Forbidden Archeology

[jonathan180iq]

I asked for evidence, not personal beliefs and established beliefs.

What makes us human? | Understanding Genetics
Molecular evolution of FOXP2, a gene involved in speech and language. - PubMed - NCBI
https://richarddawkins.net/2014/01/...s-us-human-newstatesman-w-polish-translation/

 

[Valjean]

To show that all truth is determined by the authority and power of the system, aka the world or the "beast". So that all men worship the system, worship meaning follow or submit to the system aka world or beast.

You're sounding more paranoid and delusional with every post, Kemosloby. You seem to have a fantstical conviction of a magical, spirit dominated world, with men in collusion with one side or another.

Well, I could say that evolution on the grand scale is just poorly crafted atheist propaganda and it's hooey - but I won't say that.

Evolution on a grand scale is well supported by a mountain of facts and research, from a dozen different disciplines.
Atheist propaganda? What does atheism have to do with it? Scientists report and interpret tangible facts, not theology. I suspect it's theists, whose world-view and ego-integrity are threatened by the facts reported, who are defensively crying "atheist!" and seeing conspiracies and agendas around every bend.

One should look at all of the different ways of interpreting the evidence and keep an open mind. Don't you think so?

And isn't that exactly what science does? Scientists actively try to punch holes in their own theorums, and publish them for others to take a whack at. Science texts print a request right in the front asking readers to notify the author of any errors or inconsistencies. This is how science works, and why we have high confidence in its theories.
I just wish religion would be so rigorous.

The article you cited is just about mosquitos. It says nothing of what might have evolved into mosquitos and how or why.

What's your point? Science doesn't know every step of every process, but it knows the process. As it connects the dots the big picture becomes ever clearer -- the "grand scale," as you put it.

 

[gnostic]

People have been known to try to pull off elaborate hoaxes. If the powers that be are behind it they would have unlimited resources and people willing to lie.

That sounds more like those people who advocate for Young Earth Creationism (YEC) and Intelligent Design (ID)...and Southern Baptists and Jehovah's Witnesses (JW).

 

[Polymath257]

Glory? They want to be published for recognition? Why do they make up those stories?

One of the fastest ways to achieve scientific recognition is to give evidence showing the current paradigm is wrong.

So the motivation is to prove the current views to be wrong, not to uphold 'stories' with no basis in fact.

 

[Kemosloby]

One of the fastest ways to achieve scientific recognition is to give evidence showing the current paradigm is wrong.

So the motivation is to prove the current views to be wrong, not to uphold 'stories' with no basis in fact.

Not to say all science is a hoax. I don't think it is a fast way to gain recognition to prove climate change false, at least not until they are finished with it's political applications. Then 50 years later someone can make a name for themselves proving it wrong

 

[LuisDantas]

There is no "forbidden" archeology. There are strong levels of denial and ignorance of the available evidence.

All of the so-called "controversy" is a cheap conspiracy theory fed by misplaced pride.

 

[roger1440]

I asked for evidence, not personal beliefs and established beliefs.

It’s evident it isn’t a smart move for a person to set up camp next to a den of apes. If you want proof give it a shot and let me know how it works out for you.

 

[Polymath257]

Not to say all science is a hoax. I don't think it is a fast way to gain recognition to prove climate change false, at least not until they are finished with it's political applications. Then 50 years later someone can make a name for themselves proving it wrong

Well, it would be quite hard to show that the recent years have had successively broken the average temperature records of the previous years. There is still some question of why. And we still don't know a lot about the climate. So, no doubt there will be tweaks in the future. The basics will certainly stand at this point.

 

[Sonofason]

You can Google all sorts of genetic and fossil evidence.

He could google all sorts of genetic and fossil evidence you claim, but clearly you believe by faith alone.

 

[Sonofason]

Your question doe snot make any sense.
Here is a link to help you get a better background on the topic:
The emergence of humans

Neat page, but I see no evidence displayed on it.

 

[Sapiens]

Neat page, but I see no evidence displayed on it.

Seems pretty clear to me:

I guess there are some saving graces to the Bible, Jeremiah 5:21 seem to apply in Sonofason's case.

 

[Valjean]

He could google all sorts of genetic and fossil evidence you claim, but clearly you believe by faith alone.

Well, in the Cartesian sense, perhaps so, but there's enough accumulated evidence, from enough separate disciplines, that denying the fact of evolution would be more obtuse than denying the existence of a large Ferris wheel in London.

 

[Sonofason]

Well, in the Cartesian sense, perhaps so, but there's enough accumulated evidence, from enough separate disciplines, that denying the fact of evolution would be more obtuse than denying the existence of a large Ferris wheel in London.

Your faith is amazing.

 

[Valjean]

Not faith -- knowledge.
I have evidence.

 

[Sonofason]

Not faith -- knowledge.
I have evidence.

Yeah, like I have evidence of God. We have the evidence, but just can't show it. Isn't that right?

 

[Polymath257]

Yeah, like I have evidence of God. We have the evidence, but just can't show it. Isn't that right?

No. The evidence is freely available. It might require you to learn something before understanding it, but it is out there. At the very worst, you can go to a university library and look at the published journal articles.

 

[Sonofason]

No. The evidence is freely available. It might require you to learn something before understanding it, but it is out there. At the very worst, you can go to a university library and look at the published journal articles.

Yeah, just like the evidence of God. It might require you to learn something before you understand it, but it is out there.

 

[Polymath257]

Yeah, just like the evidence of God. It might require you to learn something before you understand it, but it is out there.

I *have* learned the required prerequisites. And I still find the evidence to be non-existent. NONE of the standard arguments for the existence of a deity hold water. Usually they fail for rather trivial reasons.

So, provide a link or article that has the evidence for God.

 

[Sonofason]

I *have* learned the required prerequisites. And I still find the evidence to be non-existent. NONE of the standard arguments for the existence of a deity hold water. Usually they fail for rather trivial reasons.

So, provide a link or article that has the evidence for God.

 

[Polymath257]

Read it. Massive fail.