They just have named a new hominid - Homo Naledi. Found 14/16 complete skeletons unlike previous discoveries which were usually just fragments. Very exciting discovery. Check out the article from BBC which gives a lot more info. Watching the live stream was quite inspiring.

New human like species found in South Africa

Views: 464

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

One thing that theists miss in the skeletal records is the fact that we do not have a lot of skeletons. Every creature with bones doesn't fossilize and just wait there for us to dig it up. It takes special conditions to get finds like this. The bones of many creatures just rot away in time and we neve find anything. That's why the creationist is doubting science and on the border of believing the devil just goes around planting these fossils. It's almost amusing.

... on the border of believing the devil just goes around planting these fossils.

It takes less credulity to believe that a devil went around planting bibles!

Or televangelists and megachurch pastors - (They're different species too.)

Actually this won't phase them a bit because devil and denial don't brake for facts.

The mind-bending theories they have about the deposition of fossilised remains would be more miraculous, if correct, than the resurrection.  

Most interesting.

However, the people who tell the media need to choose their words more carefully.

"What we are seeing is more and more species of creatures that suggests that nature was experimenting with how to evolve humans, thus giving rise to several different types of human-like creatures originating in parallel in different parts of Africa. Only one line eventually survived to give rise to us," he told BBC News.

Nature was experimenting...? Most interesting.

...with how to evolve humans? Nature's purpose was anthropocentric too?

Was it a burial site or were they all at the same party?

No party paraphernalia there, no bongs, no roach clips, nor syringes, I guess it must have been a burial site.


Nature was experimenting with how to evolve humans.

I think that's a line that Stringer will regret saying. Abstract terminology like Hawkins' ''Selfish Gene'' are meat and drink for creationists. It allows them to divert a little attention from the unpalatable facts.

Of course the creationists will ignore it. They have nowhere to go with this but want us to think that the skeletons "got there" by some other means and are animal after all. (We are all animal.) They can't show us chimps and baboons in burial grounds or graves but hold out for this bizarre answer. What proves it to them is their 6,000 year old bible based creationism.

Now here is wisdom. WHY do fundy theists hold out for bible based creationism? Simple. Our species had to start with Adam and Eve. The bible says so. It's impossible for anything to go back any further than these two. It wouldn't make any sense. Scientists are off their rocker!

I might add that in another forum a man argued with me that there is evidence of a god. He says that for anything to exist outside of our universe it would mean there is a god. This man isn't a theist. he deals in philosophy. I told him I deal with objective reality. Another such idiot told me that in order to have "pure actuality" there would have to be a god. What idiots!

"Yes, if there was an invisible man and he lived on a high mountain in another universe and no space ship could go there, you would have to assume he came from  Mars billions of years ago, or he traveled here through a black hole at some unkown point in time."

The idiots amaze me!

It's amazing how creationists are so infatuated with palaeoanthropology and yet have no interest in the possible implications of the finds. I hear there's an announcement to be made of a fossil from Happisburgh in Norfolk England, dated 990,000-780,000 years ago, scores of stone aged artefact's have been recovered from the same site amid a deafening silence from the church. The only facts they seem to be interested in are discrepancies in dating methods, the facts of what's before their eyes has no interest or relevance for them whatsoever. When this blind obfuscation is witnessed, the dark ages are so easy to understand.   

On top of that they want to claim that the bones are monkey bones and the tool artifacts are actually something else. The two have accidentally become mixed and our stupid scientists do not know the difference. Anything for a disclaimer and to keep theism going.

Blindness on such a scale can't be accidental, it has to be a conspiratorial effort to hide a truth that their well aware of. Telling lies, after all, is only wrong when one is outside of the faith.


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service