In my world religions class at scottsdale community college in AZ, even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago. Even this is just guessing or averaging the time frame. Also if man were here 3 million years ago like some scientists at Rutger's university say, then there would be trillions times trillions times trillions of people in the world not to mention an affinity amount of human fossil skeletons. We'd be walking on human bones every inch of the world, except that there would'nt be any where to walk because there'd be living people on every inch of the world too. As for the oldest civilizations, The Mexicans government knows that the Mayans oldest ancestors are The Toltec Indians. The Toltecs reported in thier writings that the world was only around 1700 years old before a world wide flood about 4,000 years ago. The exact dates they added up are only a seventeen year difference to the Hebrew calendar. For the exact dates see Hovind's seminars. As for the whale having feet or legs, you are referring to vestigial body parts. Dr. Hovind debunks this theory in one of his seminars. The whale actually needs those certain hip bones to produce baby whales. Scientists that teach this evolutionary theory about the whale are either ignorant about whale anatomy or lying. Watch Dr. Hovind's seminars and debate DVDs. People are finding out the truth. Now that science is "evolving" they are proving evolution wrong as well as the old age of the earth theory.
55 comments
the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago
I could swear I just heard about a news article about the discovery of a temple dating back 11,000 years or some such thing... In fact, I think I heard about it on this website.
If the first evidence is only six thousand years old, then where does that leave the 11,000 year old temple they unearthed, or the 350,000 year old French cave paintings?
As to there being bones everywhere, I can't fault that, it's not like bones rot or anything.
"In my world religions class at scottsdale community college in AZ, even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago. Even this is just guessing or averaging the time frame. Also if man were here 3 million years ago like some scientists at Rutger's university say..."
<begin sarcasm>Because Scottsdale Community College is way more prestigious than Rutgers and the world scientific community counts on World Religion classes for all their "evolution theory"<end sarcasm>
You have already show a near complete ignorance of the aforementioned subjects and you decide to top if off with "Watch Dr. Hovind's seminars " ? Comgratulations, you are willfully ignorant of established facts, and completely accepting of blatant, on it's face psuedoscience from a known hack, who's "scientific theory's" can't even stand up to grade school level science. How sad your life must be.
-- What? You do realise that people die don't you? Why would there be trillions of people wandering about? --
Pretty sure that number was based on current population growth rates extrapolated millions of years.
Its like they think modern medicine has been around forever. Oh wait, they think modern medicine is useless and its all the praying they do that cures people and lets women actually manage to live through childbirth.
In my world religions class at scottsdale community college in AZ, even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago.
Except for civilisations such as Egypt, Indus, Mesoamerica, China who all outdate 6000 years...
" even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago. "
Try remedial reading classes before you tell us what is in a science texbook. And your creationist books are not science textbooks.
Stupid, stupid people. I can't take it.
Whales need hip bones to have baby whales? Are you serious? Bones get in the way of child birth, numbnuts.
"I could swear I just heard about a news article about the discovery of a temple dating back 11,000 years or some such thing..."
Its easy to date the start of man to 6,000 years ago if you refuse to aknowledge the existence of any civilization that contradicts your BS or any dating method approved by 99% of scientists which clearly shows you to be full of shit.
The cave paintings are easy to explain: Angels painted them with their wings using the tears of the baby Jesus as paint.
The more that I read OPs like this the more that I begin to believe that evolution may be deply flawed, after all shouldn't abject stupidity on this level be an anti-evolutionary trait?
Free Hovind! While supplies last!
Sharks and bony fish reproduce fine without hips, thank you very much. I'll assume your 6000-year-old evidence is the earlist writing. Humans have been around much longer than that. If that's your yardstick, many cultures more recent than 6000 YA didn't have writing either, but we know about them, so a written history alone isn't good enough. Lithographs, pottery, and other things people leave behind is more than enough evidence to say someone was here.
I think someone should notify the Administration at Scottsdale Community College about this "world religion professor" using false science books to teach in areas like geology and biology where he obviously has no degree, no expertise, and no basic knowledge of at all if he is using Hovind's insane rantings for course material. I'm pretty sure quite a few "real" science professors at that school would probably like to see that stopped before it fucks up people like James( who are not to bright, in fact stupid as hell). I wish I could be kinder to James but anyone who takes Hovind's lying bullshit over any true scientist should not be taking a seat in any college from someone who really wants to learn.
@DW (#840524): These people do know there are such things as war and diseases? Both have taken alot of lives during our time...
Plus things like equilibrium and zero population growth, pretty much standard in agrarian societies that depend on a stable population to survive.
@Nightjaguar: You don't hold Hovind's stupidity against us paler-than-paper folks, do you? Then why should I judge you based on Mr. Ignorant here? ;) You're among friends, dude, no worries.
Dear James Lopez: Let's forget whale hip bones for a moment (and how, regardless of what they do, you're misdefining "vestigal" to begin with).
Explain SNAKE hip bones. And no, it has nothing to do with the Book of Genesis unless God does really sloppy work.
Let's see... bones rot, get eaten by scavengers (oooh, they even have special teeth to get to the tasty insides - goddidit), oh and don't forget those heathens and their god forsaken burning of the dead!
Yeah... no bones around. Not too hard. (Pun intended.)
@Nightjaguar : Guys like James give us a bad reputation. I hope everyone is smart enough to know we're not all like this.
I didn't even consider that, nor does it give you a bad reputation nor are everyone like him. I know from years of personal experience. There is a lot of crazy religious cults among Hispanics, I had a friend who's family was into all kinds of crazy witchcraft infused religion and I once went with him to one of those herb and candle store, great fun. Candles for everything..
The Olmec were the Mayans' oldest ancestors, being the foundation culture of later Mesoamerican civilizations.
Vestigial body parts are, as I understand, good evidence for evolution; they show how organisms have changed from their ancestors.
Buffalo once covered the Great Plains: why are we not walking on buffalo bones today?
Drop out, James, and give your place to a serious student.
Where to begin?
First, learn basic English spelling and grammar before posting to a public forum. It will make you look a little smarter, and will cause people to at least consider what you have to say before dismissing it out of hand.
Secondly, there are, to my knowledge, no scientists saying that man (by which, I assume you mean homo sapiens ) have been around for 3 million years.
Thirdly, Egyptian and Chinese civilization have been around a lot longer than 4 thousand years.
lso if man were here 3 million years ago like some scientists at Rutger's university say, then there would be trillions times trillions times trillions of people in the world not to mention an affinity amount of human fossil skeletons.
Because people in prehistoric hunter-gatherer societies and agricultural societies never died of old age, disease or injury, ever, and every last infant always survived to adulthood.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.