Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-08-2015, 12:21 AM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(26-08-2015 11:19 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  "I am your spiritual onesie."

"God made that butthole."

"This is an eight-legged vagina that gives you boners until you are dead. This is not the work of Natural Selection. Nothing this horrible could be created by nature; this is the work of a God."

"My dogmatic crazy glue."

"Jibbers died for your science."

Laugh out load


More Mathew Inman goodness, this time presenting a short history of animals in space at W00tstock 6.0 back in July 2014.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
27-08-2015, 01:33 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(26-08-2015 02:02 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-08-2015 11:38 PM)cjlr Wrote:  (did homo erectus possess a soul? Neanderthals? Denisovans? it's a meaningless qualification that only serves to make us inarticulably special)
Not that there is any clear demarcation point between homo sapien and homo erectus. These aren't leaves on an evolutionary branch, these represent arbitrarily labeled parts of the same branch actually.

The labels make sense for palentologists who have only a few fossils, but make no sense on an evolutionary scale. Evolutionary wise it is all just one continuous lineage.

Our records are only ever a discrete sample set, yes. The continuum problem is inescapable in biological classification, but far more one of serial rather than parallel dynamics. Each surviving great ape genus is unambiguously differentiable from its cousins, after all - it's tracing back to the forks that's hard. With lineal descent (as erectus > sapiens) the issue is in full effect.

(26-08-2015 02:02 PM)Stevil Wrote:  When Christian scriptures say "So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them."

What is meant by image? Surely the god isn't made of bone, or flesh, surely it doesn't need two eyes on the front of its head separated by a nose and having a mouth with teeth and tongue.
So why do many Christians need to believe their god guided the form of humans?

What I was referring to wasn't those that do; rather, the evasive claim that some magic undefinable qualia is unique to "us" without applying to our ancestors.
(it isn't in principle impossible to identify and trace specific genetic history to essentially an individual level, but that isn't even the point of such claims - they're intended to be last resorts of unfalsifiability)

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: