Creationists stumped by new hominid fossils

[Stuu]

I'll give gifts to whom I want; I will never let a spastic like Obama or Kerry or Clinton have it if I can help it.

And you are perfectly entitled to vote for the spastics of your choice.

But were you to become destitute, I would be in favour of us all helping you out.

Of course I live in a different country to you, one that has a state health service and a compulsory no-fault accident insurance scheme. It's brilliant, but it does mean we have to give some money to some spastics, so perhaps its not your kind of thing after all.

Stuart

 

[Jose Fly]

Nice assumption.

What assumption?

 

[Stuu]

There are at least two chapters in Ross CREATION AND TIME

When you have finished that book, can I recommend The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins?

Even if you read just the second chapter about bat sonar, it would be well worth your time, and it would give you another perspective on the mindlessness of intelligent design, an oxymoron if ever there was one.

Stuart

 

[Jose Fly]

There are at least two chapters in Ross CREATION AND TIME documenting the leap in capabilities between previous hominids and mankind. Which is what he believes the creation of man is referring to and verified by. It does not come down to bones. It comes down to activities, abstract thought (and some of that is intended to be evil), useful memory (history), etc.

So he just waves away all the hominid transitional fossils?

 

[Interplanner]

And you are perfectly entitled to vote for the spastics of your choice.

But were you to become destitute, I would be in favour of us all helping you out.

Of course I live in a different country to you, one that has a state health service and a compulsory no-fault accident insurance scheme. It's brilliant, but it does mean we have to give some money to some spastics, so perhaps its not your kind of thing after all.

Stuart

Stu,
I think this might touch a nerve for you as a scientist, at least as far as I can tell you have that background. Obama knew what Muir said about Glacier Bay's ice! It was already gone in 1900. And Obama still told the world that industry since the mid 1900s had ruined Glacier Bay and had to be stopped! Idiot! Idiot populace! He's too busy being Irans' buddy and making people mad at Ferguson police (a total fabrication that Holder admitted) to be out making a fool of himself about Alaskan ice. But he can't resist.



And there it is. I thought you were intelligent, but I see you find it necessary to call the former president of Hewlett Packard, the governors of Texas, Arkansas, Wisconsin, all of which created more jobs than anything Obama ever did--you call that spastic. Now, remind me, what was your complaint about a Creator? Because I'm going to remind myself who is speaking when I hear the complaint.

The issue of the OP does not come down to bone fragments. It comes down to whether this universe is a 'closed system' of naturalism. Because of the collection of data and sources by Dr. Ross in CREATION AND TIME about the abrupt appearance of mankind's abilities in technology, art, worship and records, because of Gonzalez and Richards, because of the sources of Metaxas, I see no rational reason to dismiss God as defined by the Judeo-Christian materials as you do. I find far more reason to dismiss a 'closed system' of natural causes and effects, which has no intelligent--personal first cause, as a very shoddy and selective explanation of things.

If you have moral or socialist reasons for dismissing him, that's a completely different issue than what these scientists (exc. Metaxas) are referring to.

 

[6days]

Wouldn't you think that if there was absolutely no connection between humans and other primates, there would be a very clear and distinct line between the two, and specimens like this would never exist?

Right Divider said that was a nice assumption. I would like to say it's also a silly assumption. You can look for similarities and differences between any two organisms.*

Dogs and cats have many similarities, and when you find a fossil, it may not be perfectly clear from bones what type of creature it was. The similarities are great evidence of a Designer who uses similar blue prints to manufacture a car, or build a house.

One thing that is somewhat funny in evolutionist reconstructions and depictions of ape and human fossils. If the fossil appears human-like, *it's often depicted as a hairy 'being' with a blank stare. If the fossil appears apelike it is sometimes shown in an exaggerated upright position...less hair and with bright inquisitive eyes.*

 

[Jose Fly]

Right Divider said that was a nice assumption. I would like to say it's also a silly assumption. You can look for similarities and differences between any two organisms.

