Evolutionists: How did legs evolve?

[iouae]

There are tons of artifacts from Roman era Europe, but next to no European people fossils found. Can you think of anything to explain this anomaly?

It is by no means established that humans are responsible for the wave of extinctions at the end of the ice age, when humans first entered the Americas.

I can think of catacombs full of human remains, and Pompei human casts.

I am not trying to grind an axe but am genuinely interested in why only two Clovis culture human fossils have been found.

When humans are drowned in a gentle flood as described in Genesis 6, some bodies may sink. But all corpses bloat and float due to putrefaction. A gentle current will sweep them all away, hence no humans. And water will cause decomposition, not fossilising. Fossilising takes rapid burial in thick sediment to exclude oxygen. The Flood was not like that.

Matthew, not to make more of it than one should, talks about all humans being taken away, removed, vanishing in the flood.

Mat 24:39
And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Again, not to make more of this passage than one should, many think that Matthew 24:39 is referring to the rapture, where bodies will literally disappear from earth.

Another thing I cannot explain is that pre-flood humans don't seem to build houses. Every modern human builds houses. If I were on "Naked and Afraid" I would have collected rocks and built a home in 2 days. Such a home would survive a gentle flood, and be found in the fossil record. But no homes, that I know of, found for Clovis culture, or most pre-flood culture. Then after the flood, starting in Sumer, suddenly humans are FIXATED with building, e.g. the tower of Babel and Sumer.

 

[6days]

Another thing I cannot explain is that pre-flood humans don't seem to build houses.

Gen.6:7 "And the LORD said, "I will wipe this human race I have created from the face of the earth."


2Peter 3:6 "Then he used the water to destroy the ancient world with a mighty flood"

 

[The Barbarian]

I can think of catacombs full of human remains, and Pompei human casts.

Intentionally preserved remains, yes. These are not fossils. And a pyroclastic flow that buried a city. Apparently, neither happened with the Clovis people.

We know that humans have been in Australia for many thousands of years. I don't know if they've found any fossilized humans in Australia. (Barbarian checks)

Three, if you don't count intentional burials. They happened to die in an area with rather alkaline soil, which preserved the bones.

So it's an unusual thing for humans to be fossilized, just as it is for other organisms.

 

[The Barbarian]

Another thing I cannot explain is that pre-flood humans don't seem to build houses.

Mammoth bone dwellings are a very early type of housing constructed by Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherers in central Europe during the Late Pleistocene...A mammoth bone dwelling is typically a circular or oval structure with walls made of stacked large mammoth bones often modified to allow them to be lashed together or implanted into the soil. Within the interior is typically found a central hearth or several scattered hearths. The hut is generally surrounded by numerous large pits, full of mammoth and other animal bones. Ashy concentrations with flint artifacts appear to represent middens; many of the mammoth bone settlements have a preponderance of ivory and bone tools. External hearths, butchering areas, and flint workshops are often found in association with the hut: scholars call these combinations Mammoth Bone Settlements (MBS).

Dating mammoth bone dwellings has been problematic.

The earliest dates were between 20,000 and 14,000 years ago, but most of these have been re-dated to between 14,000-15,000 years ago. However, the oldest known MBS is from the Molodova site, a Neanderthal Mousterian occupation located on the Dniester River of Ukraine, and dated some 30,000 years earlier than most of the known Mammoth Bone Settlements.

Mammoth bone dwellings are not the only or first type of house: Upper Paleolithic open-air houses are found as pit-like depressions excavated into the subsoil or based with stone rings or postholes, like that seen at Pushkari or Kostenki. Some UP houses are partly built of bone and partly of stone and wood, such as Grotte du Reine, France.
https://www.thoughtco.com/mammoth-bone-dwellings-houses-169539




Every modern human builds houses.

 

[iouae]

Intentionally preserved remains, yes. These are not fossils. And a pyroclastic flow that buried a city. Apparently, neither happened with the Clovis people.

We know that humans have been in Australia for many thousands of years. I don't know if they've found any fossilized humans in Australia. (Barbarian checks)

Three, if you don't count intentional burials. They happened to die in an area with rather alkaline soil, which preserved the bones.

