|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,461 Year: 3,718/9,624 Month: 589/974 Week: 202/276 Day: 42/34 Hour: 5/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Kof2hu's 22 species corresponding to Genesis thread | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10044 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
I am interested in how hard head you people are right now when the Facts support everything I have been saying. What facts support your claim that the generations spoke of in the Bible were referring to pre-modern human species?
"What happens now, when YOU see that the very evolution of man matches what the Bible says," if you will accept it? You haven't shown that the evolution of man matches what the Bible says. Nowhere do I find mention of transitional species that have a mixture of features from basal apes and modern humans.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2128 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
kofh: This CORRESPONDS directly to the Three Racial Stock Theory of science. coyote;I've told you several times that science does not agree with your claim of three races. And I have told YOU it does. I have referenced a peer-reviewed paper from a scientific journal by two acknowledged experts in the field. (I have quite a number of books by those two experts on my office shelves from my graduate school days and from my subsequent study of human races.) The idea of just three races pretty much died out over 100 years. Because so many traits are involved (both geographical and genetic), and because many of those traits are found with clinal distributions that do not co-vary with one another, many have come to question the concept of race altogether. In spite of all of this you continue to make wild and unsubstantiated claims clearly contradicted by scientific evidence. Unless you can come up with some evidence I can only conclude you're just blowing smoke.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
You don't know anything about me except what you read in my posts. Well, yes. Your posts here, your web page, and posts you've made elsewhere. And that's the part of 'you' that I'm talking about.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I remind you again that the stated Hypothesis that the 22 names in the genealogy correspond to the 22 now extinct humans in our ascent Out-of-Africa. For the zillionth time. The book you cite is about 22 human species. Yet your correspondence is to grouping which in some cases are not all species. Then in order to maintain 22, you reject groupings proposed by others for reasons that include those groupings not being species. Do you still not see an issue?Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
How so? What I see here is you want to say I am wrong because my thinking does not meet your specifications somehow... which is mutual of course. Despite your claim to be following the scientific method, you've already admitted to methods that are not following the scientific method and Coyote pointed those out in detail. In particular, your process is to seek information that confirms your hypothesis. If that is what you do, then you aren't following the scientific method. This is what you do not do. 1. You make no serious effort to critical examine your hypothesis. Instead you simply look for confirmation. And from appearances, you are willing to look at quite bizarre twistings of fact to find confirmation. 2. You do not examine or consider or seek to reject a null hypothesis, such tasks being essential to the scientific method. If you've even formed one, you've simply rejected it out of hand. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
The evidence is science of the Three Racial Stocks that appeared after the mass extinction of all other kinds of man supports Genesis. We know that what you say here is impossible. Some a few groups of living men have no Neanderthal DNA while all other men do. That could not happen unless some Neanderthals survived the mass extinction.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2719 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined:
|
Hi, Kofh2u.
I am having a very hard time piecing together your ideas. Let me provide a bit of an appraisal.
Here is a graphic that outlines the genealogy from Genesis 4 and 5. As you can see, there are two basic lines from Adam (Cain and Seth). So, if this genealogy refers to the evolution of hominid species, then we should expect to see the same pattern in the hominin fossil record. And this is your graphic, that overlays biblical names on the various hominids. The problem is that the fossil "family tree" doesn't at all match the pattern in the genealogical trees from Genesis. For example, Ar. ramidus, which you have equated with Cain, has no descendants on that fossil tree. You instead present all the descendants of Cain as descendants of Seth.
Au. afarensis (Enoch) is depicted as the "father" of Au. africanus (Enos), Au. garhi (Mahalaleel) and P. aethiopicus (Cainan). That's not consistent with the genealogy presented in Genesis: Enoch is on the Cain line, and the others are a three-generation father-son series on the Seth line. So, in order to make the two sources fit, you have to assume that either the fossil phylogeny or the biblical genealogy is wrong. You're trying to argue that the two sources to match, when they don't appear to actually match.-Blue Jay, Ph.D.* *Yeah, it's real Darwin loves you. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3513 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
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. I have seen your attempt to limit this list. It failed then as it does now. Their linkage is not very doubtful. It is quite established.
