Kof2hu's 22 species corresponding to Genesis thread

yeah...

There has been recent genetic studies that have augmented earlier paleontological theories such as the Three Racial Stock Theory. Remember that Modern Homo sapiens ppeared about 142,000 years ago, which would coincide with Genesis 5:31, which tells us that Noah has three sons 100,000 years BEFORE the 40,000 year flood "out-of-Africa" occurs.What science tells us is that during these years the three racial stocks differentiated into the seven present genetically different races.
But the Politically Correct issues of our times, in regard to Slavery in particular, has made the subject a social issue, regardless of the FACTS: Lewontin's argument and criticism
In 1972 Richard Lewontin performed a FST statistical analysis using 17 markers including blood group proteins. His results were the majority of genetic differences between humans
6.3% was found to differentiate races which in the study were (1) Caucasian, (2) African, (3) Mongoloid, (4) South Asian Aborigines, (5) Amerinds, (6) Oceanians, and (7) Australian Aborigines.Geneticist A. W. F. Edwards in the paper "Human Genetic Diversity: Lewontin's Fallacy" (2003) argued that the conclusionEdited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

Not really.Since Abel had no children he could never be counted as a link to the ascent of other species,which is jsu common sense.However, it seems that Genesis accounts for this dead end by telling us that "Adam," a species that would have existed for almost 1 million years,... fathers another species called Seth by the Jews who must have been collecting these same fossil back then, too.Gen. 5:3 And Adam, (concurrent with Sahelanthropus tchadensis @7 million years ago), lived an hundred and thirty (thousand) years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth, (Australopithecus anamensis):..
.
The story about Abel seems more related to the science that hypothesizes a battle between the vegetarian ape species and the meat eating Australopithecus anamensis.So Abel is consider to be the first appearance of Australopithecus anamensis, which died off, but re-appears as Seth later in the evolutionary trek. Gen. 4:3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain, (Ardipithecus ramidus, a vegetarian), brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD, (which is the ever unfolding almighty Reality within which all men are both trapped and nurtured).Gen. 4:4 And Abel, (Australopithecus anamensis, was carnivorous), he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD, (Father Nature, our Reality), had respect, (in regard to the evolutionary value of a high protein diet), unto Abel, (Australopithecus anamnesis), and to his offering:Gen. 4:5 But unto Cain, (Ardipithecus ramidus was vegetarian), and to his offering, (as concerning the nutritional value to brain metabolism), he, (Father Nature, our Reality), had not respect, (in regard to the demands of the expanding mental abilities of evolving man).
And Cain, (Ardipithecus ramidus), was very wroth, and his countenance fell.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

LOLWe carry Neanderthal genes in us, which tells you that these Neanderthals had children which evolved from them, but by hybridization.

That is the bottom line, always, as we must measure the ideas in a hypothesis against the Stats for mere coincidence.The way it worked BEFORE Darwin and before the development of the Scientific Method was called Oscam's Razor.The simplest idea that answered all the separate observations that seem to have no ready explanation was considered to be the most likely answer to what was happening and why.Today, we would call that a Hypothesis.
It would be an idea that did SEEM to satisfy all the pieces in a "puzzle" and explain the relationship between them.Then, we would need to find other experimentally produced evidence that supported the hypothesis, or propose some experiment that would demonstrate a logical consequence of the hypothesis, if it were actually the reason for those other phenomenon.Or, in time, more hard evidence would surface that added weight to the hypothesis because that evidence also conformed to the proposed reasoning and explanations already hypothesized.In other words, if my hypothesis that these names in the genealogy represented species, I should be able to find support in scripture for assuming such a possibility.
And, I should find more evidence in the enumeration of the two lines of ascent, one thru Cain and one thru Seth.I should be able to explain comments in the Genesis story with corrsponding events with some form of Scientific evidence, like in the case where Cain kills Abel, and the meaning of God "taking" Enoch, and other parts of the genealogy that should equally be important to an intended report by God, of these creatures evolving from on another.If this whole Hypothesis I have made clear to reads on these threads has any merit, especially if I had lived 200 years ago, then Darwinism should have been verifying the hypothesis as more and more was uncovered by the paleontologists.That IS the way Science actually works, right?Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

And here is a major problem with your efforts.
You "find" opposition to the correpondence between Science and Genesis, by using any means necessary.You have already predetermined the that the Bible DOES NOT conform to science.
So a match must be criticized, rather than compared to the evidence presented.And it is your life's work to distort, contort, numerologize, misapply, confirmation bias and just be plain wrong about science, the Bible, or both such that a match, however FACTUALLY SUPPORTED, is said not to be found..Thes two starting points, one on your side and the other on mine own,... seem to allude you as if your position is just right and mine is just wrong, regardless of the evidence or facts.
Grow up and become intellectually honest.

