Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

All other historical discussion, ancient or modern, falls here.
User avatar
lpetrich
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:20 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by lpetrich » Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:44 pm

Interchange "creationist" and "evolutionist" and one gets what a creationist would say. John T, explain in your own words what you consider creationism and what you consider evolution.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 969
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:46 am

lpetrich wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:44 pm
Interchange "creationist" and "evolutionist" and one gets what a creationist would say. John T, explain in your own words what you consider creationism and what you consider evolution.
So as to cut to the chase, it would be better for you to define your understanding (or lack thereof) of the words.

Sadly, most so-called evolutionists have never taken the time to question/analyze their beliefs to see whether they are based on faith or science.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
lpetrich
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:20 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by lpetrich » Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:40 am

John T wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:46 am
lpetrich wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:44 pm
Interchange "creationist" and "evolutionist" and one gets what a creationist would say. John T, explain in your own words what you consider creationism and what you consider evolution.
So as to cut to the chase, it would be better for you to define your understanding (or lack thereof) of the words.
After you.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 969
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Sat Apr 07, 2018 3:16 pm

lpetrich wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:40 am
John T wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:46 am
lpetrich wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:44 pm
Interchange "creationist" and "evolutionist" and one gets what a creationist would say. John T, explain in your own words what you consider creationism and what you consider evolution.
So as to cut to the chase, it would be better for you to define your understanding (or lack thereof) of the words.
After you.
Already asked and answered. :?
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
lpetrich
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:20 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by lpetrich » Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:59 pm

Where did you do so? I don't recall you ever doing so. Here is what I mean:

Evolution = descent with modification
Creationism = ancestral populations poofed into existence by some superbeing (or beings)

User avatar
John T
Posts: 969
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Mon Apr 09, 2018 5:26 pm

lpetrich wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:59 pm
Where did you do so? I don't recall you ever doing so. Here is what I mean:

Evolution = descent with modification
Creationism = ancestral populations poofed into existence by some superbeing (or beings)
I thought I made it very clear that Piltdown Man was an example of creationism. That is; archaeologist Charles Dawson fabricated evidence to create the missing-link in his own image.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spe ... 3b4df46ffa

Not much has changed in a hundred years.

Evolutionists are still frustrated by the lack of evidence of the mythical missing link. The missing link is a long-sought transitional form between modern humans and our direct ancestor from the great apes.

Transitional species of other animals e.g. horses have long since been established. However, current fossil record shows no such transitional species for modern humans. What the fossil record does show is modern humans seemed to have "poofed" into existence that is, using the geological time scale. So, instead of admitting they still don't have squat after a hundred and fifty years of digging, evolutionists repeatedly try to convince the ignorant masses that a new discovery of a finger bone or tooth promises to be a major breakthrough in the search for the missing link. Yet, much like claims of finding Bigfoot, the evidence provided does not stand up to the scrutiny of the scientific method.

Wet, lather, rinse, and repeat.

Here is the latest version of the evolution of modern humans based on a finger bone found in Saudi Arabia.

https://aawsat.com/english/home/article ... ans-arabia

I predict this latest theory will be quickly be abandoned. Just image the outrage when an atheist/evolutionist is asked to confirm the evidence and then realizes that the Levant region includes the area known in the Bible as the Garden of Eden. ...Modern humans emerged from the Garden of Eden region?! Say what?! :wtf:

For them, mapping out human evolution is not about science but in promoting the religious beliefs of the atheist.


Do you see the hypocrisy now?
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
lpetrich
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:20 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by lpetrich » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:43 pm

John T wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 5:26 pm
lpetrich wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:59 pm
Where did you do so? I don't recall you ever doing so. Here is what I mean:

Evolution = descent with modification
Creationism = ancestral populations poofed into existence by some superbeing (or beings)
I thought I made it very clear that Piltdown Man was an example of creationism. That is; archaeologist Charles Dawson fabricated evidence to create the missing-link in his own image.
That's not what is usually called creationism.
Evolutionists are still frustrated by the lack of evidence of the mythical missing link. The missing link is a long-sought transitional form between modern humans and our direct ancestor from the great apes.
What do you think that the "missing link" is supposed to be? State it in your own words.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 969
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:35 am

lpetrich wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:43 pm

What do you think that the "missing link" is supposed to be? State it in your own words.
Actually, there are several missing links, that is gaps (complete lack of fossil evidence) in the evolution of modern man.

However, I will focus on the most recent one which should be the easiest gap to fill in, that is the gap between H. heidelbergensis and H. sapiens.

Most believers in the theory of evolution are not aware that no known transitional species between H. heidelbergensis and H. sapiens exsist. Most likely because Homo heidelbergensis is nothing more than a mere variant of Homo erectus.

Pay attention next time when you look at a diagram of the evolutionary tree for humans and make sure to read the small print at the bottom of the diagram. Why? Because honest textbooks will always include the disclaimer that the diagram represents a hypothetical family tree and not an actual family tree.

According to current theory, Homo heidelbergensis was believed to have gone extinct about 200,000 years ago. Modern humans emerged around 150,000 years ago. In other words, the gap for the missing link to appear and disappeared without a trace is only about 50,000 years, a blink of an eye in evolutionary terms. Using your terminology, it is as if the missing link 'poofed into existence by some superbeing (or beings) ' and then out of existence.

Yet, paleonathropologists still have faith in their religious doctrine of evolution that perhaps tomorrow a spade will turn over a tooth or finger bone that finally proves modern humans evolved from H. heidelbergensis.

As for me, I side with DNA science and not the religious dogma of the atheist/evolutionist.

Sincerely,

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

jferris
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 6:50 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by jferris » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:44 pm

John T,

I've been following your arguments with interest, but I find that I'm having trouble understanding them. Could you please articulate what you mean by "creationism" and "evolution?"

User avatar
John T
Posts: 969
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:56 pm

jferris wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:44 pm
John T,

I've been following your arguments with interest, but I find that I'm having trouble understanding them. Could you please articulate what you mean by "creationism" and "evolution?"
The terms are subjective just like motives.
That is why I politely ask others to define their terms and disengage those who refuse.

Experience tells me, those who refuse to define their terms are not interested in real science but in promoting their religious views, i.e. atheism or theism.

I suppose you think the word "creationism" is religious based and "evolution" is science based. That creationism is mythical and evolution is fact.

I on the other hand, look at the terms through the lens of science and see how they have been falsely used on both sides and are tools of propaganda.
If you would like to have a truthful discussion about the science of evolution, then by all means ask a question about the science.
If you want to ridicule those who don't believe in your atheist religious view, then by all means go on ahead without me.

Respectfully,

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

Post Reply