B
Bryce
Guest
I am Christain, but I don't think you should use these arguments.
No offense intended.
Though I hate to say that, I don't want to get into a Lucy argument :-?
People don't just believe it out of pure biased ignorance.
Thanks for the post though, you brought some good idea's to the table.
No offense intended.
Not true, read up on the evolutionary theory, first you have isolation of a population, then a new environment, the new environment changes the selective pressure, the selective pressure causes new features and old pre-existing features that were not selected for before to become selected for, this process continues for millions of years, then the population as a whole starts to be different.Heidi said:1) Each ape had to find another creature which with to breed to create offspring that looks more like a human than an ape. The odds of that are incalculable.
This point doesn't make much sense, since humanity spread from southern Europe/Northern Africa to the rest of the world over a 50,000 year period, humans first appear in North America over the Berring Straight ice bridge at around 30,000 years ago, and this is supported by the fact that natives in North America are genetically similar to asians. It is also traceable through the immense archeological and anthropological studies done on the subject.Heidi said:2) Then these exact same offspring had to migrate all over the world because according to science fiction writers, homo-sapiens also existed in North America
Wrong because they were already human when they got to North America, I don't understand where these fabrications come from.Heidi said:3) The next step in this impossible chain is that each homo sapiens in North America had to find a mate identical to the mates of other homo-sapiens in Africa to breed descendants who could speak! That make the odds even more incalculable since no two animals and humans look and act alike. So the exact same so-called "mutations" had to have happened in thousands of homosapiens which makes the odds unfathomable as to be impossible.
Um, humans didn't have writing until about 9000 years ago, and even then it was pictographic, nor were humans highly advanced, and neanderthals went extinct during the first 20,000 years of human existence. It is quite easy for illiterate nomads with possibly very low verbal skills to forget eh? After all, humans also co-existed with saber tooth tigers, wooly mammoths, giant sloths, and other currently extinct giant mammals, and none of these animals appear in text of ancient cultures either.Heidi said:4) There are no accounts by any ancient cultures of any of these creatures ever existing yet they are supposed to be our ancestors. :o
No it is strongly supported by archeology and genetic evidence, look of Lucy.Heidi said:5) The so-called common ancestor from which these creatures supposedly came is still as imaginary as the minds who invented them. That makes the common ancestor as imaginary as the Flying spaghetti monster.
Though I hate to say that, I don't want to get into a Lucy argument :-?
Evolution is a strongly supported theory, not proven. I don't believe it to be true but I'll give credit when credit is due.Heidi said:So the theory of evolution only exists in the imagination because it doesn't happen in reality.
People don't just believe it out of pure biased ignorance.
Thanks for the post though, you brought some good idea's to the table.