The Hoax of the Missing Link

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it does.

[b]Even Dawkins sdmitted man did not evolve from apes.
Please quote him on that. If he said that then he was wrong, but I think it far more likely that you misunderstood him.

He says both man an apes evolved from some other imaginary
creature.
That is an outright lie. Dawkins would never have said that - and you know ...[text shortened]... d you?

You called me dishonest. You know know that I was being honest. I expect an apology.[/b]

Dawkins did say on that Yutube video that man did not evolve from
the ape because both man and ape are modern animals that evolved
from an ancient ancestor. Yes, you were right tha the "imaginary
creature" was my words. But it better describes this mysterious
ancestor that we have no evidence or record of. The fossil record is
silent on this "imaginary creature" that appears to be a figment in the
mind of the evolutionist. How could anyone believe in something so
ridiculous? It is hard for me to understand how even an idiot could
believe it.


You seem to think it is just fine for you to call other people dishonest
when they are simply giving their opinions. But you don't seem to
like it the other way around. If the shoe fits you must wear it. You
expect an apology. Ha! Ha!

Originally posted by RJHinds
Dawkins did say on that Yutube video that man did not evolve from
the ape because both man and ape are modern animals that evolved
from an ancient ancestor.

Can you quote his exact words, because I think you probably got confused by your misunderstanding of the word 'ape'. He probably said that man did not evolve from any currently existing apes - which is not the same thing at all.

Yes, you were right tha the "imaginary creature" was my words. But it better describes this mysterious
ancestor that we have no evidence or record of.
But it is still wrong to incorrectly attribute your description to Dawkins.

The fossil record is silent on this "imaginary creature" that appears to be a figment in the
mind of the evolutionist. How could anyone believe in something so
ridiculous? It is hard for me to understand how even an idiot could
believe it.
That is because you have religious reasons for not believing it.

You seem to think it is just fine for you to call other people dishonest when they are simply giving their opinions.
I call people dishonest when I believe they are deliberately and knowingly telling untruths - not when they are merely expressing their opinions. I am always ready to back up my assertions and offer an apology if proven wrong.

But you don't seem to like it the other way around. If the shoe fits you must wear it. You
expect an apology. Ha! Ha!
You called me dishonest and I have since shown that I was being honest. It seems you are simply not descent enough to offer an apology for false accusations.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Can you quote his exact words, because I think you probably got confused by your misunderstanding of the word 'ape'. He probably said that man did not evolve from any currently existing apes - which is not the same thing at all.

[b]Yes, you were right tha the "imaginary creature" was my words. But it better describes this mysterious
ancestor that we ...[text shortened]... st. It seems you are simply not descent enough to offer an apology for false accusations.

I am not confused by the word "ape". I know what an ape is; and it is not man.
It is obvious that we did not evolve from a currently existing ape, but there is
no evidence, fossil or otherwise, that indicates that man ever evolved from an
ape. Apes have always been apes from the time God created them that way.
Apes are not the same "kind" as mankind. Man should not be classified as
"Great Apes" because some evolutionary scientist thinks he know his ass from
a hole in the ground. (A figure of speech, of course.)

So if I don't use the exact word in explaining what someone says, it is wrong.
But you and your "buddies" get a pass, I see.

It should not take religion to prevent someone, with any common sense, to
see how ridiculous Dawkins statement was and how ridiculous the theory of
evolution is, especially, since there is no clear fossil evidence available that is
not a result of a hoax or misrepresentation.

You fail to see your own faults because you are so focused on finding and
pointing out a fault, real or imagined, in someone else. Apparently, that
makes you feel more righteous in some way. You have shown very little
honesty in my opinion, so I see nothing wrong with calling the pot, black.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am not confused by the word "ape". I know what an ape is; and it is not man.
It is obvious that we did not evolve from a currently existing ape, but there is
no evidence, fossil or otherwise, that indicates that man ever evolved from an
ape. Apes have always been apes from the time God created them that way.
Apes are not the same "kind" as mankind. very little
honesty in my opinion, so I see nothing wrong with calling the pot, black.

How do you reconcile the genetic evidence with your stance that there is
no evidence, fossil or otherwise, that indicates that man ever evolved from an
ape.

Also, how do you reconcile that fact that researchers have found Neanderthal DNA in the human genome?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
How do you reconcile the genetic evidence with your stance that there is
no evidence, fossil or otherwise, that indicates that man ever evolved from an
ape.

