quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
I would not expect many at all humans to be present in the geologic column, it is even a thought to consider why there are any, at least in the flood scenario. I totally agree that we should be finding many many of these fossilized specimens of proto-humans.
I'm curious as to the distinction you make - why would you expect to find few modern humans but many hominids?
Perhaps this should read "I would not expect many modern humans to be present in the geologic column in the flood scenario. We should be finding many many fossilized proto humans in an evolutionary scenario."
However if this is the case it still doesn't make a lot of sense, at least in this terse form.
Why would you not expect many humans fossilized in the flood scenario? What differentiates them from other drowned species?
Why would you expect to find
many many fossilized "proto humans"?
quote:
As for Gene, you assertion that 'without evolution none of the above should exist' seems to be implying that Evolution is the only mechenism explaining these findings. Quite a bold statment, I have found no problem with their existance.
As it stands this sentence says as much about your reasoning as about the evidence: it is fair of you to let us draw our own conclusions.
Also fair is your precise wording: "Evolution is the only mechenism [sic]
explaining these findings. (My italics).
Evolution is indeed the only mechanism explaining them at present. No doubt there are other possible theories which
could explain them, but there are none except evolution which explain them at the moment with an acceptable level of internal consistency, logic, and consistency with known natural processes.