Is the evolutionary doctrine a racist doctrine?

[IndigoChild5559]

So, how did they get to Australia? There were no boats to travel that distance

Why do you assume there were no boats? Most hunter gatherer tribes make boats of some sort.

Also remember that in many ages, the sea levels were much lower, meaning that a lot of the distance was land and not water at that time.

 

[Kenny]

Why do you assume there were no boats? Most hunter gatherer tribes make boats of some sort.

Also remember that in many ages, the sea levels were much lower, meaning that a lot of the distance was land and not water at that time.

The first evidence of dugout canoes is 6,000 BC.

Human evidence in Australia, according to archaeologists, is 40,000 BC way before evidence of the most simplest of canoes and those canoes probably wouldn’t attempt to reach a land they don’t even know exists.

The options that we have is IMV:

1) There was only one continent
2) Waterline was so low you could just walk
3) Different apes (or other species) became men

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The first evidence of dugout canoes is 6,000 BC.

I have a headache and don't want to research this, so lets assume the oldest remains of boats we have are 6000 years ago. So? That simply means that older boats decayed.

Basically, if recent hunter gatherer tribes made boats, then we have no reason to think that earlier hunter gatherer tribes did not.

 

[YoursTrue]

People do that. Scientists do not.

So scientifically speaking, there are no races. Would you agree with that?

 

[YoursTrue]

I have a headache and don't want to research this, so lets assume the oldest remains of boats we have are 6000 years ago. So? That simply means that older boats decayed.

Basically, if recent hunter gatherer tribes made boats, then we have no reason to think that earlier hunter gatherer tribes did not.

Maybe also like language developing from grunts over100,000 years or so.

 

[John53]

The first evidence of dugout canoes is 6,000 BC.

Human evidence in Australia, according to archaeologists, is 40,000 BC way before evidence of the most simplest of canoes and those canoes probably wouldn’t attempt to reach a land they don’t even know exists.

The options that we have is IMV:

1) There was only one continent
2) Waterline was so low you could just walk
3) Different apes (or other species) became men

The oldest dugout found was made about 8,000 BC according to wikipedia Pesse canoe - Wikipedia

I haven't looked into it for many years but from memory the claim was sea levels were lower and there was a land bridge from SE Asia down through Indonesia to PNG then Australia.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Yes, we really do know this.

And yet we also know this...

As the early hominids lost their protective hair, their skin evolved to be dark to protect them from the sun in central Africa.

So your assumption is only true if early man evolved from ape ancestors which had hair. If that is false, than logic tells us that individuals who didn't have lots of body hair weren't black!

I'd argue that skin colour is unknown and given that Gods chosen people traditionally were the jews whose lineage came from Chaldeans, its unlikely Adam and Eve were black Africans.
Skin was probably darker than bedsheet white Poms, but not as dark as evolutionists claim.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So, how did they get to Australia? There were no boats to travel that distance

What distance? They came from Asia. They did not come directly from Africa. And sea level during the last glaciation was about 400 feet lower. This may help, the light gray is the exposed ocean bottom during the last glaciation:

 

[Subduction Zone]

And yet we also know this...

As the early hominids lost their protective hair, their skin evolved to be dark to protect them from the sun in central Africa.

So your assumption is only true if early man evolved from ape ancestors which had hair. If that is false, than logic tells us that individuals who didn't have lots of body hair weren't black!

I'd argue that skin colour is unknown and given that Gods chosen people traditionally were the jews whose lineage came from Chaldeans, its unlikely Adam and Eve were black Africans.
Skin was probably darker than bedsheet white Poms, but not as dark as evolutionists claim.

And you should not use the word "assumption" unless you can prove that it is an assumption. Conclusions drawn based upon evidence are not assumptions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The first evidence of dugout canoes is 6,000 BC.

Human evidence in Australia, according to archaeologists, is 40,000 BC way before evidence of the most simplest of canoes and those canoes probably wouldn’t attempt to reach a land they don’t even know exists.

The options that we have is IMV:

1) There was only one continent
2) Waterline was so low you could just walk
3) Different apes (or other species) became men

You are misunderstanding the evidence. All that finding 6,000 year old dugouts tell us is that they had that technology for at least 6,000 years. They could have existed for long before then. I do not know enough about finding dugouts, but if you have thousands of years between finds that means that very few are preserved that long. The further you go bac the less likely that any exist to survive.

