Is Creationism Dead?

can any body evolutionist ok explain to me how humans branched from apes 7 million years ago, yet all of them died out leaving one man and one woman in the same time span in recent history.

why did they die out , where are their billions of skeletons and skulls ??

originally posted by: Starbucks
can any body evolutionist ok explain to me how humans branched from apes 7 million years ago, yet all of them died out leaving one man and one woman in the same time span in recent history.

why did they die out , where are their billions of skeletons and skulls ??

Please stop demonstrating how little you know about this subject.

a reply to: Starbucks

This post is proof that creationism is dead. They can't argue without lies and/or complete ignorance of the topic.

a reply to: Starbucks

Allow me.

evolutionist can not explain why all supposed humans died out to one man

They didn't.

Here's what happened. It happened at a time when there were only a few of our ancestors around. Say a few thousand, in small bands scattered about a single region of Africa.

For one reason or another, all but one of these bands died out. It may have happened all at once, due to some local or global catastrophe, or it may have happened over generations due to starvation, disease, massacre or what have you. Whatever the causes, eventually only one band was left.

This band had men and women in it. Not many of either, but still enough for them to have children and multiply. And their children's children had children, and so on down the millennia. And they populated the earth.

In the generations that followed, the genes (or bloodlines, if you prefer) of all the other men who were alive at the time when the band's numbers were at their smallest simply died out.

It didn't happen all at once.

Some of those men in the original band got no children.

Others got children but didn't have grandchildren.

Others had grandchildren but had no great-grandchildren.

And so on down the generations until, at last, all the great-great-as-many-times-as-you-like grandchildren in the world were descended from that one man.

And so it remains.

The above is a slightly oversimplified explanation; there's actually no need for the male MRCA's band to be the only one left at the time; the others could have died out later without interacting with the first band. But that's how it worked.

Let us hear from you now that you have the answer.

why all humans (homosapiens and neanderthal and Peking man, spagetti man, etc) all died out all over the world?
and only a small band of few thousands survived in africa?

you should have a better fairy tale than that

originally posted by: Starbucks
why all humans (homosapiens and neanderthal and Peking man, spagetti man, etc) all died out all over the world?
and only a small band of few thousands survived in africa?

you should have a better fairy tale than that

You do know that every time you post you destroy your own case don't you? You're just proving that you know nothing about this topic other than a few myths and creationist talking points.

unable to answer a simple question.

a reply to: Starbucks

why all humans (homosapiens and neanderthal and Peking man, spagetti man, etc) all died out all over the world? and only a small band of few thousands survived in africa?

No, it didn't happen like that. The most recent male common ancestor lived between 140,000 and 200,000 years ago. Most other member-species of the genus Homo had already died out by then, inlcuding, most probably, Homo erectus (whom you call 'Peking Man'). A few species had survived — Neanderthals, modern humans, Denisovans and so forth. They, too, died out in their time, though some of them may have interbred with descendants of the last common male ancestor of all humans alive today.

It doesn't matter whether you believe this or not, by the way; your fingers-in-the-ears na-na-na-na-na response is precisely the reason why creationism is moribund, if it isn't actually dead.

do you know how many skeletons of early humans should have been in 7 million years?
if every generation was 30 millions only world wide? hundreds of billions of skeletons.
where are they?
the remains of apes and chimps are found in large numbers in pits10s of thousands of skeleton remains of gorillas are found in one pit for exmaple.

what about the homosapiens? did they die out before the survival of the small clan in africa?
or they were the first of their kind?

How is it that Neanderthal DNA is found in all current humans even the ones in africa who never left africa (haplogroup A, Haplogroup B, most of Haplogroup E) since their Most Recent Common Ancestor was in africa. The only back to africa migration is Arab Haplgroup J1 (in recent times less than 4k years ago) and Maternal Haplogroup M from India (small percentage of Ethiopian women) who also came back to africa 5k years ago or less.

Could it be that Neanderhtals were the ancient Europpeans and that is why current Europpeans have the most 3-4% of Neanderthal DNA and the other humans world wide also have that Neanderthal DNA because most current human dna are similar among themselves?


and then the neanderthals just lived in the last 20-200k years and mis dated by fossil dating and feature differences (that also exist among current humans)

originally posted by: Starbucks
unable to answer a simple question.

No, I don't like responding to trolls who can't be bothered to read the previous posts that laid everything out. Obvious troll is obvious. 0/10. Go back and get an education.

Creationism is dead??

Bold statement, maybe only for those who dont believe in it.

I can assure you there are many more people on the planet that believe in some kind of creationism than not.

Why so much 'Im right, you are wrong and stupid' threads regarding this topic on ATS, of all places.

The fact of the matter is, we ALL have different world views, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that. In fact I will go as far as saying, it is essential. If we all believed the same thing even without indisputable evidence of how the first spark of life happened, we would never get to know the truth.

We need to stop this immature squabbling as it achieves nothing apart from closing our minds further to other possibilities.

We need open minds. I can see OP that you openly admit to having a closed mind...says so on your avatar. In my opinion, this is not productive. But I will also state, it is your mind so you can do with it what you want.

We need to stop getting so up tight just because somebody uses their mind (our most personal private essence) differently than you do.

I have my views, they are personal, no body has a right to tell my how to formulate my thoughts or even criticize another person just because of a belief. Discuss it yes, but on this thread alone we can see people accusing whole sections of society of being stupid just because they have a different opinion. This is not mature. Some people here have no discussion skills what so ever. Stop getting angry. Why would you let somebody elses views spoil YOUR day??? Is it really such a surprise that someone else believes differently than you? Because that is how a lot of you are acting.