Even if they were created completely separately?

Dogs and cats have many similarities, and when you find a fossil, it may not be perfectly clear from bones what type of creature it was. The similarities are great evidence of a Designer who uses similar blue prints to manufacture a car, or build a house.

So now transitional fossils are a prediction of creationism? Why then have creationists devoted so much time and effort into arguing that transitional fossils don't exist?

 

[Alate_One]

So now transitional fossils are a prediction of creationism? Why then have creationists devoted so much time and effort into arguing that transitional fossils don't exist?

No, no. No matter what fossil you find or pattern of DNA. YECs will tell you common design! Even if it doesn't make any sense.

These same similarities and differences are what make such a workable classification system.

 

[Stuu]

Stu,
I think this might touch a nerve for you as a scientist, at least as far as I can tell you have that background. Obama knew what Muir said about Glacier Bay's ice! It was already gone in 1900. And Obama still told the world that industry since the mid 1900s had ruined Glacier Bay and had to be stopped! Idiot! Idiot populace! He's too busy being Irans' buddy and making people mad at Ferguson police (a total fabrication that Holder admitted) to be out making a fool of himself about Alaskan ice. But he can't resist.



And there it is. I thought you were intelligent, but I see you find it necessary to call the former president of Hewlett Packard, the governors of Texas, Arkansas, Wisconsin, all of which created more jobs than anything Obama ever did--you call that spastic. Now, remind me, what was your complaint about a Creator? Because I'm going to remind myself who is speaking when I hear the complaint.

The issue of the OP does not come down to bone fragments. It comes down to whether this universe is a 'closed system' of naturalism. Because of the collection of data and sources by Dr. Ross in CREATION AND TIME about the abrupt appearance of mankind's abilities in technology, art, worship and records, because of Gonzalez and Richards, because of the sources of Metaxas, I see no rational reason to dismiss God as defined by the Judeo-Christian materials as you do. I find far more reason to dismiss a 'closed system' of natural causes and effects, which has no intelligent--personal first cause, as a very shoddy and selective explanation of things.

If you have moral or socialist reasons for dismissing him, that's a completely different issue than what these scientists (exc. Metaxas) are referring to.

You seem to be limited to catchphrases and trivial personal outrage.

Is that former Governor of Texas the one that lied about nuclear weapons in Iraq as the pretext for invading and killing people? Politicians make mistakes. How many people have died so far because of Obama's? Maybe it's not zero. I bet its not as many as have died in Iraq.

Do you understand why he has made a deal with Iran?? You don't have to agree with it but I think if you are going off on a rant you should at least comprehend it.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

The similarities are great evidence of a Designer who uses similar blue prints to manufacture a car, or build a house.

I think you still haven't answered my question about whether, with common design, you would predict that the same job would be found to be done in the same way in different animals.

Stuart

 

[6days]

On September 10th*the media began highlighting the latest fossil find which is argued, once again, to be representative of an ancient ancestor of humans—Homo naledi....

"No wonder, even at this early stage, paleoanthropologists who are critical of Berger’s claims are not hard to find.*USA Today*reported...

"Bottom line: the evolutionary community must continue its search for conclusive evidence of its claims that we evolved from an ape-like creature...In so doing, would they not highlight for the world, before the world forgets the previous flawed claims,*how unsupported by solid evidence the theory of evolution truly is?
https://www.apologeticspress.org/AP.../2/2015a&utm_campaign=Oct+14&utm_medium=email

 

[Greg Jennings]

Looks a lot like they created another fiji mermaid, piltdown man, or lucy.

You creationists need to quit hanging out with Jesse Ventura so much. His love of conspiracy theories is wearing off on you

 

[Greg Jennings]

i see an artist that serves Darwinism.

everready

I suggest you take a closer look at the actual skull shown to the right of the artist's rendering. The shape is identical, which makes sense because, from the article, "Artist Gurche spent some 700 hours reconstructing the head from bone scans, using bear fur for hair."