So it's an unusual thing for humans to be fossilized, just as it is for other organisms.

From a quick look, it seems that hominid fossils from Australia are as rare as ducks teeth.

One, extremely rare fossil is discussed at http://austhrutime.com/wlh_50_-_how...f_pleistocene_human_evolution_–_a_review .htm

Conditions during the Holocene have not been conducive to Homo sapiens fossilisation.

From my perspective Noah's flood was not a fossil creating event anywhere on earth.

But the end of the megafauna is significant. Around the world today, native or Aborigine people are the most conservation minded, and non-wasteful. They do not wipe out their food sources.

 

[Right Divider]

Okay, what else defines "real science" in your opinion?

Sports betting.

 

[patrick jane]

Sorry guys. Clete and creationists like him have left the discussion. All you have left to argue with are the magic rock apes throwing poo.

Given the embarrassing display the remaining creationists have put on, I doubt if any rational creationists will be coming back.

OK genius, why do we only have records dating back 6 or 7 thousand years? Why are not ANY records of mankind before that if we've been here hundreds of thousands or millions of years?

 

[iouae]

Mammoth bone dwellings are a very early type of housing constructed by Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherers in central Europe during the Late Pleistocene..

To me, making homes of stones makes sense IF one is living a sedentary life.

A teepee of mammoth bones to me indicates a hunter-gathering lifestyle, especially in a colder climate where perhaps everything else is under snow.

Hunter gatherers tend to follow the herds they prey on, maybe outhunt one area and move on.

An organic house, even of mammoth bones will not last like a stone house.

After the flood, again speaking from my point of view, humans became real home bodies. At Babel they have to be forced to move on to recolonise the earth. But once dispersed, humans set to building permanent buildings. Something changed in the human psyche.

An obvious change might have been the greater availability of domestic animals and grain crops, possibly related to warmer climate and no mega-predators. The modern world is tame. Even the wild animals are mellow.

 

[Wick Stick]

How did legs evolve?

The same way the animals entered the ark - two by two.

 

[Silent Hunter]

Well, I'm the one subtantively responding to posts (and grammatically correct, usually). You're the one making grandios claims then refusing to back them up and you won't answer the simplest of questions, so, it isn't me being a "brick wall".

Would you like to try again?

Science, i.e. physics, biology, cosmology etc., are your god(s). That's what you put your faith in.

[sarcasm]Well, at least "science" does a much better job of "answering my prayers" than the deity you selected from the thousands available.[/sarcasm]

Why do you think there are no records of history older than 6 or 7 thousand years? (Why are not ANY records of mankind before that if we've been here hundreds of thousands or millions of years? {from post 627})

:idunno: There could be many reasons.

There ARE physical remains of human civilization > 12,000 years old and there ARE physical remains of humans > 150,000 years old.

If you mean WRITTEN records in stone or clay tablets, the oldest found to date are around 7,000 years old. Why nothing older has been found COULD BE because the "records" were written on less durable materials such as vellum (animal skin). There are many more plausible reasons than invoking your personally chosen deity when you can't think of a reason suiting your paradigm.

When you guys come up with something other than your goto "argument from ignorance" let me/us know.

I asked in several posts for someone to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the immaterial (the supernatural). The only response I've received is <crickets chirping>.

 

[patrick jane]

[sarcasm]Well, at least "science" does a much better job of "answering my prayers" than the deity you selected from the thousands available.[/sarcasm]

:idunno: There could be many reasons.

There ARE physical remains of human civilization > 12,000 years old and there ARE physical remains of humans > 150,000 years old.

If you mean WRITTEN records in stone or clay tablets, the oldest found to date are around 7,000 years old. Why nothing older has been found COULD BE because the "records" were written on less durable materials such as vellum (animal skin). There are many more plausible reasons than invoking your personally chosen deity when you can't think of a reason suiting your paradigm.

When you guys come up with something other than your goto "argument from ignorance" let me/us know.

I asked in several posts for someone to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the immaterial (the supernatural). The only response I've received is <crickets chirping>.

