Are you Greater than an Ape?

[IndigoChild5559]

Wait, a bit!
Lucy's skeleton is almost complete?
Who told you that?
you are either telling a lie, or you are totally indoctronated by pseudoscience BS!
Lucy's carcass comprises of only 40%!
Why this lie?
Do you know that the knee bone, which incidently was the reason to believe Lucy walked upright, was...
DISCOVERED HALF A KILOMETER AWAY?
Furthermore, all I see is an ape that might have walked upright that died out, became extinct!
And you say that ape is your MAMA?

Considering that most fossils are only a hip or a jawbone, yes, we would say that Lucy's is almost complete. For example, we know that the skeleton is symmetrical. The femur on one side is going to resemble the femur on the other side. The ribs on one side are going to resemble the ribs on the other side. In this way, we can reconstruct almost the entire body of Lucy.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The only art on any Homonid comes from your atheist evolutionist pseudo scientists.
They are the ones who would draw an ape looking human like.
If I were to use creationist websites, you will see fully apes.

They base their art on known evidence. See my previous comment on why virtually all pictures of Australopithecus has hair.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

OK, so we found an ape carcass, the legbone 500 meters away, in the area we found pebble size tools, and you know it was Lucy.

If you can't be honest, why should I dialogue with you?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Lovely, so you then agree with the statement that all people descended from two ancestors.
A male and female Human.
Sounds a bit Biblical to me.
And by the way, how do you know that our ancestors came from Africa?
This is also a lie!
What if the African humans came from the middle east?
And you now wish it to be from Africa because you want the Lucy's to be the parents of Africans, and the Africans the parents of the rest of the world!
There is no way to determine geographical origins by DNA!

We do you Y chromosomal "Adam" and Mitochonrial "Eve" but they are not born at the same time -- Y chromosomal Adam lived between 120,000 and 156,000 years ago. Mitochonrial Eve lived 180,000 to 580,000 years ago. Modern homo sapiens, btw, have been around for about 200,000 years. It is possible that Mitochondrial Eve existed before modern human beings.

And yes, we know that modern homo sapiens originated in Africa and migrated out, because that is what the fossil record shows.

You are basing your ideas on a creation myth. Should the Hope base their science on their own creation myth? They would be doing the exact same thing!!!

 

[Thief]

and the question remains....let's use the word......'we'

ARE we greater than apes?

and this is the general religious debate section
not the evolution vs creation section

 

[Subduction Zone]

and the question remains....let's use the word......'we'

ARE we greater than apes?

and this is the general religious debate section
not the evolution vs creation section

Your poorly asked question makes it part of the evolution vs creation series of corrections.

 

[Thief]

Your poorly asked question makes it part of the evolution vs creation series of corrections.

nay....

 

[Subduction Zone]

nay....

You could always rephrase your question. I could even suggest a solution for you.

 

[Thief]

You could always rephrase your question. I could even suggest a solution for you.

I might continue with an assumption

you are not greater than an ape

 

[Subduction Zone]

I might continue with an assumption

you are not greater than an ape

And neither are you.

This is due to your poorly formed OP. Instead of making yourself look worse than others why not politely ask for help when it is offered?

 

[SA Huguenot]

All this back and forth about fossils and such just skirts the real issue at hand. Creationist absolutely refuse to believe that they are related to other primates....period. It's a hard line in the sand that they will never, ever compromise on. That explains why they're seemingly unconcerned about telling lies (Lucy's leg bone being found at another site). As long as it supports the maintenance of that line in the sand, it's all good.

All this back and forth about fossils and such just skirts the real issue at hand. Atheists absolutely refuse to believe that they are created by God....period. It's a hard line in the sand that they will never, ever compromise on. That explains why they're seemingly unconcerned about telling lies (Ape fossils lined up to explain some lineage to man). As long as it supports the maintenance of that line in the sand, it's all good.
Your opinion, ...
My opinion!

 

[Subduction Zone]

All this back and forth about fossils and such just skirts the real issue at hand. Atheists absolutely refuse to believe that they are created by God....period. It's a hard line in the sand that they will never, ever compromise on. That explains why they're seemingly unconcerned about telling lies (Ape fossils lined up to explain some lineage to man). As long as it supports the maintenance of that line in the sand, it's all good.
Your opinion, ...
My opinion!

