Evolutionists, where are all the bodies?

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: borntowatch


There are more dinosaur bones in museums than bones that show human evolution.

I'm not sure what museums or exhibits you're visiting but that's not true in my experience. The Dino exhibits may appear bigger because the scale of the exhibits themselves is larger than hominid exhibits but the remains themselves aren't necessarily in more abundance.

If that statement isnt true then I would LOVE to see the progression from primate to human.
That in itself could end my belief in supernatural creation, the book of Genesis, then the bible alltogether.

How exactly does that work when humans ARE primates? What exactly is an acceptable starting point for you?

Now understand this, I am not talking about ancient humans, I am talking pre humans.

Just to clarify, what precisely do you mean by pre-human? Do you mean before the emergence of the genus Homo? do you mean before the advent of bipedalism? This question can't be answered properly unless I know what you consider to be human and where your cut off is between human and "pre-human".

There all good valid questions Pete, kudos for the sincere interest in finding out my position.

You know Pete, I think Subaeruginosa gets the point, even had very good link (though failed miserably).
Truth is I dont care where you start, Big Bang to difficult, from the first spark of life. To hard I know.

How about where the branch first broke from the tree, even better, how about we work from Hominidae. That seems to give us a good thumb, distinctive nose and bipedalism. Modern precursors wouldnt you say.
Sound fair
We can step forward a few million years if you want, maybe to something more modern if the challenge is to hard.

As for the "missing link" issue, point scoring?
You know exactly what I mean, its a colloquialism, dont be......

originally posted by: Answer

As it stands, it's like a kindergartner looking at a Trigonometry textbook without a basic understanding of arithmetic. You have no basis to understand what's being presented to you. The fact that you think archaeologists have anything to do with dinosaur fossils makes that clear. Also, you DO realize that the dino skeletons you see in museums are actually full-size recreations from skeletal fragments, right? If you're expecting to see a complete fossil record of full skeletons that show step-by-step evolution from ape to homo sapiens... you're not going to get it. Ever. To expect that shows a monumental level of ignorance. That sort of record doesn't exist for any species on Earth. There's enough evidence for scientists to say "hey, we observe this over and over and over and over in various species and it's only logical that this species evolved in the same manner, therefore X." That's how science works... observe, hypothesize, observe some more, test it, observe some more, test it again, have some other scientists hypothesize, test, observe, figure it out and present a theory, have some more scientists validate the theory, etc. It's not, as I'm sure you believe, a couple guys looking at a bone and saying "well dadgum that bone looks like a monkey bone... guess we done descended from monkeys!"

Ahhh, I think I get it, you are sorta saying the fragments are a best guess as to what they think they could be.
Sorta like the uhmmm, I know, the Piltdown man

"I got sum dug up bones and it could be a monkeyman, how bout sum plastacine and glue, look everyone its da missing link thingo.
Wow, guess we done descended from munkees once"
I dont know if the discoverers really spoke like that or if I made it up, clearly though, those listening to it didnt know any better, much like today.
Throw in nebraska man as well shall we, should I continue?

If I am expecting? No you dont get it do you, i am not expecting, I think evolution is absurd.
Its logical to you because you want to believe it, I dont want to believe it, I want the evidence so I have no choice but to believe it.

"observe some more, test it, observe some more, test it again, have some other scientists hypothesize, test, observe, figure it out and present a theory, have some more scientists validate the theory, etc."
Is not evidence to me, its speculation, ok?

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Answer

As it stands, it's like a kindergartner looking at a Trigonometry textbook without a basic understanding of arithmetic. You have no basis to understand what's being presented to you. The fact that you think archaeologists have anything to do with dinosaur fossils makes that clear. Also, you DO realize that the dino skeletons you see in museums are actually full-size recreations from skeletal fragments, right? If you're expecting to see a complete fossil record of full skeletons that show step-by-step evolution from ape to homo sapiens... you're not going to get it. Ever. To expect that shows a monumental level of ignorance. That sort of record doesn't exist for any species on Earth. There's enough evidence for scientists to say "hey, we observe this over and over and over and over in various species and it's only logical that this species evolved in the same manner, therefore X." That's how science works... observe, hypothesize, observe some more, test it, observe some more, test it again, have some other scientists hypothesize, test, observe, figure it out and present a theory, have some more scientists validate the theory, etc. It's not, as I'm sure you believe, a couple guys looking at a bone and saying "well dadgum that bone looks like a monkey bone... guess we done descended from monkeys!"