Agreed.
That was what the post above said.The Hypothesis is that the genealogy in Genesis is actually a list of the 22 now extinct species of humans that led to Modern Homo sapiens.Assuming that someone HAD said that, (above), in 1890, right after Darwin suggested cosmic evolution in his theory of biological evolution,... the evidence began accumulating that the hypothesis was supported by FACTS.Finally in the last year or so, paleontologists listed "the 22 now extinct humans" which do correspond to the genealogy in Genesis.But Genetic has added to this by finding that, indeed, around 6-7 million years ago, by an Act-of-God, the first man, an Adam according to Genesis, appeared without parents of the same species, because the "dust" of the earth chemically fused two Ape chromosomes together.Then, 15 year before that, paleontologists theorize that vegetarian Australopithecines killed off the first meat eating Apes in a Cain vs Abel drama which is found in Genesis too.Then we discover that, indeed, Neanderthal were the daughters of men that hybridized with our predecessors and have left the genes to prove it in us all.There are more correlating facts to the genesis genealogy, but this is already enough to emphasize The Scientific Method at work, as evidence grows to support the Hypothesis.

There is no restriction in Science on what one can hypothesize in regard to suggesting idea that seem to explain things that were not understood previously.In 1890, the idea or hypothesis was that, if Darwin was correct, then maybe the genealogy in Genesis is really a list of the species from which modern man evolved.That would explain the meaning of these names which claim they represented men who lived for 950 years and such.
If the names were eponyms, or representations for different types or species of men, then the meaning would make sense, that these kinds of men live as a species for 950 years.But that would infer that this number was a hint at the real Facts, and that the meaning was that these species actually lived 950,00 years.
Since that would have been preposterous throughout the Ages, until these times, the writers left off with the hint of 950 years, but added elsewhere that "a day is a thousand years" sometimes in scripture.What science later confirms is that, indeed, these species did live such long durations before going extinct.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

If you double check that list, as i have, you will exclude all but the 22 I have mentioned because their linkage to us is very doubtful.For instance,...Homo gautengensis............... was recovered in 1977 and was argued to belong to the species Homo habilis. [2] The type specimen has been discussed in some refereed publications as being synonymous with A. africanus,
Homo gautengensis - WikipediaHomo georgicus (For the present, about the only sure conclusion is that H. georgicus represents a new and interesting twig on the hominid bush.)
Homo georgicus - Online Biology DictionaryHomo rhodesiensis The validity of Homo rhodesiensis as a distinct type of hominid is not well accepted and it has been variously suggested that the skull on which it is based should be assigned to one or the other of H. erectus, H. neanderthalensis, H. sapiens, or H. heidelbergensis.
Homo rhodesiensis - Online Biology DictionaryHomo cepranensis ("Ceprano Man" has not been accepted as distinct from the contemporary and far better documented Homo erectus. And, in fact, there really seems to be no good reason to name a new hominid on the basis of a single, not particularly distinctive, fragment.)
Homo cepranensis - Online Biology DictionaryHomo yuanmouensis. The Yuanmou fossil teeth are very similar to those of the 1.6-million-year-old Turkana ‘boy’ skeleton from West Turkana, Kenya, usually assigned to H. erectus.Homo lantianensis Scientists classify Lantian Man as a subspecies of Homo erectus. Lantian Man - WikipediaHomo wushanensis.. early member of an extinct species of humans, considered a subspecies of Homo erectusGoogle +erectus+wushanense&pf=p&tbo=d&qscrl=1&rlz=1T4TSNO_enUS458US458&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=Homo+wushanensis&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=67039599a028a8df&bpcl=38 897761&biw=1264&bih=577&ion=1&bs=1\Homo pekinensis.. early member of an extinct species of humans, considered a subspecies of Homo erectusHomo palaeojavanicus... early member of an extinct species of humans, considered a subspecies of Homo erectusHomo soloensisearly member of an extinct species of humans, considered a subspecies of Homo erectusHomo tautavelensis.. early member of an extinct species of humans, considered a subspecies of Homo erectusHomo nankinensis. early member of an extinct species of humans, considered a subspecies of Homo erectus’Denisova Hominin. Denisovans were a hybrid population of H. erectus and H. neanderthalensis (or a related species such as H. heidelbergensis)For what they were... we are: Denisova hominins, Neanderthals, Melanesians and so on...Red Deer Cave Species.. they might represent a very early and previously unknown migration of modern humans out of Africa, a population who may not have contributed genetically to living people," Curnoe added.HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost sedibaIn a news article published with the initial descriptions in 2010, detractors of the idea that A. sediba might be ancestral to the genus Homo (e.g. Tim White and Ron Clarke) suggest that the fossils could be a late southern African branch of Australopithecus, co-existing with already existing members of the Homo genus.Australopithecus sediba - WikipediaAustralopithecus bahrelghazali searchers like William Kimbel to argue that Abel is not an exemplar of a separate species, but "falls within the range of variation" of the Australopithecus afarensis.Australopithecus bahrelghazali - Wikipedia
d-deer-cave_n_1345216.htmlArdipithecus kadabba Ancient ancestor of ramidus. It has been described as a "probable chronospecies" (i.e. ancestor) of A. ramidus. A chronospecies describes a group of one species derived from the sequential development pattern which involves continual and uniform changes from an extinct ancestral form. Throughout this change, there is only one species in the lineage at any point in time.Chronospecies - WikipediaKenyanthropus platyops.. no real consensus as to whether Kenyanthropus platyops is even distinct from the contemporary and much better known Australopithecus afarensis;. There are also those who think it's similar to Homo rudolfensis.Kenyanthropus platyops - Online Biology Dictionary

