[_ Old Earth _] Adam in light of evolution

[Adam]

Your hope to reject this evidence blinded you to the phrase "strong evidence in favour of the common descent."
If we accept the way you read the article, you would contradict this and conclude it is immaterial to common descent.

1) Your reading comprehension is poor here, in that the previous comment was that:
"Chromosome 2 presentsvery strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. "

2) What the sentence meant in context was that this now observable fusion must have occurred immediately after the time when we claim chimps branched from humans, as part of the separation of the two species, otherwise it would NOT be "strong evidence in favour of the common descent."

In fact the report says to the comprehensive reader:
"is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestralape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2."
2) In regard to 7 million years, they guess 1-6 million is mor probable, but other paleonotogical evidence suggests that 7 is a better number.

It is strong evidence that we have common descent because the chromosomes are identical, except for the fusion in man.

That IS strong evidence in favor of common descent and does not necessitate that the fusion took place immediately after the split.

It only necessitates that the fusion took place AFTER, which is the only thing needed to point out that your "fusion inside the womb of an ape-mother" claim is false.


Your "7 is a better number" is simply to fit a numerological agenda.


And again, stop with the ad homs. My reading comprehension is fine.

 

[cupid dave]

... isn't the point that there are those who disagree and they just might be right?

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Yes.

The evidence for this can beseen in the way the Christian church of 1000 years during the Dark Ages splintered into a dozen mainstream denominational christian churches of today with seven other Evangelical fundamentalist organizations at the forefront of the Religious Right, along with the recent Hebrew Christians, the Moonies, and those thousands of little cults.

The Bible predicted this for just the reason you suggest.
The Institution of Religion in the West was a perfect place to historically observe the evolution from a singular brand new Church, starting in 54AD, once the Holy Comforter appeared, and break into the differentiations we see now.

 

[Adam]

All of that sounds to be made up.


Given the abundance of made up things you have said in prior posts, I have no reason to think it is not made up.


Plus, it doesn't correspond with any truth or facts.

 

[cupid dave]

All of that sounds to be made up.


Given the abundance of made up things you have said in prior posts, I have no reason to think it is not made up.


Plus, it doesn't correspond with any truth or facts.

I know people are suspicious that I am really Adam , here, AKA.
That way I can continue to explain things christians and jews never notivec about scripture as this "Adam" guy interjects nay saying and negativity and personal subjective opinions to the contrary.

Of course this is normal, because people tend to reject things that are new and stuff they never heard before, especially as it concerns the Bible.
On the twelve (12) foundation walls above we see immediately that when the Jehovah Witnesses appeared in 1900 they were rejected as had been the Mormons in 1850.

Par for the course.
Right?

 

[Adam]

What are you talking about?

There is no way anyone could confuse you for me. I, forgive my growing impatience, know what the hell I am talking about.

And your claims don't concern the bible.

There are not 12 mainstream Christian denominations.

 

[Grazer]

Peter Enns with more on the subject:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/petere...going-to-church-and-ancient-creeds-wont-help/

 

[cupid dave]

What are you talking about?

There is no way anyone could confuse you for me. I, forgive my growing impatience, know what the hell I am talking about.

And your claims don't concern the bible.

There are not 12 mainstream Christian denominations.

The twelve mainstream denominational Christian Churches are listed as such in the Worldlmanac, and then they list the seven Evangelical Congregations.

 

[cupid dave]

Peter Enns with more on the subject:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/petere...going-to-church-and-ancient-creeds-wont-help/

His first point was that Evol VS Creationsim can be ignored.
He almost says the differences are unimportant and unresolvable.

He recommends both sides focus on the allegory of the tale instead.
His idea is that we can dismiss the issue and merely see the Bible as a parable.

The Old Testament is just about the morality of obeying the Laws of the Bible.
His observation is this assures our continued presence in the "land," wherever that may now be.
Otherwise, people can expect to be invaded or otherwise forced out of our own home land.

Seems to have merit, but this sides steps whether Genesis is actually literally correct, academically and scientifically, which would be an amazing thing if it is.
And it is.

I can not let him off so easily because his suggestion requires we doubt the very first chapter.


Can you sum his second video as easily as I have the first?
What is his point??

 

[Vanguard]

I like the deist approach to creation vs. evolution: God made the universe and the laws of nature that govern it. Everything else happened over time, according to those laws. Under that system, creation and evolution co-exist. If Adam was some ancient primate would it really matter? Not in my opinion. The Judaism/Christian OT is not the only account of ancient history.