Ahhh, I think I get it, you are sorta saying the fragments are a best guess as to what they think they could be.
Sorta like the uhmmm, I know, the Piltdown man

"I got sum dug up bones and it could be a monkeyman, how bout sum plastacine and glue, look everyone its da missing link thingo.
Wow, guess we done descended from munkees once"
I dont know if the discoverers really spoke like that or if I made it up, clearly though, those listening to it didnt know any better, much like today.
Throw in nebraska man as well shall we, should I continue?

If I am expecting? No you dont get it do you, i am not expecting, I think evolution is absurd.
Its logical to you because you want to believe it, I dont want to believe it, I want the evidence so I have no choice but to believe it.

"observe some more, test it, observe some more, test it again, have some other scientists hypothesize, test, observe, figure it out and present a theory, have some more scientists validate the theory, etc."
Is not evidence to me, its speculation, ok?

Just because you don't understand the process by which the theories are developed does not mean they are speculation and guessing.

Evidence is EXACTLY what is used to arrive to a scientific theory. The fact that you choose to ignore the evidence does not make it any less valid.

If the VAST amount of scholarly work on the theory of evolution doesn't convince you, why are you here asking a bunch of dingdongs on an internet forum for more proof? There's nothing we can present to you that you can't get in 5 seconds on Google. Quit stirring the pot just to make yourself feel better about your beliefs... just believe what you want to believe and stop being obtuse. If the theory of evolution is absurd, come up with your own theory based on observable and repeatable evidence and have it validated by the science community.

Lol. Outright panic on thread by a certain group of people.

It is almost like God himself, is disintegrating the creation myth within his mind.

Here is my view: Watch the Introduction to the BBC series, "Life". There's a bubble, with the words "Life" inside it. Now, imagine the big bang as the bubble, and basic life expanding out.

Life is everywhere. Evolution is the Creators way to promote infinite beauty in life... in every corner of creation itself.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

This is how fundamentalists are trained to think. I should know, I used to be one.

It is indoctrination talking, not rational free thinkers. When the evidence becomes too much, they flee. Even when confronted about brutal truths of the falsehoods of their own scripture.

It is almost a form of psychosis. Total disconnect from reality. But very well trained in Red Herrings and moving the goal posts. After all, they watch pastors do it.. so they think that is how to lead a Christian way of life.

a reply to: itsallgonenow

They were all covered up by mud during the great flood. Don't you read the bible?

a reply to: borntowatch
Ok, but who says human remains are not found on a regular basis.

I don't know the statistics, but I would imagine that human remains would be found on a regular basis where new excavations are done in previously inhabited places.

If your actually interested in gaining some kind of understanding of the evolutionary journey of humans, then I suggest you read the book 'An Ancestors Tale' by Richard Dawkins.

He takes you though the process, starting from man going backwards in time to our earliest common ancestors.

a reply to: borntowatch

How about Math? You trust Math right?

Okay... Dinosaurs first appeared on Earth around 250 million years ago. They went extinct 65 million years ago.

250,000,000 - 65,000,000 = 185,000,000

185 MILLION years roaming, eating, breeding, dying on this Earth. That is an incredible amount of time to leave bodies behind.

Now semi-modern humans have been around for 200,000 years. Closest to our current species we shall say.

200,000/185,000,000 = 0.0010810810810811

Humans have roamed this Earth 0.001% of the time dinosaurs did.

And yet you still question why there are, according to you, more dinosaur bones than human remains?

Coal, petroleum and natural gas are fossil fuels. It isn't a cute name. It represents what it is. Some fossils decompose into these forms and we burn 'em up for our cars and houses. There goes some of the fossil evidence you want right there.

originally posted by: borntowatch

Ahhh, I think I get it, you are sorta saying the fragments are a best guess as to what they think they could be.
Sorta like the uhmmm, I know, the Piltdown man

"I got sum dug up bones and it could be a monkeyman, how bout sum plastacine and glue, look everyone its da missing link thingo.
Wow, guess we done descended from munkees once"
I dont know if the discoverers really spoke like that or if I made it up, clearly though, those listening to it didnt know any better, much like today.
Throw in nebraska man as well shall we, should I continue?

If I am expecting? No you dont get it do you, i am not expecting, I think evolution is absurd.
Its logical to you because you want to believe it, I dont want to believe it, I want the evidence so I have no choice but to believe it.

"observe some more, test it, observe some more, test it again, have some other scientists hypothesize, test, observe, figure it out and present a theory, have some more scientists validate the theory, etc."
Is not evidence to me, its speculation, ok?

