[_ Old Earth _] Evolution insinuates bestiality

[Heidi]

I can call a fish an ape if I have a degree and people will believe me. All I have to do is say we have 2 eyes, just like fish, we can swim in the sea, we eat, and breed offspring. People are so easily duped by scientists they'll believe anything they say. All one has to do is to be able to think for himself and he can readily see that primates are still in the jungle or in zoos where man put them. But some people do have a hard time distinguishing between primates and human beings. You appear to be one of them.

 

[Barbarian]

Sorry, but I believe the bible over you any day.

That's the point. You don't believe the Bible. You've added all sorts of other things to it to make it more acceptable to you.

If you disagree with the bible,

And you do.

then you're going to be wrong,

And you are.

It's that simple.

Yep.

 

[Heidi]

Sorry, but I believe the bible over you any day.

That's the point. You don't believe the Bible. You've added all sorts of other things to it to make it more acceptable to you.

[quote:f6959] If you disagree with the bible,

And you do.

then you're going to be wrong,

And you are.

It's that simple.

Yep.[/quote:f6959]

Of course your post contains more lies. I agree with the bible word for word. It's not my fault that the way animals and humans breed conforms perfectly to the biblical account of creation. But I can understand why you're angry about it and accuse others of lying because the bible doesn't support your man-made theories. And they are man-made, which by definition, makes them fallible. And lying about that won't change it one bit. :evil:

 

[cubedbee]

I can call a fish an ape if I have a degree and people will believe me.

No, nobody would ever believe you. Nor should they, ever.

All I have to do is say we have 2 eyes, just like fish, we can swim in the sea, we eat, and breed offspring.

But that's not the definition of fish, so if you said that you'd be wrong. A primate is "A mammal of the order Primates" Humans are a mammal of order primate, so when I say humans are primates I'm using the actual defintion, the one in the dictionary that all people use, of the word primate. When you say humans are fish you're using some fake definition that you made up and that nobody in the world agrees with. See the difference?

People are so easily duped by scientists they'll believe anything they say.

No, people aren't Look at all the crazy "scientists" that claim that YECism is true--most people aren't duped by them and there false theories.

All one has to do is to be able to think for himself and he can readily see that primates are still in the jungle or in zoos where man put them

It helps to understand the definitions of words before you attempt to use them in sentences.

But some people do have a hard time distinguishing between primates and human beings. You appear to be one of them.

Some people don't understand the English language and can't even follow along in a simple argument because of their lack of comprehension. You appear to be one of them.

 

[Ignatz]

Heidi wrote:

The fact of the matter is that primates and humans cannot interbreed and therefore each breeds separate offspring. To suggest that they can intermingle which is exactly what evolutionists are saying when they say we descended from primates, is call bestiality. That is the only way that humans can descend from primates because sex is what propgates these species. Yet this perversion is what evolutionists want to teach our children. It is ont only an abomnation, but again, an embarrassment to mankind. It proves all the more that we are in a state of decay rather than superior to those who lived before us.

If I'm reading you correctly, Heidi, you're saying that:

"Humans and chimpanzees (or orangutans, bonobos, etc.) cannot procreate with each other, therefore, we cannot have a common ancestor."

Is that correct?

 

[Heidi]

Heidi wrote:

The fact of the matter is that primates and humans cannot interbreed and therefore each breeds separate offspring. To suggest that they can intermingle which is exactly what evolutionists are saying when they say we descended from primates, is call bestiality. That is the only way that humans can descend from primates because sex is what propgates these species. Yet this perversion is what evolutionists want to teach our children. It is ont only an abomnation, but again, an embarrassment to mankind. It proves all the more that we are in a state of decay rather than superior to those who lived before us.

If I'm reading you correctly, Heidi, you're saying that:

"Humans and chimpanzees (or orangutans, bonobos, etc.) cannot procreate with each other, therefore, we cannot have a common ancestor."

Is that correct?

Now you're getting it. It also means we cannot be their descendants because we cannot be a product of a human and an ape precisely because the 2 cannot interbreed.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi wrote:

The fact of the matter is that primates and humans cannot interbreed and therefore each breeds separate offspring. To suggest that they can intermingle which is exactly what evolutionists are saying when they say we descended from primates, is call bestiality. That is the only way that humans can descend from primates because sex is what propgates these species. Yet this perversion is what evolutionists want to teach our children. It is ont only an abomnation, but again, an embarrassment to mankind. It proves all the more that we are in a state of decay rather than superior to those who lived before us.