Pack it in people. This is ATS. We should welcome ALL views whether we agree or not. Then talk about them with respect to get a clearer understanding of why people have the views they have. Above all, we should respect everybodys views on this matter. Thats is how understanding and tolerance evolves.

Im sure the truth is much weirder than any religious book would have us believe, simply because our minds wont even comprehend the real truth. How that initial spark of life set the whole thing off on Earth.

Its a fantastic subject no matter what we believe but is ALWAYS gets spoiled on ATS by intolerance from ALL sides.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Starbucks
unable to answer a simple question.

No, I don't like responding to trolls who can't be bothered to read the previous posts that laid everything out. Obvious troll is obvious. 0/10. Go back and get an education.

This is a fine example. (sorry but this was directly above my post, not intentionally picking on you as we see it throughout the whole thread)

'Get an education' 'you are a troll' is not a mature way to handle a discussion. You could have just informed the other poster that they didnt answer your question and could they elaborate more. Easy. Instead you took the insulting route. Why? Why let a strangers views bring out the worse in you. You should control your feelings, dont let others control them, which is what is happening here.

I havent followed what you were responding to so am not aware of which side of the discussion you adhere to. Not picking sides here. My mind is open and am open to varying views. I also appreciate that science may not be able to answer all our questions, especially if there is some form of 'spirituality'; at work or some intervention from 'something' outside our universe as some religious texts say.




I come to ats to have fun. Threads like these just piss me off. WHY DO IT.

BE TOLERANT, others we be tolerant back.

a reply to: Daavid

Viewpoints that are refuted by reality should not be welcomed and embraced, no matter how many believe them.

Deny ignorance, right?

originally posted by: Daavid
I havent followed what you were responding to

Then perhaps you should before jumping in and passing judgement.

a reply to: Daavid

Belief that life (or the world) was created is not what I am referring to as creationism. I earlier defined creationism as the movement to propagate and promote that belief. Subtle difference. I've given that definition several times in the thread already, and it is plainly implicit in the opening post, too.

Only a fool would deny that the world is full of people who believe in a Creator. That isn't what this thread is about. Strictly speaking, that isn't what this forum is about, either; it was created to discuss possible conspiracies in the area of creationism and the argument over human origins. I am asking whether the creationist movement is dead. It certainly has lost a lot of momentum in the last few years.

One or two creationist members, notably vasaga, did address the thread topic. They were not able to demonstrate convincingly that the movement is anything but noisily and repetitiously moribund.

Even the temperature of debate in this forum has, believe it or not, cooled considerably.

If we all believed the same thing even without indisputable evidence of how the first spark of life happened, we would never get to know the truth.

Unless, of course, what we believed was in fact the truth; in which case, it would be absurd to believe otherwise. I think we can all agree on that, so the debate on creation v. evolution (strictly speaking creation v. abiogenesis) boils down to a debate over the evidence. That is what people here argue about, endlessly. But it is not what I am trying to discuss. As far as I'm concerned, that case is closed. Call my mind closed, too, if you like — ah, I see you already have.

We should welcome ALL views whether we agree or not.

Why? Could it be you care more about keeping things polite than about discovering what is true?

Oh, and also:

'Get an education' 'you are a troll' is not a mature way to handle a discussion.

I don't necessarily approve of such remarks, but did you read the posts which provoked them? Given their content and tone, a certain degree of exasperation is understandable. And by the way, why do you feel you can jump into a thread and make a meaningful comment without having first followed the conversation? Is that how one keeps an open mind?

heck, still no answer to my questions.

I bring this post of mine from another thread to bring rejoice to all creation fans, rejoice for this proves the fraud of evolutionists and evolution

originally posted by: Starbucks
you did not answer any of my questions.

how did Neanderthal have dna in africans who did not leave africa. The back to africa migration is Maternal haplogroup M in Ethiopia, and Paternal Arabs J1.



subsaharan africa have no back migration. how did they get neanderthal dna in the last 200 000 years.

I repeat my question in th quote from my last post

the sharing of dna between neanderthal and homosapiens, means neanderthals are homosapiens but of Europpean dna, which match 88% with all human dna hence it is found in all humans even the african who never left africa, and because it is found in all humans all 7 billion of them, if the neanderthals were seperate species they could not bring their dna to all and every homosapiens who only sprang from one man in africa in recent times and some of them did not leave africa untill a very recent time 50k years at most.

Not to forget the fact that that shared dna is also found in all neanderthals samples! ha ha


and it even gets better, the Europpeans branched out even more recently 10k years ago, so to find more shared dna with europpeans means the neanderthals bones need to be of very recent time 5 thousand years ago


en.wikipedia.org... europpean haplogroup R1


This is how evolutionists finally shot themselves in the foot.
they did themselves in and they proved to the world that their bones are fraud just like their thoery

a reply to: Starbucks

Yep you certainly got us. Random internet troll #123,392,304 with terrible grammar and spelling totally got one over on all us evolution proponents which includes most of the scientists of the world. Now you should go get your post here published in a peer reviewed journal so you can show the world your brilliance.

may be we should not debate at all since science is your cousin and he /she told you she like evolutionists, and warned you of creationists!

after all why should we debate since all the scientists are evolutionists.
so all you have to do when debating is refer to science as evolution and that's about it.
you got it made

a reply to: Starbucks

Maybe we shouldn't debate at all because it's a waste of time "debating" with someone as ignorant as yourself who has no intention of learning about the sciences they attack.