So 2 well known hoaxes which were found to be suspicious be nearly everyone who examined them except for the perpetrators of the frauds is a legitimate correlation indicating that ALL anthropological finds are now falsified data despite both of your examples being proven bull# by other scientists and the peer review process? Wow... two frauds 100 years ago discounts all science since then... you're really reaching today chief.

Hey borntowatch,

I am an expert in the field, have a degree and everything. I'm willing to throw down knowledge if you are willing to accept it. But if all you're going to do is just deny or ignore, then I'm not going to waste precious internet time on you. I could be looking at cats memes.

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
Hey borntowatch,

I am an expert in the field, have a degree and everything. I'm willing to throw down knowledge if you are willing to accept it. But if all you're going to do is just deny or ignore, then I'm not going to waste precious internet time on you. I could be looking at cats memes.

Stick to the cats... trust me.

a reply to: peter vlar

He is using an argument from fallacy.

Discredit and move on. We know the premise of this thread is flawed from the beginning.

a reply to: itsallgonenow

Hey so are you expecting everyone to be fossilized from the beginning of time? Human bones have the average density of wood. Trees have bee growing ng for a long time. How come the entire planet is covered with felled trees, or at least the oceans covered in drift wood. Decomposition my friend, is the secret to your question. Burying a human makes a place where people within a few generations would be able to visit and see where they were interred. This is done with stone usually because things like bodies decompose and look nasty or smell nasty after a period of time. No one wants to remember Chief Crazy Duck as a bloated bag of pus and nastiness, so they stick em in the ground. Now this stone if it were engraved or shaped, over many thousands of days and weeks and years literally the wind will destroy it, rain will destroy it, sunlight will destroy it and make it unrecognizable as a grave stone. It could even be buried itself. In a deciduous forest about a quarter inch of soil is created every year from decomposing leaves, acorns, branches and what have you. This is how things that are old end up underground. Have you ever been to a cemetery with an old section from around the revolutionary war time. The stones are barely recognizable, most certainly not readable and are falling apart at natural cleavage points within the stone that was used. Let me tell you death is forever , cemeteries are not dust to dust my friend, god did get something right. If you really believe in god and his teachings then you know we all turn back to DUST, forever to be part of the earth. So if you are looking for bodies look no further than the sand in the road, the dirt in a meadow, the soil in your window box, its, US everyone who has ever lived besides Jesus and Mary if you believe those stories they just teleported up or something, read it the Ascension of Mary is cool. If you have any more questions let me know.

Most of the answer has already been stated numerous times.
1. Dinosaurs were around longer.
2. They aren't as abundant as you think, except in a few places with favorable conditions like tar pits for example.
3. Most humans didn't get buried for most of history and even when buried most environments eventually destroy remains, bury them deeper, or put them under water.
4. A stone tool or marker is often indistinguishable from a normal stone without context and a trained eye.

Let me add that lots of them have been bulldozed and built over. I used to run heavy equipment and although the company said let us know if you see anything Indian- looking on the site, The journeyman operators said "you better find a pyramid before you say a word, because they'll send us all home with no pay for a few days just so some nerd can come out and say there's nothing special here and it's on to keep building". There are archaeologists in Israel sifting through debris that gets hauled out of construction sites, because in old cities the old remains are under the new stuff, and nobody wants to give away the deed to their home just because some dead guy used to be there.

a reply to: Not Authorized

Oh I know... I've played this game with borntowatch far too many times and should definitely know better. But as a kid I was always the one who would touch the stove after being told it was not and in college I was always the one getting yelled at after being told not to touch the 70,000 year old skull and couldn't help myself. Likewise I can't stop from picking the giant scab this poster leaves on my screen. I should definitely know better, I do know better and yet I keep coming back again and again. Just goes to show you that no matter how smart a person thinks they are you can't force common sense on them haha

originally posted by: itsallgonenow
a reply to: Snarl

Hmm then someone has not read the bible.

Then you should have no problem citing the specific passage in the Bible that gives the date of the earth. Looking forward to seeing it

Cremation and Canabalism?

originally posted by: metamagic

originally posted by: itsallgonenow
a reply to: Snarl
Hmm then someone has not read the bible.

Then you should have no problem citing the specific passage in the Bible that gives the date of the earth. Looking forward to seeing it

This is all about the Ussher Chronology, which is essentially counting 'begats'. Science at its finest!
wiki

originally posted by: borntowatch

Its logical to you because you want to believe it, I dont want to believe it, I want the evidence so I have no choice but to believe it.

Ok, I'll ask it this way:

What would it take to make you believe in evolution? Just so we aren't all wasting our time presenting evidence that you'll ignore and belittle, tell us what you need to see to believe.