Oh boy! I just did a quick Google search on when sea level rising from the last glaciation ended. I will give you one guess as to then it ended. The answer is in a spoiler. This explains why we have no dogouts older than 6,000 years:

Spoiler: The mysterious answer

Sea level rise ended about 6,000 years ago. You do not find any dugouts older than that because people do not haul heavy boats far from the ocean. The rising seas covered the old defunct and abandoned dugouts. They clearly had them at 6,000 years ago, but since the technology arose during the ice age or very soon after we will not find those old boats. They are covered by the rising seas.

Global sea-level rise at the end of the last Ice Age | National Oceanography Centre

Southampton researchers have estimated that sea-level rose by an average of about 1 metre per century at the end of the last Ice Age, interrupted by

noc.ac.uk

 

[John53]

The first evidence of dugout canoes is 6,000 BC.

Human evidence in Australia, according to archaeologists, is 40,000 BC way before evidence of the most simplest of canoes and those canoes probably wouldn’t attempt to reach a land they don’t even know exists.

The options that we have is IMV:

1) There was only one continent
2) Waterline was so low you could just walk
3) Different apes (or other species) became men

It should also be noted that many Australian Aboriginals would say they have always been here. Their ancestors and traditional learnings tell them of this history, and their precise place within it.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

And yet we also know this...

As the early hominids lost their protective hair, their skin evolved to be dark to protect them from the sun in central Africa.

So your assumption is only true if early man evolved from ape ancestors which had hair. If that is false, than logic tells us that individuals who didn't have lots of body hair weren't black!

I'd argue that skin colour is unknown and given that Gods chosen people traditionally were the jews whose lineage came from Chaldeans, its unlikely Adam and Eve were black Africans.
Skin was probably darker than bedsheet white Poms, but not as dark as evolutionists claim.

Are you saying that humans didn't evolve dark skin until AFTER we lost our fur? Well, I'm not saying that is not the case, but I don't think we can that's for sure. Some apes like Gorillas have dark skin. So the possibility exists that dark skin predates homo sapiens.

I'm not really sure why you are so obsessed with skin color, and I have to confess, I'm a little uncomfortable with it.

And Adam and Eve are not historical people. For that matter, DNA analysis indicates the closest relatives to the Israelites were the Canaanites, not the Chaldeans.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Maybe also like language developing from grunts over100,000 years or so.

Chimps have about 400 different scream combinations that means specific things.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So scientifically speaking, there are no races. Would you agree with that?

right.

Unless you want to completely redefine race so that it doesn't refer to biological distinct groups, but rather social constructs. But we already have a word for that--ethnicities.

 

[Comradio251]

What explanation does the evolutionary doctrine give to the different human races? Does this have to do with the species of apes that populated the different regions of the earth?

In any case, in human likeness, how many different races exist among the apes that later, according to evolutionary doctrine, became the different human races?

It should be more bothersome to you that evolution does an even better job at undermining your intelligence. Comparing Robert Oppenheimer to an ape variant is an embarrassment. But not only to him but to humanity as a whole. It's the biggest insult there is!

 

[John53]

It should be more bothersome to you that evolution does an even better job at undermining your intelligence. Comparing Robert Oppenheimer to an ape variant is an embarrassment. But not only to him but to humanity as a whole. It's the biggest insult there is!

I'm not insulted by it and can't for the life of me figure out why anybody would.

 

[YoursTrue]

Chimps have about 400 different scream combinations that means specific things.

Guess they don't feel the need to write them down.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Guess they don't feel the need to write them down.

why would that be an issue?

 

[YoursTrue]

why would that be an issue?

They haven't developed cable services in case of emergencies. Of course, in the sense of a crash that happened to the bridge recently, I guess humans have a long way to go.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

They haven't developed cable services in case of emergencies. Of course, in the sense of a crash that happened to the bridge recently, I guess humans have a long way to go.

Again you are saying a whole bunch of stuff that seems to have no relevance to chimp language. I'll give you another opportunity to clarify, and if you aren't able to do so, I'll just move on.