Evolutionists, where are all the bodies?

a reply to: itsallgonenow
I suggest that you read up on the Sima Los Huesos site , at Atapuerca Spain.
This site has several hundred thousand years worth of early human remains. Recent work has shown that one can trace the evolution from homo heidlbergensis to homo sapiens Neanderthal, through the physical changes in the skeletons , over time.
As far as bodies go, only specific conditions will result in fossil formation. Also fossils are rare in regions where skunks and porcupines are found as they eat bones. Many cave sites, around the world clearly show that much of the bone material was eaten by said animals.
In my neck of the woods, central California, when the first white farmers moved in they found literally thousands of mummified remains wrapped in reed matts, stuffed in cliffside overhangs. Their native Californian workers were aghast at the idea of burial, as they had for as long as they knew they burned the dead, so they urged the farmer to let the give a "proper" burial, and they stacked them like cordwood and and burned them.

originally posted by: Answer
Dinosaurs were around unfathomably longer than anything resembling homo sapiens have been but it's rare to find their bones.

Oh wait, I just doubly argued your point. Is that allowed?

Yes you validate the issue very clearly, lots of dinosaur bones, very few human bones by context.
Dinosaurs, billions of years ago, humans not so long ago, yet we cant find many pre human bones.

Archeologist accept all sorts of silly theorys, science is a boys club.
Where are all the bones of the dead, if the world is that old, there should be mounds everywhere.

Dont answer if you havnt studied the facts, you are just guessing.

best place to start is the worlds population explosion over the last few thousand years

originally posted by: borntowatch

Dinosaurs, billions of years ago

Dinosaurs, billions of years ago

Dinosaurs, billions of years ago

originally posted by: borntowatch


Dont answer if you havnt studied the facts, you are just guessing.

Read that statement of yours over a couple times and then do a little research into how long ago the first dinosaurs appeared. Ill give you a hint... Not BILLIONS of years ago.

Another little tip, archaeologists aren't the ones who study human remains so I'm not sure what their silly theories have to do with this at all.

originally posted by: aorAki

originally posted by: borntowatch

Dinosaurs, billions of years ago

Dinosaurs, billions of years ago

Dinosaurs, billions of years ago

Yeah, well whatever, millions billions trillions, it was just a statement to show how ludicrous the archaeology statement is.
Million year old bones seem easier to find than thousands of year old bones

The time frame is irrelevant in context to the evidence, where are all the bones of the dead people.
Strain a flea but leave the camel.

a reply to: borntowatch

Are you serious or are you just trolling?

You've stated as fact that dinosaurs were around billions of years ago, then accused others of not studying the issue. If it wasn't so sad it would be hilarious.

They dig up ancient human burial sites constantly, not to mention that the majority of human burial sites sit on top of modern cities.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: borntowatch


Dont answer if you havnt studied the facts, you are just guessing.

Read that statement of yours over a couple times and then do a little research into how long ago the first dinosaurs appeared. Ill give you a hint... Not BILLIONS of years ago.

Another little tip, archaeologists aren't the ones who study human remains so I'm not sure what their silly theories have to do with this at all.

Pete, I dont have to read the post I wrote it.
I dont care about the time frame, I want an explanation as to why dino bones are easier to find than the bones of the so called missing link.
Its absurd, you miss the whole point to win a few points.
Have the points, you are right obviously, dinosaurs still exist today.
www.youtube.com...
( I havnt watched the video so I can only assume it supports the theory)

Now explain why dino bones seem easier to find than missing link bones.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: borntowatch

Are you serious or are you just trolling?

You've stated as fact that dinosaurs were around billions of years ago, then accused others of not studying the issue. If it wasn't so sad it would be hilarious.

They dig up ancient human burial sites constantly, not to mention that the majority of human burial sites sit on top of modern cities.

No I didnt state it as a fact, in context I was trying to show that the time frame is irrelevant to the evidence.

More old stuff is found than less new stuff. Get it?

In hindsight I should have said trillions, it would have shown how ludicrous the time frame was in relation to the evidence.

a reply to: borntowatch

Because its not true. Dinosaur bones are rare compared to ancient humans and there is no such thing as a missing link.

When you watch these guys with metal detectors digging around certain inhabited areas, they often find ancient artifacts within the first couple of feet.

This tells me that nobody dug in that area for thousands of years. People don't typically go around digging..

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: borntowatch

Because its not true. Dinosaur bones are rare compared to ancient humans and there is no such thing as a missing link.

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

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

originally posted by: nOraKat
When you watch these guys with metal detectors digging around certain inhabited areas, they often find ancient artifacts within the first couple of feet.

This tells me that nobody dug in that area for thousands of years. People don't typically go around digging..

No thats completely false.
People are digging every day, houses, buildings, infrastructure, tunnels, mining, the digging is endless.

Never mind natural erosion that exposes the past.

Dinosaurs were on earth for about 65 million years.
Modern humans have been here since about 200,000 years ago.

Now why would there be more fossils of dinosaurs? Maybe because they lived on the earth for a really, really, really long time.

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: borntowatch

Because its not true. Dinosaur bones are rare compared to ancient humans and there is no such thing as a missing link.

That in itself could end my belief in supernatural creation, the book of Genesis, then the bible alltogether.

Hominid Species

Now burn your bible and denounce your religion.

Some informative, easy to understand videos on human evolution.



Check out Aron Ra's channel, he has a lot of great uploads.

originally posted by: borntowatch


Pete, I dont have to read the post I wrote it.

You wrote it yet don't seem to comprehend it, interesting.

I dont care about the time frame, I want an explanation as to why dino bones are easier to find than the bones of the so called missing link.

But they aren't easier to find than hominid remains and there is no missing link, so called or otherwise.

Its absurd, you miss the whole point to win a few points.
Have the points, you are right obviously, dinosaurs still exist today.
www.youtube.com...
( I havnt watched the video so I can only assume it supports the theory)

This isn't about points, its about your need to perpetuate ignorance like you're passing out candy to Trick or Treaters. Why waste your own, let alone anyone else's time, to post a video when you don't even know the content other than to be snarky? Its rather pedantic and doesn't distract from your continued lack of understanding of evolution or what the theory itself proposes.

Now explain why dino bones seem easier to find than missing link bones.

When did I get in the way back machine and return to the 1920's, because that's the last time anyone took seriously the notion of a " missing link". It only exists in your imagination. Seriously, what is it that pops into your mind when you say "missing link" as if its a real thing or part of any theory or hypothesis? Can you describe exactly what riddle it's existence would solve?

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".

This site is going backwards recently... I think you'd enjoy this site better link

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: borntowatch

Because its not true. Dinosaur bones are rare compared to ancient humans and there is no such thing as a missing link.

That in itself could end my belief in supernatural creation, the book of Genesis, then the bible alltogether.

Hominid Species

Now burn your bible and denounce your religion.

You win the internet

"Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans." excerpt from your wonderful link

Except lose much credibility in my opinion.

Well done, sadly, not so well read

By all means you are welcome to have another go,never give up, never.

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: borntowatch

Because its not true. Dinosaur bones are rare compared to ancient humans and there is no such thing as a missing link.

That in itself could end my belief in supernatural creation, the book of Genesis, then the bible alltogether.

Hominid Species

Now burn your bible and denounce your religion.

You win the internet

"Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans." excerpt from your wonderful link

Except lose much credibility in my opinion.

Well done, sadly, not so well read

By all means you are welcome to have another go,never give up, never.

This would be a lot easier if you had an inkling of a clue how all this works.

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!"