Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: Hugo Chavez on September 08, 2011, 11:03:19 PM



Title: candidate for missing link
Post by: Hugo Chavez on September 08, 2011, 11:03:19 PM
'Best candidate for missing link' lived in South Africa 2million years ago... with longer arms but human-like hips

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2035021/Best-candidate-missing-link-lived-South-Africa-2million-years-ago.html#ixzz1XR7CbLYA


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Deicide on September 09, 2011, 04:53:56 AM
'Best candidate for missing link' lived in South Africa 2million years ago... with longer arms but human-like hips

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2035021/Best-candidate-missing-link-lived-South-Africa-2million-years-ago.html#ixzz1XR7CbLYA

The world is only 6,000 years old.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: loco on September 09, 2011, 09:53:41 AM
The world is only 6,000 years old.

Poking fun at Creationists?  Scientists keep on "finally" finding the missing link.  Remember "Ida"?      ;D

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Darwinius_masillae_PMO_214.214.jpg/220px-Darwinius_masillae_PMO_214.214.jpg)

Primate fossil 'not an ancestor'
BBC News
Wednesday, 21 October 2009


The exceptionally well-preserved fossil primate known as "Ida" is not a missing link as some have claimed, according to an analysis in the journal Nature.

The research is the first independent assessment of the claims made in a scientific paper and a television documentary earlier this year.

Dr Erik Seiffert says that Ida belonged to a group more closely linked to lemurs than to monkeys, apes or us.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8318643.stm

Fossil hailed as Man's ancestor is 'not even close relative'
From The Times
October 22, 2009


Darwinius masillae, the primitive primate that was unveiled to the world with huge fanfare and a Sir David Attenborough documentary in May, seems now to have been less of a missing link than an evolutionary dead end.

Far from being an ancestor to humans, the lemur-like creature from 47 million years ago belongs to an entirely different branch of the primate family tree that has left no known descendants, research has indicated.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology_evolution/article6884359.ece


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: garebear on September 09, 2011, 09:59:14 AM
Galileo got outvoted for a spell.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: garebear on September 09, 2011, 10:00:04 AM
Poking fun at Creationists?  Scientists keep on "finally" finding the missing link.  Remember "Ida"?      ;D

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Darwinius_masillae_PMO_214.214.jpg/220px-Darwinius_masillae_PMO_214.214.jpg)

Primate fossil 'not an ancestor'
BBC News
Wednesday, 21 October 2009


The exceptionally well-preserved fossil primate known as "Ida" is not a missing link as some have claimed, according to an analysis in the journal Nature.

The research is the first independent assessment of the claims made in a scientific paper and a television documentary earlier this year.

Dr Erik Seiffert says that Ida belonged to a group more closely linked to lemurs than to monkeys, apes or us.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8318643.stm

Fossil hailed as Man's ancestor is 'not even close relative'
From The Times
October 22, 2009


Darwinius masillae, the primitive primate that was unveiled to the world with huge fanfare and a Sir David Attenborough documentary in May, seems now to have been less of a missing link than an evolutionary dead end.

Far from being an ancestor to humans, the lemur-like creature from 47 million years ago belongs to an entirely different branch of the primate family tree that has left no known descendants, research has indicated.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology_evolution/article6884359.ece
Epic self-owning.

This disproves creationists anyway, fool.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: loco on September 09, 2011, 10:12:06 AM
Epic self-owning.

This disproves creationists anyway, fool.

How so, fool?


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Deicide on September 09, 2011, 10:27:19 AM
Poking fun at Creationists?  Scientists keep on "finally" finding the missing link.  Remember "Ida"?      ;D

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Darwinius_masillae_PMO_214.214.jpg/220px-Darwinius_masillae_PMO_214.214.jpg)

Primate fossil 'not an ancestor'
BBC News
Wednesday, 21 October 2009


The exceptionally well-preserved fossil primate known as "Ida" is not a missing link as some have claimed, according to an analysis in the journal Nature.

The research is the first independent assessment of the claims made in a scientific paper and a television documentary earlier this year.

Dr Erik Seiffert says that Ida belonged to a group more closely linked to lemurs than to monkeys, apes or us.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8318643.stm

Fossil hailed as Man's ancestor is 'not even close relative'
From The Times
October 22, 2009


Darwinius masillae, the primitive primate that was unveiled to the world with huge fanfare and a Sir David Attenborough documentary in May, seems now to have been less of a missing link than an evolutionary dead end.

Far from being an ancestor to humans, the lemur-like creature from 47 million years ago belongs to an entirely different branch of the primate family tree that has left no known descendants, research has indicated.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology_evolution/article6884359.ece

I thought you believed in evolution? Regardless, the basis of evolution remains unchanged and science works by revising its ideas based on evidence, you know that.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: loco on September 09, 2011, 10:39:33 AM
I thought you believed in evolution? Regardless, the basis of evolution remains unchanged and sciences works by revising its ideas based on evidence, you know that.

I do.  Not my point.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Deicide on September 09, 2011, 10:44:34 AM
I do.  Not my point.

What was your point then? and if you believe in evolution, what do you tell your fellow Christians who reject evolution?


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: loco on September 09, 2011, 10:53:36 AM
What was your point then? and if you believe in evolution, what do you tell your fellow Christians who reject evolution?