Bone scans are pretty straightforward. Not a whole lot of room for artistic interpretation

 

[Greg Jennings]

Well, it is the work of artist.

From the article: "Artist Gurche spent some 700 hours reconstructing the head from bone scans, using bear fur for hair."

As said above, bone scans leave no room for artistic interpretation. They are what they are.

 

[Greg Jennings]

The Dead Sea Scrolls say that Noah was the first white man born, and that he had blue eyes. Before then, people only had brown eyes.

The Dead Sea Scrolls also includes the gospel of Thomas. You must obviously believe that too?

I think Evolutionist do not like the fact that white men came from the darker skinned peoples.

According to human evolutionary theory, all humans alive today are descended from dark-skinned African people. Ethiopian, likely. So there goes that brilliant assertion of yours.

Would it kill you to do some light reading so you don't make a fool of yourself?

 

[6days]

Bone scans are pretty straightforward. Not a whole lot of room for artistic interpretation

False.
Bone scan reconstruction has tons of leeway.
Was the skull covered with hairy fur, or human skin? How thick were the lips? Were the eyes bright and humanize, or dull like a monkey?

Evolutionists have a history of trying to make human fossils appear apelike, and making apelike fossils appear more human.

 

[Greg Jennings]

False.
Bone scan reconstruction has tons of leeway.
Was the skull covered with hairy fur, or human skin? How thick were the lips? Were the eyes bright and humanize, or dull like a monkey?

Evolutionists have a history of trying to make human fossils appear apelike, and making apelike fossils appear more human.

That has nothing to do with bone scans. Go back and look at what I responded to. It was about the shape of the skull, nothing more. That shape was determined only by scans and is not open to artistic expression.

You're correct that the color and fur on the face is unknown for certain, but not the shape of the face. That's a known commodity. Do you deny that the face shape is accurate? And if you don't, does it not appear strikingly ape-like in just its pure structure? Just look at the skull itself if you like, don't even look at the reconstructed face.


Side questions: what do you mean humans have "bright" eyes while monkeys have "dull" ones? And are you aware of the important difference between a monkey and an ape?

 

[oatmeal]

Even though there haven't been any threads on it here at ToL, I'm sure most everyone has at least heard about the hominid fossils discovered deep in a South African cave. If not, National Geographic has a very good article...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/09/150910-human-evolution-change/

In sum, these specimens show a fascinating mixture of modern and primitive traits, which is what we would expect if humans shared an evolutionary common ancestry with other primates.

But one of the more entertaining aspects of finds like these is to watch the creationists try and figure out how to force them into their religious belief that such organisms must either be "fully human" or "fully ape". So what are we seeing?

Bones of Contention: How Will Creationists Respond To A Huge New Hominid Fossil Find?

Answers in Genesis sez: Fully ape

Institute for Creation Research sez: Doesn't matter, but maybe human

Kurt Wise sez: Fully human

Reasons to Believe sez: Fully ape

Todd Wood sez: I dunno

And creationists wonder why they're laughed at? Hilarious. :chuckle:

Wow, and not only bones but a portrait of the animal that it belonged to and they knew its hair and eye color.

That's incredible,

no, wait, that is incredibly stupid

 

[Greg Jennings]

Wow, and not only bones but a portrait of the animal that it belonged to and they knew its hair and eye color.

That's incredible,

no, wait, that is incredibly stupid

Great apes (outside of Homo sapiens, of course) only have three basic fur colors: black, brown, and orange. All apes have brown eyes with very very rare exception. The artist made the reconstruction have black hair with brown eyes, exactly like a modern chimpanzee or gorilla does. Tell me what problem there is with that?

Do you want to comment on the fossils themselves? Did you read the article even a little?

 

[6days]

That has nothing to do with bone scans. Go back and look at what I responded to. It was about the shape of the skull, nothing more. That shape was determined only by scans and is not open to artistic expression.*

Uh... there were no intact skulls found that I heard of. The "ARTIST" spent 700 hours reconstructing the head