 |
Duration: 05:32 minutes Upload Time: 2007-05-20 22:51:14 User: BalmungSama0 :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day |
|
Description: I debunk the Answers in Genesis article entitled "Farewell to 'Lucy'" Here's the original article. http://answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/04/18/farewell-lucy Comparison of Australopithecus afarensis and homo erectus: http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/images/Australopithecus-Erectus.jpg |
|
Comments | |
| DanVilAl ::: Favorites 2007-06-17 02:54:34 Hi, interesting. Even if really the only country in the world were one must be fighting creationist ignorance semms to be United States. Actually, the lasts "trees"... where the put A. afarensis? __________________________________________________ | |
| argh12345678901 ::: Favorites 2007-05-29 15:23:36 Good job. I still wonder how people can say that the theory of evolution is completely false when it has stood up to 150 years of intense scrutiny by the worlds brightest minds. This theory is so strong it survived the discovery of genetics, and finding of hundreds of thousands of 'missing links' (just as a small example). Think about it... __________________________________________________ | |
| Pandacraft ::: Favorites 2007-05-25 09:47:22 sonic hedgehog is a gene. Come back when you've mastered a fourth grade education. If you get cancer, remember that the relevant knowledge happens to be evolution. 'god given' or otherwise. __________________________________________________ | |
| BalmungSama0 ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:09:43 "And yes evolution does touch on where that first organism came from. Listen, I'm not going to continue this with you unless you take this to e-mail." Fine, but evolution doesn't. It says we came from a common ancestor, it says we evolved trhough mutation and natural selection, but evolution doesn't care how that first organism got here. Be it abiogenesis or a magic imp picking us out of his teeth. __________________________________________________ | |
| BalmungSama0 ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:08:37 I said I was looking forward to the e-mail discussion. I didn't ignore it. YOu mustve overlooked it. I'm sure it was posted. __________________________________________________ | |
| BalmungSama0 ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:07:43 "I don't use the word Darwinism because it classifies your theory as a religion i use it because that is the only accurate term for your theory. Though your theory is still a religion." And yet you haven't explained why, as I have falsified your only claim as to why. __________________________________________________ | |
| ExgamerLegends ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:06:26 And yes evolution does touch on where that first organism came from. Listen, I'm not going to continue this with you unless you take this to e-mail. there have been too many problems with loss of information and late posts. I'm not even gonna comment your next couple of posts. I'll be waiting in my inbox tomorrow...again....like i told you yesterday.....and you obviously ignored me......again. __________________________________________________ | |
| BalmungSama0 ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:06:24 I did. I posted it just a few minutes ago. __________________________________________________ | |
| BalmungSama0 ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:06:03 "Sure i'll explain it. Only kids play with there feet. I just learned about that in psychology class." I wasn't playing, and that's a ad hominem attack. "Most people wouldn't do that because it is pointless and is most likely just to entertain the audience. goodness knows it didn't make a valid point. It would've if you showed a lucy foot with it but you didn't at first." Of course the fact that I do now doesn't satisfy you. __________________________________________________ | |
| BalmungSama0 ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:04:30 "The Dna was not too identical. Some dna can become isolated within certain groups. I'll explain it in my diversity blog." With only 2, or 8 people, isolation wouldn't work. It wuld be one group, and only two sources of DNA. MUtation can cause some variation, but nothing even close to account for what you claim happened in this short period of time. __________________________________________________ | |
| BalmungSama0 ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:04:13 "I claim that inbreeding became a problem and that is why Moses made the law against it." Why wasn't it a problem before? If the law was made because it was a problem, why wasn't it a problem for Adam, Eve, or the 8 people from the ark? __________________________________________________ | |
| ExgamerLegends ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:03:38 I don't use the word Darwinism because it classifies your theory as a religion i use it because that is the only accurate term for your theory. Though your theory is still a religion. I didn't find a single post from you about circular reasoning. But this is getting old. It may be because i overlooked or it may be because it didn't get posted. Which is why i asked you to take this to e-mail (something else you ignored.) __________________________________________________ | |
| ExgamerLegends ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:01:32 No you didn't. I went back and read. It's not there. __________________________________________________ | |
| ExgamerLegends ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:01:19 No you havent __________________________________________________ | |
| ExgamerLegends ::: Favorites 2007-05-24 22:01:09 Sure i'll explain it. Only kids play with there feet. I just learned about that in psychology class. Most people wouldn't do that because it is pointless and is most likely just to entertain the audience. goodness knows it didn't make a valid point. It would've if you showed a lucy foot with it but you didn't at first. __________________________________________________ | |
No comments:
Post a Comment