 

[Adam]

The twelve mainstream denominational Christian Churches are listed as such in the Worldlmanac, and then they list the seven Evangelical Congregations.

No, they are not. The World Almanac used 12 churches as a focus to draw ample statistics from.

They have not claimed that there are only 12. And they did not, at all, list 7 ecuminical congregations. That is an outright lie on your part.

 

[cupid dave]

I like the deist approach to creation vs. evolution: God made the universe and the laws of nature that govern it. Everything else happened over time, according to those laws. Under that system, creation and evolution co-exist. If Adam was some ancient primate would it really matter? Not in my opinion. The Judaism/Christian OT is not the only account of ancient history.

That's the right idea.

1) The Spirit of God is His Natural Laws.
They are to Him what our arms and legs are.

He does all things with and in accord with that spirit.
It is what the Jews call the Great Shekenah:


The hot spinning molten matter thatwas to coalesce into the planet Earth WAS without form:

Gen. 1:2 And the earth was withoutform, (a spinning cloud of molten matter and gases), and void: (not valid as a sphere yet- i.e.; an accretion disk), and darkness: [choshek: obscurity] was upon the face (of the disk) of the deep: [tehowm: the deep primeval abyss of the thick ring].

And (the great Shechinah), thespirit, (the pan-en-theistic Natural Laws) of God moved upon theface: [paniym: presence] of the "waters" (i.e.; of these transitory things spinningcounter clockwise around the Sun: [mayim: Hebrew])

http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id132.html

2) Clearly, Genesis supplied us with the clue that the 22 links in the genealogy refer to the 22 now extinct humans in the ascent to Modern Man of today:



Gen 5:2 says god called them, the manand his wife, the "Adamites,"... i.e.; a species:







Gen 5:2 Male and female created heTHEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, / (a species), in the day when THEY werecreated.







http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.html

 

[cupid dave]

No, they are not. The World Almanac used 12 churches as a focus to draw ample statistics from.

They have not claimed that there are only 12. And they did not, at all, list 7 ecuminical congregations. That is an outright lie on your part.

Of course...
That is why the collective term of the Cults was used along with the HebrewChristians and the Moonies.

 

[Adam]

You don't seem to have a point, unless you are acknowledging that there aren't 12 mainstream denominations like you originally claimed.

 

[Adam]

2) Clearly, Genesis supplied us with the clue that the 22 links in the genealogy refer to the 22 now extinct humans in the ascent to Modern Man of today:



Gen 5:2 says god called them, the manand his wife, the "Adamites,"... i.e.; a species:

http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.html

It does not say "Adamites" and you've already had it explained numerous times that there are not 22 species in our ascent.

Is it possible that you have been in an accident and sustained traumatic brain injury?

You don't seem to be able to recall that these things have been evidenced in great detail against your claims. I seriously wonder if you are aware that you have had this discussion before, because you don't seem to get or to remember that what you are claiming has been completely disproven.


Why do you have so much trouble receiving truth?

 

[cupid dave]

The point of Gen 5:2 seems to be that the Bible writers understood all to well that the ancient people would have discarded Genesis as nonsense had they specified that a link to the men of that day was to include the idea of having evolved from Apes with only 24 chromosome pairs, in an Act-of-God that fused two of them together in a new creature, man, with only 23 Chromosome pairs.

The rest of the genealogy in both Genesis chapter 4 and 5 contain numerous other bits of what would be strange information were it not invaluable in showing a direct correspondence between genealogy and human ascent from 22 now extinct humans in our deep phylogenetic past.

Whereas the church hard heads will always road block things that are new and unknown to their mediocre interpretations rooted in some persons idea of long ago, facts like Heliocentrism, or the earth rotating the sun, will eventually prevail.

What we need look at is correspondences between this idea of Adam, a name for those first humanoids, and all the other things which infer the Bible writers KNEW about things we only discover in the 20th century.

The Big Bang beginning of the universe was one of the greatest discoveries in the 20th Century, but the idea was available to believers since Moses in 1362BC.

 

[Adam]

Again, Mr. Faulty Memory, there are not 22 direct links to modern man.



And, it does not seem that the bible writers understood anything of the kind of modern science.

24 chromosomes pairs?
Chapter and verse, please.

 

[cupid dave]

Again, Mr. Faulty Memory, there are not 22 direct links to modern man.
.

?
Of course there 22 now extinct humans accepted as in our line of ascent, as the book I referred you to confirms.

