Page 2 of 7
Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 12:34 pm
by Leona Conner
Poor GV, he's still thinks that people who believe in evolution think we came from monkeys. Humans and the great apes share a common ancestor. The branch of the tree that produced monkeys split long before the branch the ended up us. But then anyone who would believe we were made out of dirt is suspect in the intelligence department. They say we are wrong because we were not around to see evolution in progress, but since they weren't around when God supposedly made man, how do they know that is what actually happened.
Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:30 pm
by Barracuda
Opps! I didn't know GV was a wacko, or I would not have replied. It won't happen again.
Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:32 pm
by Minimalist
They're everywhere, Barracuda.
Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:58 pm
by Guest
So Leona, what is the supposed common ancestor of monkeys and humans, the tree shrew? Ahhhahahahaha.
Darwinian evolution (goo to you) is the dumbest notion ever, you actually believe that bilge?
Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:59 pm
by Beagle
Barracuda wrote:Opps! I didn't know GV was a wacko, or I would not have replied. It won't happen again.
ROTFLMAO -
'Cuda that is funny! I know how you feel though.
Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 2:00 pm
by Guest
With the number growing greatly every day, barracuda.
Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 5:07 am
by Guest
i am going through the original article and i have some questions which i hope will be answered honestly etc., (i know i have been chastised if i don't answer questions, so let's see if the other side sets the examples or opts for hypocrisy)
1.
Neanderthals survived for thousands of years longer than scientists thought, with small lingering bands finding refuge in a massive cave near the southern tip of Spain, new research suggests
how do they know this? are there any other records to confirm such thinking?
2.
The paper says charcoal samples from fires that Neanderthals set in the cave are about 28,000 years old and maybe just 24,000 years old.
how does dating burnt charcoal confirm the above? what was writtenon the charcoal to indicate that the above is the case? how do they know that the cave was used by healthy neabnderthals and not a place to put the sick and dying while they waited for death to relive themof their burdens? how does dating charcoal automatically relate to neanderthals? maybe hunters used it while looking for food and wanted to stay warm?
3.
Experts are divided on how strong a case the paper makes
which experts are right? how do we know they are telling us the truth? all they have are a few bones, some charcoal and thats about it, so how does that give rise to the theory they represent? where is the corroborrating evidence?
4.
Were they doomed because they couldn't compete with the encroaching modern humans for resources, or because they caught new germs from the moderns, or because of climate change? Did the two groups have much contact, and what kind?
how do they know thatthe neandethals weren't really human after all? given the scant remains that are studied, it would be very difficult to be conclusive, wouldn't it? Plus, with all the advanced artifacts found from the 'same time period' who is top say they weren't part of schoch's pyramid building civilization?
5.
Other experts are less convinced
so, if carbon 14 dating is so accurate, why can't the experts agree on the date? carbon 14 has now been proven totally unreliable.
6.
Contamination by younger material might have skewed some radiocarbon results toward more recent dates, he observed
and
There's no evidence of contamination with younger material and chemical analysis argues against it, he said.
which and who is correct? again, the experts can't agree yet they build a big theory and present it.
i hope i get real answers and not the usual garbage that comes when the adherents of such thinking run for cover and refuse toaddress the weaknesses of such conclusions.
Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:21 pm
by Guest
Okay maybe you need more time, after all it has only been 8 hours, you may need to research some more. BUT these are just typical questions anyone is going to ask you when they read that article.
i remember being vilified for not answering poster's questions and my credibility was called into question, leona did it, Frank did it and a few others.
well now is yours and their time to show me how it is done honestly and seriously. let's see credibility in action please. i mean if you can't defend your weak spots, how do you expect anyone to accept what you say as part of actual history?
Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:46 pm
by Minimalist
I will not speak for anyone else but I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time explaining advanced scientific concepts to you only to have you come back with some "the bible says" nonsense.
You are not a seeker of knowledge, arch.
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:21 am
by Guest
I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time explaining advanced scientific concepts
a. those are not advanced scientific concepts
b. they are not even scientific but conjecture
c. i just wanted an explanation of how they could go from a few bones to a whole civilization of people.
d. i want to know why they promote something that they have no idea if they are even close to what the actual owners of the bones did.
e. i also want to see them putt their answers where their mouths are. after criticizing me for not answering questions, it is their turn. by their silence the shame is on them.
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:40 am
by Minimalist
archaeologist wrote:I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time explaining advanced scientific concepts
a. those are not advanced scientific concepts
They are to someone who thinks the entire earth was flooded in 2600 BC!
b. they are not even scientific but conjecture
See above. And the sun did not stand still in the sky, either.
c. i just wanted an explanation of how they could go from a few bones to a whole civilization of people.
It's called 'scientific evidence' and it is one of many things you do not understand. Try to recall that those "few bones" are much more evidence than you possess for "solomons temple or a davidic empire...." yet, you believe in both without question.
d. i want to know why they promote something that they have no idea if they are even close to what the actual owners of the bones did.
Just like you and the bible.....except, as noted, science has 'some evidence.'
e. i also want to see them putt their answers where their mouths are. after criticizing me for not answering questions, it is their turn. by their silence the shame is on them.
Not true. As I've noted before, you do not seek enlightenment you seek vindication for your fables. BTW, I answered your stupid questions and you punked out.
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 11:51 am
by Beagle
To all - For some time now I have said that Neandertal should have his own thread. So, I started by lifting Minamalists' latest post and adding the recent Neandertal news available.
I personally don't agree with all of them. There was a recent article that proposed that Europeans were 5% Neandertal genetically.
These most recent posts here suggest that all traces of him have vanished.
He is a hot topic and will continue to be untill the nuclear DNA can be completely confirmed. I, and hopefully others, will post the latest HN news here along with whatever discussion we may have about him. Although we may have our own feelings about this mystery, I'll post all sides of the argument without prejudice.
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:35 pm
by Guest
minimalist, i don't care about your point by point diatribes. you do more work avoiding answering the questions than it would take to answer them honestly.
so since you can't defend your 'scientific' position or theory what good are you or it? here is what the lack of response tells me:
1. you have no credibility
2. you can't defend what you accept or believe
3. you can't allow criticism or close scrutiny
4. you can't face the reality that what is stated in that and similar articles are a flimsy house of cards and the realization of how fragile it is is too much for you too consider thus you keep pretending that one day proof will be found and you can rest in your acceptance.
i tell my students to not be afraid to ask questions if they want to learn something, so i must do it as well but one can't learn when the questions are ignored.
all you have done is proven how false that type of thinking is. by the way, when i was growing up, neanderthals were taught in elementery science classes, there is nothing advanced about it.
i will wait another day then re-post the questions and see if i get a response then.
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:32 pm
by Leona Conner
Why should anyone bother to answer? You won't accept any answer other than one that would validate your beliefs. As long as you keep telling us we need something better than science, I for one will pass.
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:01 pm
by Guest
well then never accuse me of ignoring questions or calling my credibility into question.
You won't accept any answer
i don't have to accept your answers, you certainly do not accept mine.