[_ Old Earth _] Some More Garbage

[Jack Spratt]

In a recent study, Tel Aviv University anthropologists determined that Lucy’s lower jaw bone is some kind of gorilla jaw bone. Other parts of the skeleton are just like the bones of knuckle-dragging, tree-climbing gorillas. Yet Lucy has been Evolutionism's poster child. Very creatively designed sculptures of Lucy appear in tax-funded museums, and these sculptures are hoaxes, not following the obvious ape-like bone structures, but rather dishonestly presenting Lucy as if she had human-like bone structures. This is typical Evolutionary flim-flam. Evolutionists fool themselves first because of their confirmation bias. Everything looks like part of the evolutionary dream, because or Evolutionism's presupposition.

As a result, the evolutionary researchers concluded that Lucy should no longer be considered man’s direct ancestor. As is typically the case in the field of human evolution, a single bone structure overturns years of grossly exaggerated claims. In the face of all these findings, many evolutionist experts declared that Lucy could not have been a forerunner of man.

 

[Barbarian]

Well, let's take a look, then...

From a Muslim website, we find:
Lucy:This fossil, discovered in Africa in 1974, was widely esteemed by evolutionists and was the subject of some of the most intensive speculation. Recently however, it has been revealed that Lucy (A. afarensis) had an anatomy ideally suited to climbing trees and was no different from other apes we are familiar with.(6) The French scientific journal Science et Vie covered the story in 1999 under the headline “Adieu, Lucy.” One study, performed in 2000, discovered a locking system in Lucy’s forearms enabling it to walk using the knuckles, in the same way as modern-day chimps.(7)
In the face of all these findings, many evolutionist experts declared that Lucy could not have been a forerunner of man.(8)

I can understand why you wouldn't want to give a link. But it's plagiarism to not give a link.

Let's look at our Muslim interior decorator's (that's his actual training) claims.
it has been revealed that Lucy (A. afarensis) had an anatomy ideally suited to climbing trees

He's not honest on that point. For example:

Australopithecines like Lucy, have humanlike fingers less adapted for climbing than those of apes. Let's look at feet and hips:

Notice that humans and Australopithecines have feet adapted for walking, and not at all useful for climbing, unlike those of apes. Notice the pelvises of humans and Australopithecines are broad with the illeum curved forward to facilitate smooth walking, unlike the clumsy, rocking gait of apes. The hip socket of humans and Lucy, along with the femur, give them a knock-kneed stance that allows smooth, efficient walking, but not such good climbing:

So your Muslim friend is stuffed with prunes on that count. Let's go on.

The French scientific journal Science et Vie covered the story in 1999 under the headline “Adieu, Lucy.” One study, performed in 2000, discovered a locking system in Lucy’s forearms enabling it to walk using the knuckles, in the same way as modern-day chimps.

Again, not correct. The locking system is in the hand, not the forearm. And the anatomy of Australopithecines is not consistent with knuckle-walking:

Hallucal tarsometatarsal joint in Australopithecus afarensis
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Volume 82, Issue 2, pages 125–133, June 1990
Abstract
Hallucal tarsometatarsal joints from African pongids, modern humans, and Australopithecus afarensis are compared to investigate the anatomical and mechanical changes that accompanied the transition to terrestrial bipedality. Features analyzed include the articular orientation of the medial cuneiform, curvature of the distal articular surface of the medial cuneiform, and the articular configuration of the hallucal metatarsal proximal joint surface. Morphological characteristics of the hallucal tarsometatarsal joint unequivocally segregate quadrupedal pongids and bipedal hominids.

Yaha's uninformed tirades against science have often been picked up and used by American creationists, unaware of the fundamentalist Islamic messages therein.

 

[Barbarian]

In a recent study, Tel Aviv University anthropologists determined that Lucy’s lower jaw bone is some kind of gorilla jaw bone.

Well, let's take a look...

One of these is an ape, a gorilla. One is an Australopithecine. Two are humans of two different species. One of them has jaws and teeth clearly unlike the three others. Which one? Right. from the top, it's more obvious:

The one on the left is a gorilla, the middle one is A. afarensis (Lucy) and the one on the right is a modern human.
Again, one stands out as different, although notice that A. afarensis is less evolved than a modern human.

You've been fooled, because you're not checking your facts.

 

[Barbarian]

Other parts of the skeleton are just like the bones of knuckle-dragging, tree-climbing gorillas.

Well, let's take a look at that:

Notice that A. afarensis (the most primitive Australopithecine) is more like a human than like a gorilla. Skull, jaws hips legs, feet, and hands, are all human-like, albeit transitional between primitive apes and humans.

