Posts: 957
Threads: 1
Joined: October 10, 2013
Reputation:
2
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
April 30, 2015 at 7:57 pm
(April 30, 2015 at 11:05 am)Tonus Wrote: (April 29, 2015 at 10:26 pm)snowtracks Wrote: Bipedalism appeared suddenly in the fossil record and was optimal soon as it appeared.
Google "evolution of bipedalism in hominids" and you'll see that this isn't true. There are still questions about the evolution of bipedal hominids, but you seem content to shield yourself from even the stuff that has been learned in order to deny that it is known. If your worldview is dependent on ignorance to that degree, then it's time to broaden it or outright reject it.
Those article state theories as to why there was evolution to hominids. Two problems: 1) Starts with the 'fact' that primates evolved into hominids. 2) No supporting anatomical evidence. The scientific organizations like Smithsonian, Nature Journal, etc. are required to always give an interpretation that supports a naturalism point of view or it doesn't get published (nothing wrong with doing that, it's in their policy statements).
These images are artist renditions to support naturalism.
http://www.shutterstock.com/s/%22homo+sa...=188960081
"Bipedalism appeared suddenly in the fossil record" - None of the searches refute that statement.
Atheist Credo: A universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Posts: 7175
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 1, 2015 at 8:15 am
(April 30, 2015 at 7:57 pm)snowtracks Wrote: Those article state theories as to why there was evolution to hominids. Two problems: 1) Starts with the 'fact' that primates evolved into hominids. 2) No supporting anatomical evidence.
The theories are regarding how they evolved, because the fact that they evolved is established. They are studying the anatomical evidence to determine where the various species fit into the overall scheme and how they might be related (directly, or as separate branches from a common ancestor, etc). See, they're not the ones approaching it from the wrong end; you are. So it's not surprising that it might not make sense to you. But that's your problem, not theirs. Your rejection of things that have already been established long ago makes for some amusing forum posts, but doesn't matter to them --or their work-- one whit.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 2, 2015 at 4:19 am
(April 30, 2015 at 7:57 pm)snowtracks Wrote: (April 30, 2015 at 11:05 am)Tonus Wrote: Google "evolution of bipedalism in hominids" and you'll see that this isn't true. There are still questions about the evolution of bipedal hominids, but you seem content to shield yourself from even the stuff that has been learned in order to deny that it is known. If your worldview is dependent on ignorance to that degree, then it's time to broaden it or outright reject it.
Those article state theories as to why there was evolution to hominids. Two problems: 1) Starts with the 'fact' that primates evolved into hominids. 2) No supporting anatomical evidence. The scientific organizations like Smithsonian, Nature Journal, etc. are required to always give an interpretation that supports a naturalism point of view or it doesn't get published (nothing wrong with doing that, it's in their policy statements).
These images are artist renditions to support naturalism. http://www.shutterstock.com/s/%22homo+sa...=188960081
"Bipedalism appeared suddenly in the fossil record" - None of the searches refute that statement.
You know nothing john snowtracks.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