We've been over this many times.  Christians do believe in evolution.  Some believe in evolution beyond the level of species, while others believe in evolution below the level of species only.  But simply saying that Christians do not believe in evolution is incorrect.  It's like saying that Christians oppose stem cell research.  Many people keep repeating that when it is not true.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Dos Equis on September 09, 2011, 10:56:40 AM
We've been over this many times.  Christians do believe in evolution.  Some believe in evolution beyond the level of species, while others believe in evolution below the level of species only.  But simply saying that Christians do not believe in evolution is incorrect.  It's like saying that Christians oppose stem cell research.  Many people keep repeating that when it is not true.

Correct. 

Also, the "missing link" isn't a single fossil.  It's an entire fossil record. 


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: garebear on September 09, 2011, 11:29:59 AM
Do you believe in Satan?


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Deicide on September 09, 2011, 11:57:34 AM
We've been over this many times.  Christians do believe in evolution.  Some believe in evolution beyond the level of species, while others believe in evolution below the level of species only.  But simply saying that Christians do not believe in evolution is incorrect.  It's like saying that Christians oppose stem cell research.  Many people keep repeating that when it is not true.

I was specifically talking about those Christians who outright reject it.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: loco on September 09, 2011, 12:01:26 PM
I was specifically talking about those Christians who outright reject it.

Like who?  I think you are asking the wrong Christian, about this and about exorcism in the other thread. 


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Deicide on September 09, 2011, 12:23:19 PM
Like who?  I think you are asking the wrong Christian, about this and about exorcism in the other thread. 

Beach Bum does not think evolution is true, nor does he believe the earth is older than 6,000 years. How do you dialogue with a Christian like that with whom you disagree?


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Dos Equis on September 09, 2011, 12:37:42 PM
Beach Bum does not think evolution is true, nor does he believe the earth is older than 6,000 years. How do you dialogue with a Christian like that with whom you disagree?

lol.  O Rly?  Can you quote me on this? 


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: loco on September 09, 2011, 01:05:57 PM
Beach Bum does not think evolution is true, nor does he believe the earth is older than 6,000 years. How do you dialogue with a Christian like that with whom you disagree?

Do you know anyone in this world with whom you agree with on everything, 100%?  If not, then how can you dialogue with anyone?


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Hugo Chavez on September 09, 2011, 01:08:55 PM
fuck man...  I specifially avoided any statements like "ah ha christians, look the missing link" specifically because of past shit like Ida. 


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: loco on September 09, 2011, 01:14:44 PM
fuck man...  I specifially avoided any statements like "ah ha christians, look the missing link" specifically because of past shit like Ida. 

You did well!   ;D


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Deicide on September 09, 2011, 01:31:34 PM
lol.  O Rly?  Can you quote me on this? 

So you do believe that humans share a common ancestor with other apes and that the earth is several billion years old.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Dos Equis on September 09, 2011, 01:43:42 PM
So you do believe that humans share a common ancestor with other apes and that the earth is several billion years old.

Ah.  So now you're asking what I believe, after you posted what I believe?  Very funny.   :)  I don't have a problem answering your questions (which I've posted on this board numerous times), but why don't you quote me first in support of the comments you made about my beliefs. 

And remember Skip's Rule No. 1 from the Politics Board.   :)  http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=393564.0


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Hugo Chavez on September 09, 2011, 02:24:43 PM
Looks like most people actually do believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old :o

Interesting poll results on these questions:

http://www.pollingreport.com/science.htm


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: garebear on September 09, 2011, 02:26:04 PM
The bible doesn't mention evolution because god is testing your faith.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Emmortal on September 10, 2011, 08:03:24 PM
The bible doesn't mention evolution because god is testing your faith.

Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

The Hebrew word for Man is "adam" which is related to the word "adamah" which means ground.

It's been a while since I've studied over this, but the Bible does not discount evolution.  Science and God go hand in hand, they don't go against one another.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: garebear on September 10, 2011, 09:10:49 PM
Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

The Hebrew word for Man is "adam" which is related to the word "adamah" which means ground.

It's been a while since I've studied over this, but the Bible does not discount evolution.  Science and God go hand in hand, they don't go against one another.
Of course that's true. That's why Christians immediately accepted Darwin's premise.

Do you even believe what you just wrote? The Bible didn't even accept that the Earth orbited the sun. THAT took a knock down, drag out fight.

Christians always cling to the illogical until absolutely defeated, and then make lame excuses like this as their argument has been shot to shit.

Are you drunk?



Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2011, 10:00:49 PM
No such thing as a "missing link".  This is just another in a series of transitional forms.


Title: Re: candidate for missing link
Post by: Emmortal on September 10, 2011, 10:38:38 PM
Of course that's true. That's why Christians immediately accepted Darwin's premise.

Do you even believe what you just wrote? The Bible didn't even accept that the Earth orbited the sun. THAT took a knock down, drag out fight.

Christians always cling to the illogical until absolutely defeated, and then make lame excuses like this as their argument has been shot to shit.

Are you drunk?


Where exactly in the Bible does it say the earth doesn't orbit the sun?  You are lumping in the ideologues of the church as some sort of proof for your argument.  I don't respect an entity who's sole purpose is to spread it's power over man while forsaking the very charges they are held to by Jesus Christ.

There are plenty of people who are ignorant in this world, that doesn't mean all of us are.  You are an intelligent person and I'm sure you are able to engage in logical conversation without having to resolve yourself to such unintelligent remarks.