Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: allmendream; count-your-change; metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; ...
==Typical Creationist lie... Ida was heralded as a link between pro-simians (lemurs and such) and simians. How could a transitional fossil between lemurs and monkeys possibly be “proof” or even evidence of the evolutionary link between apes and humans?

Your devotion to the Temple of Darwin has broken your connection with reality, dreamer. Your evo co-religionist Ida proprietors claimed that Ida “represents an early haplorhine – the ‘dry nosed’ primates that include old world monkeys and apes, including humans.” The ICR News article claims that they used this bogus evo-religious claim to “supposedly prove ape-to-human evolution.” Where does the ICR author say that Ida was claimed by your evo co-religionists to be between apes and humans? The answer is that the good scientists over at ICR never made any such claim. You inserted that claim into their mouths in order to set up a straw man to distract attention away from the embarrassment Ida is causing to your evo-religious creation myth that masquerades as science. The reason this bogus fossil supposedly proved ape-to-human evolution was because of the bogus claim that it linked apes and humans to the rest of the animal kingdom, a link that your fellow evo co-religionists thought was missing until they fell for the Ida hoax. Of course the link is still missing, and it will always be missing because God's Word is clear that humans were created fully formed and fully functional, with no evolutionary connection to apes or any other mystical evo-connections to the greater animal kingdom.

65 posted on 09/15/2009 5:24:57 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: GodGunsGuts
You STILL cannot get it right GGG.

It is a proposed transitional between lemurs and monkeys, not between anything and apes.

That came much later.

Nobody reputable said it “proved” the ape-human transition.

The scientific argument is over if it represents a lemur to monkey transition.

A lemur to monkey transition can shed no light on the ape to human transition that wouldn't take place until millions of years later.

To suggest that this was proposed as evidence of the ape-human transition is based upon IGNORANCE.

But that is all Creationists have really, the ignorant.

The more one knows, especially about science, the less likely they are to be a Creationist.

No wonder so many of your cohorts have anti science messages in their taglines and are appalled at the thought that someone might think a scientist was heroic.

66 posted on 09/15/2009 5:33:24 PM PDT by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

GGG ~ here is another chance for you to enter the temple of Darwin and demonstrate how you can utterly destroy it. Should be simple since you claim there is no scientific evidence to support it, and mountains of evidence to refute it.

Go ahead show us that you are not just the big man in the echo chamber venture outside and send the evo’s away crying…

Personally I doubt you last more than 2 or 3 post as best without being exposed.

But go ahead and sign up, defend your position outside of this echo chamber without your cheerleaders.

You talk and good game here, but talk his cheap go ahead show how easy it is.

http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4638818


72 posted on 09/15/2009 5:52:53 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


132 posted on 09/16/2009 9:50:12 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson