I don't know if anyone has posted this yet but...just in case.
3 Million year old pre-human found
by monkeyshine 25 Replies latest social current
-
-
monkeyshine
Damn, that carbon dating is WAY off!!! ---LOL
-
Warlock
How do they know it's 3 million years old? Was there a birth certificate next to the skeleton?
Warlock
-
under_believer
Not really a human skeleton, though. The article calls it a pre-human.
-
Satanus
Warlock
Drivers liscence.
S
-
badboy
THE NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC IS TO PUBLISH A MAG IN NOVEMBER ABOUT IT.
I ALSO HAVE TODAY'S NATURE MAG.
-
monkeyshine
Not really a human skeleton, though. The article calls it a pre-human.
I fixed it.
To me, it's human enough. It's strange how all those ape-like "deformities" and "birth defects" happened back then.
-
ICBehindtheCurtain
Yes indeed, this is labeled as a pre-human, why do they always want to insist that it had anything to do with humans? How many millions of species of animals have become extinct in the last 1 million years, why don't they ever say that maybe it was a now extinct species of apes? but no, they want to grab on to anything that even remotely shows it had any similarity to humans instead of accept that we were designed and created by a higher intelligence.
IC
-
under_believer
Sorry monkeyshine, the only reason I nitpicked is that there are many evolution deniers on this board and it's important to get the facts straight so as to give them less to criticize. Humans did not exist 3 million years ago, but it was long after we'd split off onto a different branch than chimpanzees and gorillas.
-
under_believer
IC, did you read the article?
In fact, nobody is 100% sure that humans descended from Australopithecus. It's possible their race died out without any descendants.
Additionally, they say that the skeleton shares characteristics both of humans (especially in the fact that the child appears to have walked upright) and apes (curved fingerbones, very similar to modern tree-dwelling apes.) The reason they "insist it had anything to do with humans" is because the skeleton has human-like characteristics quite unlike any living modern species of ape.
Evolution is not incompatible with creation. You appear to accept that this happened millions of years ago; therefore you don't believe in a literal interpretation of the Genesis account. That being the case, why would evolution threaten your belief in a creator?