Also, how do you reconcile that fact that researchers have found Neanderthal DNA in the human genome?

I have never seen any genetic evidence or fossil evidence that proves
man evolved from apes. All it proves is that God created both man and
the apes. And the Neanderthal man is now known to be a real human
being and not some type of link between ape and man so there is no
problem with the DNA being like modern humans because it was a human.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have never seen any genetic evidence or fossil evidence that proves
man evolved from apes. All it proves is that God created both man and
the apes. And the Neanderthal man is now known to be a real human
being and not some type of link between ape and man so there is no
problem with the DNA being like modern humans because it was a human.

My BS-o-meter blew up after reading that post.

I have never seen any genetic evidence or fossil evidence that proves man evolved from apes.

Well considering you've never read a book on evolution and never read a peer-reviewed scientific journal on this topic, the above statement is hardly surprising.

All it proves is that God created both man and the apes.

All what proves?!

And the Neanderthal man is now known to be a real human being and not some type of link between ape and man so there is no problem with the DNA being like modern humans because it was a human.

Really?! How come the human genome and the Neanderthal genome, which have both been sequenced, are different?! If Neanderthals were humans surely they'd be the same?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
mmm, a very fine line me thinks, if there is no reality other than that which is material are you not more inclined to denigrate spiritual values for that which is material and lead your life so as to procure as much 'material things ', as possible? or at very least to put emphasis on that which can be seen, touched, tasted and appeals to the senses. ...[text shortened]... of that which is material. A persons life must be filled with something, is it not the case?

I don't agree, I don't think that accepting a materialist view of existence does necessarily influence one in that way. Why do you theists always imagine that your belief raises your moral standards over that of non-believers? It's simply not true. There are compelling tendencies for mature human beings to behave in a generally christian manner at least most of the time regardless of their lack of belief in the religion.

As I said, I agree there may be a correlation between materialism and consumerism, but if one causes the other it could equally well be that consumerism engenders materialism, couldn't it? Or, and this is my favoured alternative, perhaps you're missing out on something else which has influenced the proliferation of both positions.

Also, while you're considering highly religious and highly consumerist 21st century USA, also reflect on 1950s USSR - highly materialistic, but really not all that consumerist.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have never seen any genetic evidence or fossil evidence that proves
man evolved from apes. All it proves is that God created both man and
the apes. And the Neanderthal man is now known to be a real human
being and not some type of link between ape and man so there is no
problem with the DNA being like modern humans because it was a human.

You know, this argument that god directed every form of life on Earth is just like the UFO argument that the UFO people came down to Earth and had nothing better to do than help those totally inept and stupid Egyptians build the pyramids. Not just one mind you but dozens.

You think God directs the evolution of all life forms. Fine, but if your god is omniscient, it would have the power to leave off all the middle men and just go straight to the endgame where the beings are even more evolved than we and have a real jewel planet, a garden of eden that won't be destroyed by mankind.

The fact there are so many intermediate forms, like in the case of Apes, Chimps, Orangutans, Bonobos, etc., and humans.

Then all the different birds, this god of yours could have just made a super bird that could live anywhere, dive underwater, catch fish, build nests in a tree or on the ground or on an iceberg, and so forth.

This god of yours does not seem to be very efficient in its creations. There are creatures who used to have vision but now not, why would that be? They pisssed off your god so much he just up and said, from now on, Salamander, you and all your descendants shall for ever more be blind, no matter said Salamander has practically no brain and would not have understood a god or a god being pisssed off.

So tell me, why would such a god be so inefficient? Don't you think such a god would have better things to do than direct the results of every cell division on the planet for billions of years or whatever your delusion thinks it is?

So your answer would be the devil did it. So your god is so limited it could not handle one errant angel? Pretty pathetic god if so.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
My BS-o-meter blew up after reading that post.

[b]I have never seen any genetic evidence or fossil evidence that proves man evolved from apes.

Well considering you've never read a book on evolution and never read a peer-reviewed scientific journal on this topic, the above statement is hardly surprising.

All it proves is that God created b ...[text shortened]... ve both been sequenced, are different?! If Neanderthals were humans surely they'd be the same?

I have no idea where you are geting all this nonsense. Man was created
as a man and just as God said he is still a man. An ape was created as
an ape by God and just as God said it reproduced after its kind and is
still an ape. Simole as that. No need to try and make it complicated in
order to trick me into believing a lie. It ain't gonna happen.