All you have is opinion. We have facts, observations, evidence and science on our side. And it is not a matter of refusing to believe. That is your flaw. It is the fact that you have no reliable evidence on your side.

Do you want to know why creationists lose court cases all of the time, even when a conservative Christian judge is hearing the case? It is because judges are experts on evidence too and they recognize the fact that there is none for your beliefs.

 

[SA Huguenot]

You asked the creationist in this thread why he won't address the evidence that's been presented to him. The answer to that is obvious.....because this isn't about the data. For creationists, this is about theology (and more deeply, psychology), not biology. And because of that, most attempts to persuade by appealing to the science are doomed to fail.

Realy?
Why dont we start to get the evidence?
Give me one piece of evidence I can scrutinize.
I weighed Islam, JW's, LDS, Christianity (Protestant, Catholic), and Atheism.
I found only Christianity true.
Ateism likes to pretend they are nutral and dont have any religious belief, however their theology is EVOLUTION!
I went deeply into the Evolutionist's "Claims" of being scientificly proven, and was deeply dissappointed with the poor evidence they blew up to make a scientific claim.
If I were to use such sillyness to say, start a businuss, I will go bancrupt in a week.
So, give me one conclusive bit of evidence I can use to see that we descended from an Apelike creature.

 

[SA Huguenot]

All you have is opinion. We have facts, observations, evidence and science on our side. And it is not a matter of refusing to believe. That is your flaw. It is the fact that you have no reliable evidence on your side.

Do you want to know why creationists lose court cases all of the time, even when a conservative Christian judge is hearing the case? It is because judges are experts on evidence too and they recognize the fact that there is none for your beliefs.

Interesting.
Are you talking about the scopes trial, or perhaps Behe's testimony?
Give us a bit more information!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Interesting.
Are you talking about the scopes trial, or perhaps Behe's testimony?
Give us a bit more information!

The Scopes Trial is the one case when a very biased judge fell for the creationist BS. History has not treated that poor fool kindly.

I saw that you requested evidence in your prior post. The problem is that you do not understand the concept. Would you like to learn what is and what is not evidence first?

 

[SA Huguenot]

They base their art on known evidence. See my previous comment on why virtually all pictures of Australopithecus has hair.

Great!
So perhaps you can tell me how an artist can place the Laeotoli footprints (pure Modern Human prints) on Lucy?
This without any , not a single foot bone discovery made on the fossil!
This is science?
Do you see my observation of bias and fraud?
And you swallowed the "SCIENTIFIC" artist rendering hook line and sinker.

 

[SA Huguenot]

The Scopes Trial is the one case when a very biased judge fell for the creationist BS. History has not treated that poor fool kindly.

I saw that you requested evidence in your prior post. The problem is that you do not understand the concept. Would you like to learn what is and what is not evidence first?

pal, I am still waiting for you to tell me what the "scientific method" is?

 

[Subduction Zone]

pal, I am still waiting for you to tell me what the "scientific method" is?

I am not going to just tell you. Are you willing to learn?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Great!
So perhaps you can tell me how an artist can place the Laeotoli footprints (pure Modern Human prints) on Lucy?
This without any , not a single foot bone discovery made on the fossil!
This is science?
Do you see my observation of bias and fraud?
And you swallowed the "SCIENTIFIC" artist rendering hook line and sinker.

You do realize that Lucy was not the only Australopithecus ever found, don't you? Feet were not found immediately. Those were found in later specimens. The early artistic renderings were based upon reason and were shown to be more than reasonably accurate.

And the Laetoli footprints are not "pure Modern Human". I can find quite a few for you and most show a rather obvious gap between the big toe and others:

 

[SA Huguenot]

New footprints from Laetoli (Tanzania) provide evidence for marked body size variation in early hominins | eLife
Rather try this scientific descriptions of the Laeotoli footprints.
The picture you gave can be interperated as having an opposable big toe.
The prints are "modern Human"
African Footprint Fossils Are Oldest Evidence of Upright Walk
Try this website to see how tests show that the Laeotoli prints tells us that the one who made the prints, walked like a human, was taller than Lucy, and it's foot looked like that of modern human.
Now while you are giving me this information, can you tell me how do you know that the fossil of Lucy, or her family, made that prints.
This was the question I asked myself in 2010.
lets see if you find the answer.