There are two currently popular theories of human evolution 1) a single recent appearance of modern humans and 2) the multiregional model, which states that modern humans evolved simultaneously on different continents. Molecular biology destroys the multiregional model (12-22, 29-36). In addition, even the fossil evidence does not support the multiregional model (37). Instead, all the data supports the biblical view that humanity arose in one geographical locale. Modern molecular biology tells us that modern humans arose less than 100,000 years ago (confirmed by three independent techniques), and most likely, less than 50,000 years ago (12-22). This data ties in quite well with the fossil record. Sophisticated works of art first appear in the fossil record about 40,000-50,000 years ago (38) and evidence of religious expression appears only 25,000-50,000 years ago (39, 40). Other indications of rapid changes during the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition (35,000 to 45,000 years ago) in Europe include (41): A shift in stone tool technology from predominantly "Rake" technologies to "blade" technologies, achieved by means of more economic techniques of core preparation. A simultaneous increase in the variety and complexity of stone tools involving more standardization of shape and a higher degree of "imposed form" in the various stages of production. The appearance of relatively complex and extensively shaped bone, antler, and ivory artifacts. An increase in the rate of technological change accompanied by increased regional diversification of tool, forms. The appearance of beads, pendants, and other personal ornaments made from teeth, shell, bone, stone, and ivory blanks. The appearance of sophisticated and highly complex forms of representational or "naturalistic" art. Associated changes in the socioeconomic organization of human groups, marked by a more specialized pattern of animal exploitation, based on systematic hunting a sharp increase in the overall density of human population an increase in the maximum size of local residential groups the appearance of more highly "structured" sites, including more evidence for hearths, pits, huts, tents, and other habitations. Simultaneous, rapid changes in human abilities suggest replacement of previously existing hominids with modern humans. The fact that all these events happened ~50,000 years ago precludes any possibility that previously existing hominids could be our ancestors, since Homo erectus died out 300,000 years ago, and Homo neandertalensis has been proven to be too genetically different from us to have been our ancestor (29, 30). Where does this leave the evolutionists and their descent of man theory? Well, they can always fall back on their favorite line - "the fossil record is just incomplete." Rich Deem __________________________________________________
I don't care too much about this issue but what people have to realize is that they have been fed one side of the argument, from childhood on. There has not been much coming from the creationist side except through the Church venue because Christianity has been outlawed in the public venue, that being the public school sysems at all levels. It has not really been outlawed but the ACLU will bring a costly suit, which they will lose BTW, on every instance of a public venue being used to teach creationism. This is true for the USA, people in other countries have completely different views on the idea that the universe and life is an accident and very old. Americans do not know that BTW. The best place to start to get the creationist arguments is at drdino.com. Download his seminar videos, watch his presentation of the proof of his arguments. Max
even if those figures are correct it says nothing about the fact that there may or may not be a creator...
i think it says something about churches today. imagine a child being taught his whole life that a global flood once covered the earth. when he gets to college he finds out he has been lied to. he probably comes to the conclusion the whole thing is a lie. christianity must embrace science or become irrelevant.
If you really want to start a scientific battle, then please cite your sources so that opponents and supporters don't have to waste time surfing the web. Needless to say, Mr. Deems article appears to be well researched and thoughtful. If I were to use due diligence to write a rebuttal, it would probably take weeks to uncover all of the contrary arguments, and/or false statements, if any exist. I would probably need to hire an expert to review the document. However, in the past, the theists on this site have set a very low standard for rejecting scientific assertions. Z has gone so far as to reject the entire talkorigins.org site as the work of a "hack," on the strength of one word in one sentence. So, for the moment, as I do not have the time required to research your document from end to end, I will start with the following rebuttal: "Why do human males have nipples?" Was God drinking? Was God experimenting? Did God require something to fill the empty space between the shoulder blade and the navel? To my way of thinking, this is a rather odd thing to do for an intelligent designer. The biological answer is that men and women are essentially the same at conception and hormones cause various physical characteristics to be emphasized in favor of others. But, what is the scientific answer from the intelligent design advocate. Male nipples serve no useful purpose, they are not even erogenous zones.
on fine tuning.... "well, there's no way we can really comprehend it. The fine-tuning has conservatively been estimated to be at least one part in a hundred million billion billion billion billion billion. That would be ten followed by fifty-three zeroes. That's inconceivably precise." ----- Robin Collins, PHD in an interview Vehn thunder is asking for evidence not a cat fight....
i believe i said there is no evidence for id. it is just a good fallback position from falsified biblical creation because it cant be falsified.
Ward and Brownlee in Rare Earth......"that plate tectonics is the central requirement for life on a planet. Of all the planets and moons in our solar system, plate tectonics is only found on Earth."