4everGod:


Cloudgoddess are you a wild animal? Yes or no

Like all humans I'm an animal. Not sure about the wild part.

Strawman:
winner01, KingEbukasBlog, 4everGod, felixomor...

Na like this una don slap all the evolutionists in this thread

Oh boy !!! That slap hot ooo

KingEbukasBlog:


Oh boy !!! That slap hot ooo

lol

cloudgoddess:

Like all humans I'm an animal. Not sure about the wild part.

Speak for yourself when you say you are an animal and not for humanity. You support Darwinism and Darwin Himself said man is a WILD animal and you only accept the animal part and not the WILD part? How come?

felixomor:


It wasnt revealed. It was the theory.

Please read properly. Check the date on the original article, u think BBC will report it now?

The work on the fossils has just been the completed.

Read well.

Excerpt from the article:

The human-like skull fragments and an ape-like jaw, complete with two teeth, shook the scientific world in 1912 but were exposed as a hoax in 1953. New tests show the bones came from two or three humans and one orangutan.

Try harder.

CoolUsername:


Excerpt from the article:

The human-like skull fragments and an ape-like jaw, complete with two teeth, shook the scientific world in 1912 but were exposed as a hoax in 1953. New tests show the bones came from two or three humans and one orangutan.

Try harder.

Try harder how? Did the OP fabricate the fraud discovery? Wikipedia is your friend.

4everGod:


Speak for yourself when you say you are an animal and not for humanity. You support Darwinism and Darwin Himself said man is a WILD animal and you only accept the animal part and not the WILD part? How come?

Every Human is an animal whether you like it or not. Darwinism is not a thing, he profound a very helpful insight that changed the way we see ourselves, the world and our place in it and we would be forever grateful but he isnt a priest or a pastor or an imam that should be worshipped, or that every single word from his mouth or writing is an unarguable fact. Then lastly, its as simple as ABC, wild means in Natural habitat, we are obviously in artificial habitats and environments, Wild doesnt apply to majority of humans in this present day and age.

4everGod:


Try harder how? Did the OP fabricate the fraud discovery? Wikipedia is your friend.

For goodness' sake, the article says that the fossil was revealed to be a fake way back in '53. New tests have shown what exactly the fossil is and has shed enough light to convict Charles Dawson as the culprit. You read it, right?

4everGod:


Speak for yourself when you say you are an animal and not for humanity.

You support Darwinism and Darwin Himself said man is a WILD animal and you only accept the animal part and not the WILD part? How come?

Darwinism isn't a religion. I know theists struggle to understand this but science doesn't require anyone to subscribe to an idea simply because a scientist said it. Darwin was not some sort of prophet.

That being said, I personally don't care even a little bit about whether the word wild is used to describe me or humanity as a whole, I don't find it insulting or anything, I just don't see exactly why it would be necessary.

Perhaps at the time he said it Darwin was trying to highlight the kinship between humans and animals? Since in his time humans and other animals were seen as fundamentally different by most people, & his discoveries were beginning to dismantle that paradigm.

jmichlins:
you had to resort to science to prove science wrong, what do we use to prove religion teaching like earth been the center of the universe wrong. I keep telling my fellow theist to keep on their lane and not force your teachings upon others. Live and let live is the true way of life

You are an Atheists just hidding his identity.shame on you.

Edenoscar:
So am I suppose to become a christian after reading this?

No just hide your face in Shame Clown.

SirWere:
Yes yes yes. We see how threads like this litter the internet everyday.

Besides, who were the people who officially declared it a forgery? Creationist Hell No. It was biologists who accepted evolution and saw the obvious disrepancies in the fossil.


And I'm agnostic. Don't get your point

Which Biologist clown?

4everGod:



Thats not the point. The point is, why was it accepted as part of mans evolutionary process without initial proper checks? It was obviously based on personal recognition.

If it was based on personal recognition then that means there are possibly other scientific submissions about evolution that were also accepted without necessary checks.

This is why we say that SCIENCE NEVER LIES BUT SCIENTISTS DO!

Science is not Human ,so how will it lie?
Is Atheists like you that twist Science to suit your fantasy.

cloudgoddess:

If you actually understood what evolution was/how it worked, you would have not made that statement.

So what is Evolution?

cloudgoddess:

It's a misconception that evolution progresses towards some ultimate apex. Although the "aim" of natural selection is to filter out the best-fit organisms in a population, this standard of fitness is constantly in flux due to environmental factors. So there is no ultimate "most evolved" anything.