The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-TwoSpecies of Extinct Humans

by G.J.Sawyer, (Author)



Here are the rest of the fossils that have been found,but are NOT considered in the line of our ascent:

Australopithecussediba………………………………………

In a news article published with the initial descriptionsin 2010, detractors of the idea that A. sediba might be ancestral to the genusHomo (e.g. Tim White and Ron Clarke) suggest that the fossils could be a latesouthern African branch of Australopithecus, co-existing with already existingmembers of the Homo genus.[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus_sediba

Australopithecusbahrelghazali………………………………………………

Researchers like William Kimbel to argue that Abel is notan exemplar of a separate species, but "falls within the range ofvariation" of the Australopithecus afarensis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus_bahrelghazali



Homocepranensis……………………

("Ceprano Man" has not been acceptedas distinct from the contemporary and far better documented Homo erectus. And,in fact, there really seems to be no good reason to name a new hominid on thebasis of a single, not particularly distinctive, fragment.)

http://www.macroevolution.net/homo-cepranensis.html

Homoyuanmouensis…………………….

The Yuanmou fossil teeth are very similar to those of the1.6-million-year-old Turkana ‘boy’ skeleton from West Turkana, Kenya, usuallyassigned to H. erectus.

http://humanorigins.si.edu/research/asian-research/earliest-humans-china

Homolantianensis……………………………

Scientists classify Lantian Man as a subspecies of Homoerectus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lantian_Man

Homo wushanensis……………………..

early member of an extinct species of humans, considereda subspecies of Homo erectus

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=toolbar-instant&hl=en&ion=1&qscrl=1&rlz=1T4TSNO_enUS458US458#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_nf=3&tok=G77PF9yq-H3PyrxoSubO_w&cp=16&gs_id=2&xhr=t&q=homo+erectus+wushanense&pf=p&tbo=d&qscrl=1&rlz=1T4TSNO_enUS458US458&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=Homo+wushanensis&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=67039599a028a8df&bpcl=38897761&biw=1264&bih=577&ion=1&bs=1\

Homo pekinensis…………………………..

early member of an extinct species of humans, considereda subspecies of Homo erectus

Homo palaeojavanicus………………...

early member of an extinct species of humans, considereda subspecies of Homo erectus

Homo soloensis……………………………

early member of an extinct species of humans, considereda subspecies of Homo erectus

Homo tautavelensis………………………..

early member of an extinct species of humans, considereda subspecies of Homo erectus

Homo nankinensis………………………….

early member of an extinct species of humans, considereda subspecies of Homo erectus’



DenisovaHominin………………………….

Denisovans were a hybrid population of H. erectus and H.neanderthalensis (or a related species such as H. heidelbergensis).

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/2010/12/denisova-hominins-neanderthals.html

Red Deer Cave Species……………………………..

they might represent a very early and previously unknownmigration of modern humans out of Africa, a population who may not havecontributed genetically to living people," Curnoe added.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/14/new-human-species-red-deer-cave_n_1345216.html

Homorhodesiensis……………………………

The validity of Homo rhodesiensis as a distinct type ofhominid is not well accepted and it has been variously suggested that the skullon which it is based should be assigned to one or the other of H. erectus, H.neanderthalensis, H. sapiens, or H. heidelbergensis.

http://www.macroevolution.net/homo-rhodesiensis.html



Homogeorgicus……………….

(For the present,about the only sure conclusion is that H. georgicus represents a new andinteresting twig on the hominid bush.)

http://www.macroevolution.net/homo-georgicus.html

Homo gautengensis........................

was recovered in1977 and was argued to belong to the species “Homo habilis”. [2] The typespecimen has been discussed in some refereed publications as being synonymouswith “A. africanus”,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_gautengensis

 

[Adam]

The book, yet again it must be pointed out, does not confirm what you claim.


It never once makes the claim that the species covered are in our direct lineage. You are lying about it.

 

[cupid dave]

You don't seem to have a point, unless you are acknowledging that there aren't 12 mainstream denominations like you originally claimed.

I'm sticking with the explicit statement found in the World Almanac, that these are the 12 mainstreamers that represent the portals into the one Christianity that will emerge as the New Jerusalem found in America according to the Urim and Thummim Hypothesis I have presentwed earlier in other threads:

That the centers for the 12 mainstream denominational christian churches are all located in the USA supports this idea and makes the World Almanac a supporting source, IMHO.

 

[Adam]

I'm sticking with the explicit statement found in the World Almanac, that these are the 12 mainstreamers that represent the portals into the one Christianity that will emerge as the New Jerusalem found in America according to the Urim and Thummim Hypothesis I have presentwed earlier in other threads:



.

There is no such statement, either explicit or implicit found in the World Almanac.