The method is reading the Bible as an accurate historical account.

 

[Jose Fly]

I was saying that, no, I do not believe something "just because it's in a book".

Ok then, that's good.

Why is murder wrong?

Because the society in which the event occurred has deemed it to be so. That's why they label it "murder" and punish the perpetrator.

How do you come to moral determinations like that?

Reciprocity and empathy. I wouldn't want someone to kill me or my family members, so I don't do the same to others.

"Social science" cannot determine right and wrong, it only obverses what people do.

It can determine what a specific society has deemed to be right and wrong.

Where else do you find truth?

Depends on the subject. Science can tell me all about the chemistry of a curry dish, but it can't tell me if it's "good".

 

[Jose Fly]

All you have left to argue with are the magic rock apes throwing poo.

The fascinating thing about the poo-throwers, is how they've essentially ceded science to atheism. By distancing themselves from science, and aggressively bashing it and those who defend it, they've set the terms to where science=atheism, and Christianity=anti-science.

Of course that's not true in the real world, but in their world it most certainly seems to be the setup they prefer.

 

[SUTG]

:idunno: There could be many reasons.

There ARE physical remains of human civilization > 12,000 years old and there ARE physical remains of humans > 150,000 years old.

One could even say there are remains of human civilization much older than that, depending on how one defines "remains" and "civilization". The cave paintings at Lascaux, for example.

 

[iouae]

I asked in several posts for someone to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the immaterial (the supernatural). The only response I've received is <crickets chirping>.

Find a religious faith healer and put an advert in the paper for sick folks with doctors reports. Then take them to the healer, get him to heal them or not. Do a proper scientific investigation. If he heals them, get doctors reports. If not, he is bogus and needs exposing.

 

[Silent Hunter]

[sarcasm]Well, at least "science" does a much better job of "answering my prayers" than the deity you selected from the thousands available.[/sarcasm]

:idunno: There could be many reasons.

There ARE physical remains of human civilization > 12,000 years old and there ARE physical remains of humans > 150,000 years old.

If you mean WRITTEN records in stone or clay tablets, the oldest found to date are around 7,000 years old. Why nothing older has been found COULD BE because the "records" were written on less durable materials such as vellum (animal skin). There are many more plausible reasons than invoking your personally chosen deity when you can't think of a reason suiting your paradigm.

When you guys come up with something other than your goto "argument from ignorance" let me/us know.

I asked in several posts for someone to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the immaterial (the supernatural). The only response I've received is <crickets chirping>.

The method is reading the Bible as an accurate historical account.

Please explain HOW reading a book containing pseudo-history one can "identify and study the supernatural".

You ASSUME the "bible" contains an accurate historical account. Do you discounts stories of "my deity did it" in other cultures? Your "method" amounts to little more than "special pleading".

 

[Silent Hunter]

:idunno: There could be many reasons.

There ARE physical remains of human civilization > 12,000 years old and there ARE physical remains of humans > 150,000 years old.

One could even say there are remains of human civilization much older than that, depending on how one defines "remains" and "civilization". The cave paintings at Lascaux, for example.

:thumb:

 

[Silent Hunter]

I asked in several posts for someone to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the immaterial (the supernatural). The only response I've received is <crickets chirping>.

Find a religious faith healer and put an advert in the paper for sick folks with doctors reports. Then take them to the healer, get him to heal them or not. Do a proper scientific investigation. If he heals them, get doctors reports. If not, he is bogus and needs exposing.

You should try a touch harder at keeping up with the conversation.

I asked in several posts for someone to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the < the creationist's deity >. The only response I've received is <crickets chirping>.

 

[musterion]

The Bible.

If you were to approach it with an open mind, God would honor that because He has exalted His Word above His very name. But if you come to it with your mind made up He does not exist, therefore it has nothing to say to you, then it won't.

 

[iouae]

You should try a touch harder at keeping up with the conversation.

I asked in several posts for someone to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the < the creationist's deity >. The only response I've received is <crickets chirping>.

Then go to the creationists deity faith healer.