If I'm reading you correctly, Heidi, you're saying that:

"Humans and chimpanzees (or orangutans, bonobos, etc.) cannot procreate with each other, therefore, we cannot have a common ancestor."

Is that correct?

Now you're getting it. It also means we cannot be their descendants because we cannot be a product of a human and an ape precisely because the 2 cannot interbreed. Sothere can't even be a common ancestor, much less one from which we've descended!

 

[cubedbee]

If I'm reading you correctly, Heidi, you're saying that:

"Humans and chimpanzees (or orangutans, bonobos, etc.) cannot procreate with each other, therefore, we cannot have a common ancestor."

Is that correct?

Now you're getting it. It also means we cannot be their descendants because we cannot be a product of a human and an ape precisely because the 2 cannot interbreed.[/quote]Nobody has ever claimed that humans are the descendents of other apes that our currently living. The claim has always been that humans and other apes all have a common ancestor.

Sothere can't even be a common ancestor, much less one from which we've descended!

Here's where you're wrong Heidi. There can be a common ancestor between two populations that can't breed today.

 

[soma]

I think you are starting a false rumor that man had sex with apes or is this a fantasy?

 

[Ignatz]

Heidi, The TOE does NOT claim that humans and other apes procreate. Nor that they ever did.

It simply doesn't.

If you were told that this is what the TOE says, then your sources were either ignorant of the TOE or they were LYING to you.

If you came up with this idea yourself, then you are incorrect.

Heidi, I truly do understand that this is a common misconception, but this has been repeatedly pointed out to you time and time again yet for some reason you insist that this is what the TOE claims.

You are repeatedly accusing evolutionists of making a claim that they HAVE NOT MADE.

This is ABSOLUTELY bearing false witness. I don't know what else to call it, and it breaks my heart that another Christian would intentionally distort the claims of their opponent to make them appear foolish.

Why do you insist on challenging a statement that NOBODY has made?

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Come on people, Don't feed the trolls, I don't think any rational person can honestly believe that "evolutionists" are into bestiality.
Now if you will excuse me, I have a date with a lovely young chimpanzee.

 

[Heidi]

I think you are starting a false rumor that man had sex with apes or is this a fantasy?

How do you think descendants are produced? :o

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

How do you think descendants are produced? :o

It sounds like you are claiming to have decended from an ape.

 

[Heidi]

How do you think descendants are produced? :o

It sounds like you are claiming to have decended from an ape.

Hardly. But that is what evolutionists claim which is one of the most absurd theories to have ever been postulated. And of course they think they're more intelligent and superior to the thinkers of the past which is the sin of pride at its peak.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Wow, as an evolutionist I didn't even know I held those opinions. Thanks for enlightening me.

 

[Heidi]

Wow, as an evolutionist I didn't even know I held those opinions. Thanks for enlightening me.

So you don't believe that humans descended from apes or primates? if not, then you're a classic example of an evolutionist who holds a different theory than other evolutionists. Thanks for proving my point that they have no idea what their premise is. :wink:

 

[Frost Giant]

Practice some intellectual honesty for once, Heidi. The ToE says that we share a common ancestor with modern apes and monkies, and that we are descended from an ape-like creature. It doesn't matter what every individual "evolutionist" thinks, that's what the ToE says.

 

[Frost Giant]

double post

 

[jwu]

The ToE says that we share a common ancestor with modern apes and monkies, and that we are descended from an ape-like creature.

That common ancestor was an ape too though. Just not one of the contemporary ape species.

 

[Heidi]

The ToE says that we share a common ancestor with modern apes and monkies, and that we are descended from an ape-like creature.

That common ancestor was an ape too though. Just not one of the contemporary ape species.

So what does the word "common" mean in that phrase? A common ancestor connotates an ancestor common to both humans and apes, otherwise the word "common" wouldn't even be in there. It would simply be called an ancestor and there would be no need for a "missing link."

You have also contradicted Thanatos who said that evolutionists don't believe that man descended from apes. So which is it? :o So it would be nice if evolutionists could get their stories straight. :wink: