Sasquatch, Bigfoot (evolution, creation, hell)

[Tau]

If the abominable snowman or yeti or saquatch or whatever these creatures are called in the lands they are found turn out to be closely related cousins of humans, perhaps genetically close enough to reproduce with each other *shudder* then surely this rather hampers any religious fundamentalist argument that man is not an animal and furthermore verifies and strengthens the evolutionary explanation for the appearance of man?

[misanthropic_clown]

I don't know...perhaps the Loch Ness monster will come into play somehow.

[Tau]

Originally Posted by misanthropic_clown

I don't know...perhaps the Loch Ness monster will come into play somehow.

Bigfoot and his relatives get seen a hell of a lot more than poor nessie.

[misanthropic_clown]

Originally Posted by Tau

Bigfoot and his relatives get seen a hell of a lot more than poor nessie.

I'm still not keen to propagate a discussion of "If a creature widely considered not to exist exists, surely that's a bad thing for creationists"

It's akin to, but not as bad as, saying "If the scientific community makes up fossil records, surely thats a bad thing for evolutionists"

[Willamena]

"Surely" according to whom?

[Father Heathen]

We would need actual specimens before speculating about their place on the evolutionary tree.

[misanthropic_clown]

Indeed, I guess that even if the assertions are true it does not follow that it is a bad/deciding thing for any particular side. I stand corrected.

[Tau]

Originally Posted by misanthropic_clown

I'm still not keen to propagate a discussion of "If a creature widely considered not to exist exists, surely that's a bad thing for creationists"

Widely considered not to exist?

As skeptical as you may be there are good reasons to consider it a possibilty, I wont go into that arguement now but consider this a hypothetical exercise if you will and then come back to me.

[misanthropic_clown]

Originally Posted by Tau

Widely considered not to exist?

As skeptical as you may be there are good reasons to consider it a possibilty, I wont go into that arguement now but consider this a hypothetical exercise if you will and then come back to me.

Hypothetical exercises are only any good when the conclusion is not reached within the time taken to read the scenario. Even if bigfoot were widely considered to exist, the answer to your question is blatantly obvious as soon as it has been asked.

[+Xausted]

slightly off the OP, but does anyone out there really believe in this nonsense?