Need help--Harun Yahya backlashing

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
Need some ammo, guys. Their main points are:
-my analysis on Sahelanthropus is flawed

---

They seem to be arguing that if sahelanthropus is 'more-modern' then evolution is falsified. This is silly. At worst, we've got the family tree wrong.

quote:

---

-they have to admit that australopiths walked bipedally, but they say there is no known mechanism that enable them to do so [count that as a half-victory]

---

The same flaw as above appears here too.They present the ToE as Lamarkianism-- straw man, and dishonest as well.The final paragraph about the austs. is another straw man. They present mutation as kind-of a gestalt, all or nothing transformation. It is the hopeful-monster view-point.

quote:

---

-they refuse to acknowledge change from the 'ladder' view to the 'bush' view.

---

It actually looks to me like they do accept the bush view, but claim that such a view falsifies evolution. Another straw man. They are taking the ladder view of evolution and cannonizing it. Then falsifying it. Wow... gee... that's a trick.The gist of it seems to me to be that 'the fossil record is a mess so evolution is falsified'

quote:

---

-they think I'm misquoting them misquoting Henry Gee.

---

quote:

---

Briefly, Gee is saying that the model for human evolution comes "not from direct fossil evidence," that there is "a huge and frustrating gap" in the fossil record, and that therefore the view of the "missing link" is also "completely untenable." This is what we have been saying from the beginning. Therefore Primanda's allegation that Gee was misquoted is entirely unfair.

---

Lets look at the summary:1) Gee said 'not from direct fossil evidence' he did not say 'not from any evidence' In this case the evidence is from genetic studies.2) The 'frustrating fossil gap' is a meaningless argument. For it to have weight one has to jump to the conclusion that there are no fossils to fill the gap instead of to the more rational conclusion that we haven't yet found any fossils to fill it.3) The 'missing link' idea is completely untenable. The missing link idea is a vestige of great-chain-of-being thought. It is the Hollywood half-man/half-ape fantasy. This is an attack upon a theory that is long dead.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by peter borger:
Dear John,
How was it again with the line up and the position of the foramen magnum in these 'primates'? I couldn't make much of it, and still can't. So, could you please help me out?

​

best wishes,
Peter

​

---

I'm not sure what you want PeterB. but I'll take a shot.The position of the foramen magnum-- the connection point between the head and spine-- implies the angle at which the head rests. This in turn implies the general posture of the animal. Think about how your head is positioned on your neck. Then get down on your hands and knees and raise your head to look around. It is pretty easy to understand how it would be helpful for your spine to attach to your head a little further back. This is where it attaches in animals like dogs. The more upright an animal's posture the further foreward, or under, the foramen magnum rolls.Sahelanthropus has a foramen magnum positioned within the range you'd expect for a bipedal animal-- not quite as far forward as in humans but pretty far foreward nonetheless.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ahmad:
But why should we seek knowledge from flagrantly godless people who have devoted their whole life to materialism??

---

This characature of we godless hordes is eternally amusing.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com