Originally posted by sonhouse
You know, this argument that god directed every form of life on Earth is just like the UFO argument that the UFO people came down to Earth and had nothing better to do than help those totally inept and stupid Egyptians build the pyramids. Not just one mind you but dozens.

You think God directs the evolution of all life forms. Fine, but if your god is om ...[text shortened]... it. So your god is so limited it could not handle one errant angel? Pretty pathetic god if so.

God is much more intelligent than you could even imagine. He has a grand
plan that will make a heaven and earth even better than you could imagine.
It is that we have to be given time so the maximum amount of people will
be able to participate when God creates the new heaven and the new earth.

I can't comment on any UFO people, for I don't know about them. But I don't
believe God directs evolution, since I don't believe in evolution. I think God
has programmed things to work in a certain way and doesn't intervene in the
normal processes of life except in unusual circumstances. And you may think
God is pathetic, but I see all that He has created and that already indicates
to me that God is awesome.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have no idea where you are geting all this nonsense. Man was created
as a man and just as God said he is still a man. An ape was created as
an ape by God and just as God said it reproduced after its kind and is
still an ape. Simole as that. No need to try and make it complicated in
order to trick me into believing a lie. It ain't gonna happen.

Trying to trick you?! Goodness grief, now you're just being paranoid.

The human genome was finally sequenced in 2003 -

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml

The Neanderthal genome last year -

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

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am not confused by the word "ape". I know what an ape is; and it is not man.
It is obvious that we did not evolve from a currently existing ape, but there is
no evidence, fossil or otherwise, that indicates that man ever evolved from an
ape. Apes have always been apes from the time God created them that way.
Apes are not the same "kind" as mankind. ...[text shortened]... very little
honesty in my opinion, so I see nothing wrong with calling the pot, black.

I am not confused by the word "ape".
You certainly are!

An ape is any member of the biological superfamily Hominoidea (hominoids). There are two families of hominoids:

Hylobatidae consists of four genera and sixteen species of gibbon, including the lar gibbon and the siamang, collectively known as the lesser apes.
Hominidae consists of chimpanzees, gorillas, humans and orangutans[1][2] collectively known as the great apes.

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

Originally posted by wolfgang59
[b]I am not confused by the word "ape".
You certainly are!

An ape is any member of the biological superfamily Hominoidea (hominoids). There are two families of hominoids:

Hylobatidae consists of four genera and sixteen species of gibbon, including the lar gibbon and the siamang, collectively known as the lesser apes.
Hominidae consists of c ...[text shortened]... orangutans[1][2] collectively known as the great apes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape[/b]

You are not confused because you are not using your mind to think.
You are accepting what you read as fact without question. I do not
accept ridiculous claims that do not make sense. But I am not confused
because I know the truth.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are not confused because you are not using your mind to think.
You are accepting what you read as fact without question. I do not
accept ridiculous claims that do not make sense. But I am not confused
because I know the truth.

So you have your own definition of "ape" which you have created by the power of your mind? or is "ape" defined in the bible? Or did god whisper in your ear what the word "ape" meant?

You are correct that you are not confused. Confusion requires considering options. Confusion requires thinking then eventually resolution.

You do not think about anything.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are not confused because you are not using your mind to think.
You are accepting what you read as fact without question. I do not
accept ridiculous claims that do not make sense. But I am not confused
because I know the truth.

You are a living example of cognitive dissonance and collective delusional behavior. That is the long and short of it.

It is the same with all religious people, christians, muslims, Jews, all of them deluded into thinking a fairy god is coming down and making things better. It's been a couple three thousand years and no god has come down yet, the world gets deeper and deeper into the hell of humans' making with nothing but darkness at the end of the tunnel.

We (the human race) are digging ourselves into a big corner and there will be no god get us out of it. If anyone is to get ourselves out of our clear trouble right now, it is going to be scientific geniuses, economic geniuses, technological genius that will save the day, not some paranoid vengeful vainglorious god thought up by men who want to control other men and just incidentally subjugate women into thinking their place is in the home. Castigate half of the intelligence of the human race, keep them barefoot and pregnant, eh. Good luck on finding all that genius we desperately need when half our brains are kept home shining furniture. Or in the case of Saudi Arabia, not even being allowed to drive.