Yet Lucy has been Evolutionism's poster child. Very creatively designed sculptures of Lucy appear in tax-funded museums, and these sculptures are hoaxes, not following the obvious ape-like bone structures, but rather dishonestly presenting Lucy as if she had human-like bone structures.

You've been misled about that. The actual fossils are available for examination by scientists, and it would be impossible to hide any fraud in this. Moreover, there are quite a few specimens of A. afarensis available, now, so even if someone tried, the others would quickly correct it.

Even more compelling, gait analysis, based on the skeleton of Lucy shows, that the most energetically efficient gait would be a normal human gait. A chimp-like or gorilla-like gait would be much more energetically costly, and therefore highly unlikely for Lucy.

As a result, the evolutionary researchers concluded that Lucy should no longer be considered man’s direct ancestor.

It would be an astonishing event of good luck, if our direct ancestor was fossilized and then found. You should understand that Lucy is very close to the line that gave rise to humans, but almost certainly is not the individual that is our direct ancestor. Knowledge is power. It's accessible to you, if you want it.

 

[Sparkey]

Well, let's take a look, then...

From a Muslim website, we find:
Lucy:This fossil, discovered in Africa in 1974...

You know, Barb... You're sounding like you think your "muslim website" carries more authority than I would naturally give it. Do you have reason for that? Did they, perhaps, earn a Nobel Prize for their thinking or is it just that you found somebody who agrees with you?

Curious minds want to know.

Oh! I see what you did there. It's called a strawman. You found a site that you like to debunk and you put it here as if it belonged in this conversation.

PS - I'm glad that you don't use your patented phrase "as you have learned" when you address me, sir. Because it seems that what I have learned is that you like to quote obscure sources (when they are wrong) so that you can correct them and sound like you REALLY, REALLY know what you're talking about but really? It's just another canned dissertation, right? In other words: BUSTED!

 

[rthom7]

Theories of faith need predictions to be a theory....interesting....so why can't Christians have Science theories recognized by Physics too ?

Let me try to develop some theories

Hab 3:4 And his brightness was as the light; he had horns coming out of his hand: and there was the hiding of his power.

Something called matter rushed out of GOD's hand during creation, therefore GOD is not matter, nor a servant to time, or space, nor is GOD inside His universes, He is above them and over them.

The Big Bang theory has a flaw, where did the matter come from, and the physical laws defining that matter ?

Shalom

 

[Claudya]

Theories of faith need predictions to be a theory....interesting....so why can't Christians have Science theories recognized by Physics too ?

Let me try to develop some theories

Hab 3:4 And his brightness was as the light; he had horns coming out of his hand: and there was the hiding of his power.

Something called matter rushed out of GOD's hand during creation, therefore GOD is not matter, nor a servant to time, or space, nor is GOD inside His universes, He is above them and over them.

This is in no way a theory. It's a hypothesis. Well actually it's not even a hypothesis in a strict scientific sense, because there is no way of doing empirical research on that hypothesis.

As a statement of faith, however, your "hypothesis" is awesome and I, too, think it's true.
It's just nothing a scientist could work with. :-(

The Big Bang theory has a flaw, where did the matter come from, and the physical laws defining that matter ?

Shalom

The Big Bang Theory actually does adress that question.

 

[Claudya]

He's not honest on that point. For example:

Did anyone else think at the first glance that's a picture of, uhm, male genitals? 2

 

[rthom7]

This is in no way a theory. It's a hypothesis. Well actually it's not even a hypothesis in a strict scientific sense, because there is no way of doing empirical research on that hypothesis.

As a statement of faith, however, your "hypothesis" is awesome and I, too, think it's true.
It's just nothing a scientist could work with. :-(



The Big Bang Theory actually does adress that question.

Love your mind Claudya yes correct it is a hypothesis...only because no Scientist has experimented so far with the theory of faith...

SO if GOD is indeed outside of matter, finding the god-particle as the Scientist are doing in high speed collisions would never eventuate would it ? That's one way to test the theory.

The reason I say this is because the Holy Spirit is a MEDIUM function, while this function is administrated by a co-eternal being, called the "Holy Spirit", it is a Medium we see, hence why people get confused over the work of the Holy Spirit....

Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Wind is a mechanical flow of energy inside a media called air , the whole effect is called a medium.

Mediums do some amazing things to energy flowing into them and coming out of them, they often change or administrate the flow.... For a look at the Holy Spirit as a medium see my link http://spiritualsprings.org/ss-1033.htm

So if the whole system of matter is engineered in a medium, finding any god-particle would not be possible...it would be like finding the Holy Spirit as a person in the wind, or like finding electricity in the copper wire, or like finding the image in a mirror, such things do not exist because they are made known only in the medium, outside the medium they do not exist.

So yes you could test this theory or hypothesis....

