Posted on 12/30/2005 2:29:22 PM PST by PatrickHenry
You guys are hilarious! :)
No, Really, some of the theories are so funny, because no one in their right mind expects an American Indian arrowhead from the 1600's to be found as intact as any of these so-called stone tools from Lake Turkana appear to be...
Back after a nearly 3-hour power outage...
Race, I know you probably won't believe but there is a particular wear put onto tools with tool use. It is very distinctive under an electron microscope. One of the characteristics is the organization of the wear--it is not random, but occurs in patterns.
Natural wear is random, and not organized.
You can perform this experiment yourself. When you use a pencil look at the tip before you sharpen it. See any wear? The rounded point is very different from the sharp point you started with. And this is in a very soft material; cherts and flints are very brittle and hard, and record the traces of use wear quite well.
If you just look around you, I am sure you can find wear on things. Take a look at the different things which have that wear and see if there are patterns in some, while others appear natural. Most rocks in a stream or garden will be natural. But after a street sweeper goes by sometimes the thin metal brushes can be found. They have a very distinctive wear pattern from the direction of rotation of the roller.
Take a look around you before you laugh things off. Really, some folks have spent 40-50 years at this and really do know a couple of things.
He won't look. He'll never look. He's too frightened of reality.
Lithic technology (flintknapping, or elementary finger bleeding) was a course when I was in grad school. We learned a lot of the basics. To be really good requires a lot of dedication and practice, though. Good flintknappers who do replication studies can tell you a lot about how prehistoric peoples did the same tasks.
And now confirm for me that this wear pattern remains unchanged through several hundred millenia to remain unchanged so you can verify this?
YOU CAN'T.
Through all the climate changes, the erosion, the weather, the heat, the cold, the erosion of water and sand particles across the surfaces, the frost heaves, the biological droppings on it...
YOU CAN'T.
Yet, you claim it remains pristine after over 1 million years to declare it was used to harvest berries in the now desert??
The Bible admits it requires faith to believe some things. Evolution denies it requires faith to believe the unprovable, and then calls that faith necessary to believe it's tenets science.
I dont care how many initials you have after your name. You cannot PROVE that something that is 1 million years old was a weapon that was used to do what evolutionists say it did or does.
You guys just dont see the religion required to believe what you espouse.
It may not make any impression on some folks, but when one presents good data and logical arguments, its bound to do some good somewhere. And, fossil man and osteology are two areas I actually studied in grad school, so I'll do what I can.
Further evidence in response to your query: Evolution of Genes, Genomes, and the Genetic Code . See especially the Ph.D. Thesis: The Origin and Evolution of the Genetic Code: Statistical and Experimental Investigations
Sorry if you don't believe me, but that simply is the way it is.
OK, one more example. All over the world, anthropologists have visited people still living a more traditional lifestyle, using stone, bone, and wooden tools. They have gathered and studied those tools, watched them being made and used, and then compared the wear with tools from the more distant past. By studying modern tools you learn a lot; you can then apply that knowledge to the past.
If you don't believe this for religious reasons, just say so. But don't be trashing the legitimate work of thousands of scientists whose work you have little knowledge of, just because you disagree with the results for religious reasons.
How goes the good fight?
Something to think about: most religious belief systems are necessarily static just as science is necessarily fluid and evolving.
What I wanted to save was this from post 285:
You guys just dont see the religion required to believe what you espouse.
Doesn't matter. It wasn't that good.
Jesus Christ's life and death is a matter of Western Civilizations historical record. Judeo/ Christian truths founded our nation. Read the writings of people far more brilliant than most today.
Waaaaaaaaa! CENSORSHIP!!!!
< /Luddite Mode>
But his status as a deity is a matter of mere conjecture, unproven and unprovable. This supposed status was the crux of your statement. The historical existence of a man by that name is not germaine to your argument. Judeo/Christian ideals (not truths) figured in the philosophical basis for our nations founding to about the same degree that pagan Greco/Roman ideals did.
Your earlier statement remains unproven.
There is a shortage of the coveted Darwin-Central refrigerator magnets. A donation in your name has been made to the coffee fund.
Hmmm, that's compelling. ;-)
The people sat waiting
Out on their blankets in the garden
But God said nothing
So someone asked him:"I beg your pardon:
I'm not quite clear about what you just spoke
What that a parable, or a very subtle joke?"
God shuffled his feet and glanced around at them;
The people cleared their throats and stared right back at him.
I am a mechanical engineer, with training in computer science and electrical engineering, also.
I am against what you say for more reasons than Religion.
But at least you were honest, most evo types wont admit that.
Religions evolve also, just more slowly. People mistake their own fantasies for the word of God and resist conforming them to reality, but generations eventually replace generations.
Almost ...
300
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.