Homo 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 Dictionary I believe rhodesiensis is featrued in the book "The Last Man." If you want to eliminate it, you obiously haven't read the book and you also serve to discredit the very book you try to appeal to.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3513 days) Posts: 274 Joined:
|
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. I see you are making up definitions now. Subspecies are different from species.
The evidence is science of the Three Racial Stocks that appeared after the mass extinction of all other kinds of man supports Genesis. Then the evidence is worthless, because you drew it from your imagination and not the real world. There was no mass extinction of all other kinds. That is a lie you keep telling yourself as it has been brought to your attention that other huminids lived as early as 12,000 years ago.
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. Well, that is also not true. You admitted as much the last time you brought it up that the range for this MRA is from 60,000 to 142,000 years ago and that 40,000 years is quite out of that range. Why bother trying to reinsert this lie? We all know that you know that your claim about 40,000 years is bogus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3513 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
I assumed you were referring to our present discussion of the genealogy and the one-to-one corrspondence with the paleontology reported in the latest book on that subject Are you bonkers? Why keep going back to these fully discredited claims. The book is not the latest. It is quite outdated as far as the subject goes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
If a 23rd is found then we will start counting Abel. Right now we are pretending that Abel is the only name that represents an individual rather than a human species. So we have a built-in fudge factor.
If even more are found, then we can revisit the criteria for counting 22. As if this exercise is not total BS.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3513 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
We already found a 23rd.
Au. sediba back in 2008. Of course, that doesn't coincide with the latest book on the subject (2007) so Kofh2u pretends that the discovery never happened. ..hm... I really shouldn't say that that find was the 23rd. I don't want to give the wrong impression that there are only 23 species discovered when we actually have at least 38 including our own species. 1.Homo sapiens2.Homo sapiensidaltu 3.Homo georgicus 4.Homo ergaster 5.Homo gautengensis 6.Homo antecessor 7.Homo heidelbergensis 8.Homo neanderthalensis 9.Homo rhodesiensis 10.Homo erectus 11.Homo habilis 12.Homo rudolfensis 13.Homo floresiensis 14. Homo cepranensis 15.Homo yuanmouensis 16.Homo lantianensis 17.Homo wushanensis 18.Homo pekinensis 19.Homo palaeojavanicus 20.Homo soloensis 21.Homo tautavelensis 22.Homo nankinensis 23.Denisova Hominin 24.Red Deer Cave Species 25.Australopithecus anamensis26.Australopithecus sediba 27.Australopithecus bahrelghazali 28.Australopithecus africanus 29.Australopithecus afarensis 30.Australopithecus garhi 31.Australopithecus aethiopicus 32.Australopithecus robustus 33.Australopithecus boisei 34. Ardipithecus ramidus35. Ardipithecus kadabba 36. Kenyanthropus platyops 37. Sahelanthropus tchadensis38. Orrorin tugenensis
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3842 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Hmmm,...
I thought I had alredy posted here before I left last week that you list contains chronospecies or duplicates that are just other names given to the same species. When all the Homo erectus duplications above are collected together, the list reduces to 22 as I have consisytently reported here, in spite you complain that amounts to spamming. If you are to backward to get the message, I usually refrain from posting it again.So check out you list and resist googling to find the facts, instead, take a course in the subject or read the book I recommended.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3842 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
If a 23rd is found then we will start counting Abel. Right now we are pretending that Abel is the only name that represents an individual rather than a human species. So we have a built-in fudge factor. If even more are found, then we can revisit the criteria for counting 22. Not sure what you men here,... but it is the same with science theory as with this theological theory. If future discoveries require we add, change, enlarge, with draw the theory, we do so. But Abel IS accounted for in the genealogy and the paleontology.He was an early meat-eating ape that was attacked and disappeared early on. Another such meated arose as Seth in the Genesis story.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3842 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Are you bonkers? Why keep going back to these fully discredited claims. The book is not the latest. It is quite outdated as far as the subject goes.
?2007 edition was the latest book by a qualified team of paleontlogists as far as I know. What was later and what was different?????
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024