Correspondence between the genealogy and Paleontologists is making the similarity in BOTH lists analogous to each other: THE HYPOTHESIS OF DARWINIAN GENEALOGYBook: The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans
by G.J.Sawyer, (Author) WHAT IS YOU COMPLAINT????I am just saying that the two lists are comparable, and both science and Genesis say these creatures led to us.Both seem right on that, regardless that 3+7+12 = 22.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

Yep,...I am saying that since the two lists are comparable in regard to the links from the first human with 23 chromosomes to the last now here, the hypothesis is they correspond to each each.

I am saying my Hypothesis says there is a correspondence between the two lists.Then, I am producing other evidence that seems to support that hypothesis.That happens to be The Scientific Method.

I don't think the correspondence is accidental.I believe that the ancient bible writers either received divine reveltion,..... or, they had simply collected the same bones we dug up in this last century.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

1) ?
Subspecies are not different a species.
They are the corresponding "those sons and daughters" which Genesis refers to after designating the actual link in the genealogy to us.Gen 5;7 And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters:2) What is to explain?
The evidence is science of the Three Racial Stocks that appeared after the mass extinction of all other kinds of man supports Genesis.Genesis ALSO states that Noah had three branches called sons also, which is EXACTLY what now know to have been the case.We ALSO just found out that all people living today are related tonust one man who lived about 40 thousand years ago.
That fits and corrsponds exactly with the Hpothesis, that the Genealopgy is really the list of the 22 humans in our ascent to modern man.These three son are like the nail in the coffin for protesting against the Hypothesis.

Using the Scientific Method removes any need to worry about my credibility.We are not interested in me at all.We are examining a Hypothesis that says Darwin would explain the genealogy which claims 22 kinds of man are our ancient ancestors who live phenomenally and inordinately long existences beyond the imagination or capacity of men as far as we know.We are then listing all the science evidence that has gradually come to support the 1890 theory of Darwin as applied to the Bible.After stating that Hypothesis, we see evidence of hybridizing as Genesis claims, we see the two lines of ascent DID take place, like with Cain and Seth.
We see that all other kinds of mankind went extinct, just like in the Flood Story.We see Noah has three sons that populated all the earth, even up to the mountain tops.
This CORRESPONDS directly to the Three Racial Stock Theory of science.Now Science says that all men living today are genetically related to just one man who lived 40 thousand years ago, i.e., the Noah of the flood matches that.What does your teaching of Genesis really have, except the priority of some guy two centuries ago saying what he thought the Genealogy meant????