Monday, June 30, 2014

The Origins of Modern Humans, Part III: The Fossil Evidence

My third BioLogos post on the fossil evidence concerning the origins of modern humans is up over at BioLogos.  This is the part that will, likely, rattle a few cages.  Comments welcome.

5 comments:

  1. You are under attack from Ken Ham, who has seen your first Biologos article:
    http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2014/07/03/does-the-bible-teach-human-evolution/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KenHam+%28Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham%29

    I am about to count how many stupid lies the article contains.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't know your email address but I have sent the following email widely:

    "Ken Ham - anti-science bigot and divisive unrepentant Christian liar (who ignores Revelation 21:8)
    And he is attacking fellow Christians again.
    http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2014/07/03/does-the-bible-teach-human-evolution/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KenHam+%28Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham%29

    So how many lies did I count in this short blog article? Six.

    And they are whoppers:
    - "they're indoctrinating children";
    - "the so-called evidence they've produced for their idea doesn't support it at all";
    - 'evolutionists' simply 'create' ape-men (Ham is accusing fellow Christians, among others, of scientific fraud - on the grounds that anything contradicting Genesis 'must' be fraudulent);
    - "there is no evidence for human evolution";
    - this is because the Bible tells us humans were created therefore "they're cannot be any evidence in eg fossils pointing to human evolution and non-creationists have simply imagined it all or resorted to lies and fraud;
    - "evolutionary interpretations are superimposed upon them" - prove it and prove that creationist interpretations are 'not' be superimposed upon them.

    I have informed the author of Mr Ham's attack via his blog pages, although he may already be aware of it. This is the author:
    http://biologos.org/blog/author/james-kidder
    (this is his blog:
    http://scienceandcreation.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-origins-of-modern-humans-part-iii.html)

    Liars never repent it would seem. Instead they becoming more extreme in their lying and denials.

    Although I have only skimmed the first Kidder article I can immediately tell in this case that the liar and CEO of Answers in Genesis has failed even to address ANY of the points in the article.
    http://biologos.org/blog/the-origin-of-modern-humans-the-fossil-evidence-part-1 (it is the first of three articles about fossil evidence for human evolution)

    Much simpler to adopt the lies of fellow young Earth creationist Ray Comfort: "You see, there is no evidence for human evolution."

    Er, I think there IS - and THIS young Earth creationist KNOWS it:
    http://toddcwood.blogspot.co.uk/2009/09/truth-about-evolution.html

    A very stupid article by Mr Ham, which I think more intelligent YECs like Jonathan Sarfati (also dishonest but cleverer) might find a tad embarrassing.

    It may backfire on Mr Ham.

    Perhaps he should consider handing over the reins to someone younger?

    If I was still an active evangelical Christian I would find Mr Ham and similar YECs' behaviour to be disgusting and a big threat to the church's reputation (deserved or otherwise) for 'truthfulness' and thus a cause of concern.

    As indeed I do in my current situation (if you think I must be rejoicing at lying by Christians I am not - although the likelihood of Christianity being true with reality-denying liars like this also being the most Bible-defending of Christians is pretty small, unless God is evil/stupid/dishonest/wanting all people to perish through inability to believe his 'Word').

    A H-R"

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have read the post by David Menton. It is a masterwork of misdirection and omission. I am on vacation right now but will address it in full when I get back and have access to all of my resources, including pictures that Dr. Menton carefully does not mention.

    ReplyDelete
  4. (Thanks. I submitted a second comment if I recall correctly.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sorry - the post you have not shown was of course the text of my email sent to various people about the Ham blog. Happy for it not to be displayed here.

    ReplyDelete