Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

The fear of human becoming extinct


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Who knew the Weasley family trademark?a shock of bright red hair?was tens of thousands of years old?

Fictional wizards and J.K. Rowling aside, researchers Carles Lalueza-Fox of the University of Barcelona, Spain and Holger Rompler of the University of Leipzig in Germany announced last week that Neanderthals, who died out 35,000 years ago, had the same distribution of hair and skin color as modern human European populations. By inference, that means that about 1 percent of Neanderthals must have been redheads, with pale skin and freckles. ... http://www.livescience.com/history/0711 ... -hair.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Moderators

Ghosts from the past... whose descendants may be found in Eastern Europe!
:roll
I wonder why the evolutionists are so insistant on the Neanderthals having gone extinct, rather than simply being mixed into the general population... creationist style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

"same distribution of hair and skin color as modern human European populations"

And yet we are to still believe they were not really human?

By such faulty reasoning as they use, one might as well say that since a tiny Asian and large African are so very different, one might be considered human but the other certainly isn't as high up the evolutionary tree so we can't call them human. :roll :bonk:

Humans are a diverse lot, yet all are humans. I see no reason to consider Neanderthal to be any different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
No one knows exactly why Neanderthals went extinct, but the possibilities are also troubling.


I know why they went extinct. It's the same reason the majority of large dinosaurs went extinct and the same reason the mammoths are extinct.... it's called a FLOOD.

Everyone of these evolution articles I read amazes me, not because of the article, but because so many people spend so much money on education to become so ignorant.

C
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
By such faulty reasoning as they use' date=' one might as well say that since a tiny Asian and large African are so very different, one might be considered human but the other certainly isn't as high up the evolutionary tree so we can't call them human.[/quote']

In fairness, I've never heard any biologists claim that different races of human being are different species. The argument that neanderthals were a different species is often supported by mitochondrial DNA studies. But if those are all bogus, we may as well say that the findings from this DNA study are bogus too.

"I wonder why the evolutionists are so insistant on the Neanderthals having gone extinct, rather than simply being mixed into the general population... creationist style."

Some claim they did, and in any case such a scenario wouldn't be outside of evolutionary theory (i.e. it predicts that this sort of thing happens).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It was either Darwin or his protoge that declared a mistake had been made in categorizing Africans as on the same evolutionary scale as the rest of mankind. He declared they should have been placed in their own separate category, or considered a separate species.

Other believers in evolution over the years have put forth that Africans and the Australian Aboriginals are separate sepecies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Darwin was wrong, and scientific consensus no longer agrees with him, though no doubt if you trawl the net you will find some wacko who does. I thought we were talking about modern research here, not the views of a naturalist from 150 years ago. When Darwin was making his views known, slavery had not yet even been abolished in the US.

What I'm interested in is this statement: "By such faulty reasoning as they use, one might as well say that since a tiny Asian and large African are so very different, one might be considered human but the other certainly isn't as high up the evolutionary tree so we can't call them human."

What faulty reasoning that who uses? Are you saying some paleontologist had just picked up a skull and said, "...that frown looks a bit different, therefore this skull must be from a whole other species.."?

Thing is, I'm not even trying to defend evolution. I just hate seeing other people's views mis-represented. That's why I also tried to pick you up on your comment that commentators today "overwhelmingly" think that people from as recently as 200 years ago were stupid. I asked you to back this claim up, but answer came there none!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's mostly scholars that think people who were stupid in those days. like the flat earth theories that they love bring up in bible debates.


But if you think about how they study chimps... like this quote:

"Now we must redefine tool, redefine Man, or accept chimpanzees as humans."
from the Jane Goodall institute website

basically they are saying we use to act like chimps. but probably not 200 years ago.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thanks for your responses Psalm18-28!

It's mostly scholars that think people who were stupid in those days. like the flat earth theories that they love bring up in bible debates.

Saying that people were wrong isn't the same thing as saying they were stupid. Here's John's comment:
Despite a rather large volume of ancient proof' date=' plus many modern day experiments which prove the ancients were not simpletons, there is the overwhelming belief that those people "back then" (whether thousands of years ago or just a hundred or two) were basically bumbling dumbells who just couldn't know stuff. [/quote']
So, the overwhelming majority of commentators (evolutionists?, historians? who knows?) think that people as recently as 200 years ago were simpletons, according to John. Not 'ignorant', but 'simpletons' and 'dumbells'. But do most people really think that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No, they don't use theories like that.
And as far as creationists in the past, well i agree too. they are guilty as well since they don't exactly who the bible was referring to anyway ... so they go around assuming ...for example:The Ham's Curse or thinks God approve of slaveries when he himself brought slaveries out of Egypt. He knows slavery will always exist because of sins (Greed) , that's why God gave guidelines... and if you think about it, they didn't have machines so they had to use cheap or free labor to provide wheats, cottons, etc for the society.. That's why they wanted hold on to slaveries so tightly even though they know it is wrong

we are slaves too if you are working for someone so his guideline for slaveries also applies to bosses and supervisors or anyone who have control over you to make you work.

But on the spiritual side of slaveries, bringing his people out of egypt is actually a picture of Sins.. God is bringing us out of our sins (Jesus wash our sins away so we will look pure and white as snow when we face God... we are no longer in our debt of our sins)


it is true that some think chimpanzees,came from the same tree branch as humans, probably not the same line but the same tree. They are always comparing the percentage of how much each animals are similar to humans Which I don't have a problem with because we have the same designers... just that I don't believe we have the same ancestor as chimpazee. So it isn't just the use of tools they were excited about. It's much bigger than that.

Just to let you know, you don't have to have my type of thinking ( as far as evolution) to be Saved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
So, the overwhelming majority of commentators (evolutionists?, historians? who knows?) think that people as recently as 200 years ago were simpletons, according to John. Not 'ignorant', but 'simpletons' and 'dumbells'. But do most people really think that?


well, they keep trying to say belittle the bible, and belittle the people who witnessed those miracles. They would say "well... it probably wasn't an miracle. Here what probably happened...." and whenever someone have faith what the bible says, they call us ignorant and sometimes stupid for believe such thing (just because we disagree with them) ... depending on the person. But we believe there is God and He will reveal himself somehow even if He reveal himself through sinners (prophets in the biblical time and the bible itself). We are not ignorant or stupid.. just people with faith.

I am not sure they called them stupid though. but they called us that today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

[quote="John81"]Attend a secular university, read the books and other readings they give out, listen to the professors; it's clear as day.[/quote]

Have done, and I was never taught anything close to what you are claiming is taught. I think your claims about what the "overwhelming majority" thinks are untrue.

For anyone else reading this thread- you don't need to go to a secular uni to find out what they are studying. A quick surf of the net will bring up various reviews of what the consensus theories are in history, biology or whatever. What you won't find is the following:

a) Biologists/evolutionists/anthropologists/whatever teaching that other races of humans are separate species.

b) Historians/social commentators/whatever teaching that people 200 years or more ago were less intelligent than we are today.

Of course, you may find the odd person who claims these things, maybe even a web-site about it. And you may find wackos on internet forums making these claims, as Psalms18-28 has found. But that doesn't mean it's what the "overwhelming majority" thinks, any more than the ramblings of Westborough Baptist Church represent the majority of Christians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...