Archaeologica.org

Oh, HORRORS!




http://apnews.excite.com/article/200609 ... RMUG0.html

Scientists Find 'Lucy' Species Skeleton

NEW YORK (AP) - Scientists have discovered a remarkably complete skeleton of a 3-year-old female from the ape-man species represented by "Lucy." The discovery should fuel a contentious debate about whether this species, which walked upright, also climbed and moved through trees easily like an ape.

Overall, he wrote in a Nature commentary, the discovery provides "a veritable mine of information about a crucial stage in human evolutionary history."

We should start a poll to figure out how arch will try to denigrate this discovery.

I pick " It's ONLY ONE SKELETON......IT DOESN'T DISPROVE THE BIBLE."

archaeologist wrote:

fundamentalists don't like hearing the truth

you ought to deal with evolutionists then, they are far worse.

On what evidence do you base this statement? The assertion that they do not agree with a particular mythology does not qualify as evidence.

Arch doesn't need "evidence."

He has this......

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

We should start a poll to figure out how arch will try to denigrate this discovery

why try to draw me in to this discussion? i noticed you avoided drawing attention to this tidbit:

Judging by how well it was preserved, the skeleton may have come from a body that was quickly buried by sediment in a flood, the researchers said.

the rest of the article is just pure conjecture and i will not deal with it. save to ppoint out the idiocy of the investigators in this quote:

but does seem to indicate some climbing ability

duh. basically all children have climbing ability. this is just proves to what extent researchers will go to bend the facts to their way of thinking.

Because you steadfastly deny evolutionary evidence.....even when it smacks you in the face.

Because you steadfastly deny evolutionary evidence.....even when it smacks you in the face

sounds like the reverse is true:

Judging by how well it was preserved, the skeleton may have come from a body that was quickly buried by sediment in a flood, the researchers said.

by the way, water and moisture are anethma to c-14 dating so again the age of the skeleton is in doubt and cannot be trusted to be accurate.

Moisture is anethma to 14C dating? News to me....

Creationists believe in evolution, per se (natural selection within syngameons), however, we don't believe in Darwinian evolution, that bunkum which some here choose to believe, that goo evolved into you, oh man.

So what do you do with the fossil record? If you are asking for evidence for Darwin (it exists) where is your evidence for creation (there is none).

Again, if you are going to apply a requirement for proof to me, that's fine. But be sure to apply it equally to yourself as well.

sounds like the reverse is true

As soon as you present actual "evidence" for god making man from dirt, it will be considered.

So far, that has eluded you.

Hey oas, how 'bout billions of creatures (99% of which are relatively immobile marine creatures) entombed in vast layers of sediments stacked up on the continents, well now, I wonder how they got there?

Genesis Veracity wrote:Hey oas, how 'bout billions of creatures (99% of which are relatively immobile marine creatures) entombed in vast layers of sediments stacked up on the continents, well now, I wonder how they got there?

? Life is ancient on the scale of millions of years. Babylon isn't. I'm sure you're trying to make a point here.....

Oas, I still can't tell if you're dense or goofy.

Genesis Veracity wrote:Oas, I still can't tell if you're dense or goofy.

I must be both. The bible says something about going out of the presence of a man when thou percievest not in him any wisdom. But here I am still talking to you.

And it's way past my bedtime.....

Good line, good night.