Thanks for the reply and for your insight....Shalom

 

[Milk-Drops]

rthom7

In order for you to construct a God/faith hypothesis you would need to start defining terms and variables. For instance when you state that God is a medium you would have to define what the medium is and how it functions. Then your hypothesis would be testing various variables to understand how the medium works.

Lets say the Medium is X. Your variable would be that with X being true we can expect to see Y. That is because Laws A,B, and C describe how X works. Z would be unknown variables for future testing.

So, we can put it like this. X = the addition of A+B+C = Y

Laws
A=0, B=2, C=-1.


So a hypothesis would be Y =1 because testing the combination of A,B, and C would be 1.

Z= future information that is found that could change A,B,C or another variable to make Theory X more stable.

 

[rthom7]

rthom7

In order for you to construct a God/faith hypothesis you would need to start defining terms and variables. For instance when you state that God is a medium you would have to define what the medium is and how it functions. Then your hypothesis would be testing various variables to understand how the medium works.

Lets say the Medium is X. Your variable would be that with X being true we can expect to see Y. That is because Laws A,B, and C describe how X works. Z would be unknown variables for future testing.

So, we can put it like this. X = the addition of A+B+C = Y

Laws
A=0, B=2, C=-1.


So a hypothesis would be Y =1 because testing the combination of A,B, and C would be 1.

Z= future information that is found that could change A,B,C or another variable to make Theory X more stable.

Wow Milk Drops your a real Scientist indeed !

Mr 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God:

Yes some mysteries we might know

1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.


And some we don't know

The Holy Spirit we are told is a medium in it's function.
Since the Holy Spirit is symbols of air, water, fire and oil, these substances are media, which constitute a medium.

Eze 1:4 ¶ And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind "ruwach" Holy Spirit came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire.

Here we see a functional description of the Holy Spirit as a cyclone of fire and energy...

Perhaps you might like to consider the medium of electricity to help make some equations:

Electricity is a dual thing, simultaneously a pulse travels at the speed of light in one direction while a slower movement of electrons happens in the opposite direction, of so we believe....The media is copper and electrons, the system is an medium known as a circuit, the energy flow is something administrated by God via the Holy Spirit, ie is not all things created by GOD and have their being in His hands?

In a world without dysfunction, V=I
In a world with function and dysfunction V=IR , where R represents some missing in the circuit of life.
The voltage life force of GOD is a constant source of administrated energy available to us as living systems of energy, what we might call the living soul, or living energy.

Thus if the R increases, the life force in us, decreases.

What happens if the sinner does some sinning ?

V = I ( R1 + R2 = ...)

The life flow is proportional to the summation of each missing in our lives, or each sinning value.
This is the normal circuit for a sinner, the series relationship with GOD.

When we become Believers, a shunt comes over our sinning lives and increases the life flow through us. Thus in a parallel circuit, we have Jesus and us together yoked to the life force. And yoked this way, Jesus takes the bigger burden us the smaller but the over current flow increases because we are yoked to Jesus.

Thus Milk-Drops, I hope to give you some equations in the simile of electricity to us as believers...one can also consider capacitors, tank circuits and other equations to make similes to us in the spiritual life.

I hope somebody better in maths than me, can take in interest in such similes and allegories. Shalom

 

[Barbarian]

You know, Barb... You're sounding like you think your "muslim website" carries more authority than I would naturally give it.

Just pointing out where the argument presented here, originated. How do I know that? The same way you know, if reviewing a thesis, you find the same unusual error in the thesis that exists in the work of a different scientist. It sources back.

Do you have reason for that?

Scientific habit. Go for the primary source.

Did they, perhaps, earn a Nobel Prize for their thinking or is it just that you found somebody who agrees with you?

It's best to go to the original for debunking. As you see from the anatomical evidence, Yaha doesn't really understand what he's talking about, but unfortunately, many creationists take it as factual, and repeat it without realizing the source.

Oh! I see what you did there. It's called a strawman. You found a site that you like to debunk and you put it here as if it belonged in this conversation.

Notice the same claim was repeated here, minus the source.

 

[Barbarian]

Did anyone else think at the first glance that's a picture of, uhm, male genitals?

No baculum in humans.

 

[Pizza]

Barbarian -- what are your degree(s) in?
You seem to know a lot about ........... a lot. :yes

 

[Lewis]

Barbarian -- what are your degree(s) in?
You seem to know a lot about ........... a lot. :yes

I taught him everything he knowsView attachment 4826

 

[Barbarian]

My degrees are in bacteriology and systems. I was an academic bum, and just took whatever I found interesting. Anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry always got my attention. Eventually, I got enough credits to earn a bachelors, and then I got a master's degree. But I was once stationed in a hole of a base where the only entertainment was getting drunk, having sex or taking college courses. I'm very close to a degree in history and another in fire protection technology.