If you want an example of baffled evolutionists,
-
Roquefort — 15 years ago(July 16, 2010 08:53 PM)
(2) "Baffled evolutionists" would be anypone who believes both:
(A) Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans likely did not interbreed
and
(B) interbreeding took place
(1) [how it contradicts the mechanisms of evolution?]
If the only allowable possibilities, according to evolution are:
(A) Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans likely did not interbreed
and
(B) interbreeding took place
Then the unthinkable possibilty is that
(C) Neanderthals are the product of hybridization.
Such a line of reasoning would unravel the theory of hominid evolution and the fossil dating system. -
heathenangel — 15 years ago(August 22, 2010 10:33 AM)
And really, isn't that the GREAT thing about science? When new information comes in, theories can be reworked so that the new information is included. Science isn't based on belief it is based on evidence, unlike religion and mythology which one must have BLIND FAITH OF A CHILD (religionists words, not mine), which translates to ignorance and willful ignorance. In order to believe that an invisible superman lives in the sky, and cares who you marry, where you put your genitals, what you eat, watch, listen to, wear one has to suspend logic and have BLIND FAITH OF A CHILD.
I'll take the scientific evidence, the MOUNTAINS of it that evolution has to back it up. It certainly beats thinking that there's a little faerie living in my refrigerator turning the light on for me when I open the door. -
seilerbird — 11 years ago(November 23, 2014 06:49 PM)
I find it amazing that anyone can seriously question evolution. Look at your parents, look at your children. Do they look anything at all like you? If the answer is true you have just proven that evolution is a fact, not a theory.
-
Roquefort — 10 years ago(November 21, 2015 02:30 PM)
A good video on the history of the real trial is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvz7vyGsQv0