it does today (not separate species), and that its evolution took place worldwide continuously over the last couple million years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

It seems to me these bones which lead to the conclusion that there may not have been so many branches within the homo clade tend to add some support for the multiregional hypothesis. But it does not settle it. The debate continues and dishonest fools like you will not add anything to it.
Click to expand...

it seems to me you folks have difficulty thinking in practical terms about your evolutionary beliefs.....can you give me a single example today where evolution occurred anywhere on a multi-regional basis?......evolution occurs when a strain is isolated from interaction with other strains.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
but if there are a hundred, aren't there a hundred different species?......
Click to expand...

No. There are a hundred members of an evolving population. They would only speciate from a group that was sexually isolated.

You clearly don't understand a thing about evolutionary theory.

Again, why don't you explain how you think speciation is supposed to occur?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
it seems to me you folks have difficulty thinking in practical terms about your evolutionary beliefs.....can you give me a single example today where evolution occurred anywhere on a multi-regional basis?......evolution occurs when a strain is isolated from interaction with other strains.....
Click to expand...

You are confusing evolution and speciation. We continue to evolve as a group. But speciation occurs, as you just indicated, within a group. Not in an individual member as you had previously indicated (you are pretty clearly confused). It can happen within some division of the population or the entire population could evolve to a degree that it might be classed as a new species in comparison with archaic forms. The latter is quite possibly what happened within humans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top