Evolution by natural selection occurs in response to the environment, not the other way around, so extinction is an inevitable part of evolution. If an environment becomes too hostile for a certain species to survive, then that species dies out. That's what's happening with climate change. Which by the way is human-caused.

You are pathetic. is this the defintion of Evolution? you can twist words and definition to suit your deception.

CoolUsername:
... thus showing us that science is a trustworthy and unbiased disciplined that is concerned with finding the truth.

The fossil was already revealed to be fake more than half a century ago. This is hardly breaking news.

pathetic comment.

blueAgent:


Science is not Human ,so how will it lie?
Is Atheists like you that twist Science to suit your fantasy.

Dude i am a Christian. How did you arrive at me being Atheist? Besides where and when did i twist science?

CoolUsername:


Excerpt from the article:

The human-like skull fragments and an ape-like jaw, complete with two teeth, shook the scientific world in 1912 but were exposed as a hoax in 1953. New tests show the bones came from two or three humans and one orangutan.

Try harder.

U still cant read, can you? The theory was called a hoax but no study was done on the fossils to confirm how it was forged.
And many people still argued it was real since then. Just as u are arguing now.
But after this experiment, nobody will argue again. Just like u will do someday also. Yeah

cloudgoddess:

But you don't even need evidence to believe that a Jewish man died on a cross and ascended into heaven three days later, or that a talking snake caused the fall of mankind. You believe those things and many other questionable tidbits just because one dusty religious book (of many) says it happened. Who is truly the gullible one here?

Its still better than believing that u were once a maggot or bacteria and then became a monkey after living as a fish.

felixomor:


Its still better than believing that u were once a maggot or bacteria and then became a monkey after living as a fish.

"Better" as in it makes you feel better? Sure, perhaps for some people; but I try not to believe things based on how good or bad they make me feel. Because then I'd end up with lots of inaccurate beliefs.

Besides, I personally find the phenomenon of evolution incredibly fascinating, and beautiful. It sucks that religion robs people of the ability to appreciate it.

felixomor:


Its still better than believing that u were once a maggot or bacteria and then became a monkey after living as a fish.

So it's about your emotions right? How you feel?

felixomor:


U still cant read, can you? The theory was called a hoax but no study was done on the fossils to confirm how it was forged.
And many people still argued it was real since then. Just as u are arguing now.
But after this experiment, nobody will argue again. Just like u will do someday also. Yeah

What theory was called hoax? A particular fossil specimen was called a hoax, and that had been known since 1953.

I know you're desperate to discredit this theory but don't skew facts. It's worn in the article. I copied and pasted that excerpt directly from the article that was linked.

I will not answer you anymore if you don't have anything reasonable to say.

CoolUsername:


What theory was called hoax? A particular fossil specimen was called a hoax, and that had been known since 1953.

I know you're desperate to discredit this theory but don't skew facts. It's worn in the article. I copied and pasted that excerpt directly from the article that was linked.

I will not answer you anymore if you don't have anything reasonable to say.

Guy carry ur hurt butt away and read the news. U think u are smarter than the bbc who reported the just concluded experiment?
Go an console urself somewhere. Abeg

Ranchhoddas:
So it's about your emotions right? How you feel?

No sorry.

cloudgoddess:

"Better" as in it makes you feel better? Sure, perhaps for some people; but I try not to believe things based on how good or bad they make me feel. Because then I'd end up with lots of inaccurate beliefs.

Besides, I personally find the phenomenon of evolution incredibly fascinating, and beautiful. It sucks that religion robs people of the ability to appreciate it.

Hehehe, good luck then.

U can imagine how it took over 100 years just to know how a fossil was forged?
Just imagine if he was smarter. Maybe more.
Just imagine many more people who are yet to be unraveled too.

Good luck really.

felixomor:


Hehehe, good luck then.

U can imagine how it took over 100 years just to know how a fossil was forged?
Just imagine if he was smarter. Maybe more.
Just imagine many more people who are yet to be unraveled too.

Good luck really.

She finds this fascinating Well everyone loves fairytales

cloudgoddess:

But you don't even need evidence to believe that a Jewish man died on a cross and ascended into heaven three days later, or that a talking snake caused the fall of mankind. You believe those things and many other questionable tidbits just because one dusty religious book (of many) says it happened. Who is truly the gullible one here?

Yeah, who?