Quote
Where would you draw the line between human and ape? You seem to be claiming that neanderthals were humans, though this again involved throwing out archaeological evidence and claiming that the dating methods scientists use are erroneous and even deliberate hoaxes to mislead everybody. Can you explain how that may be? And how would you classify homo erectus or homo habilis? When did God create them?


QUOTES FROM EMINENT EVOLUTIONISTS:

"Modern apes, for instance, seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no yesterday, no fossil record. and the true origin of modern humans - of upright, naked, toomaking, big-brained beings - is, if we are to be honest with ourselves, an equally mysterious matter" - Lyall Watson. ('The Water People' - science Digest, Vol 90, May 1982, p.44).

"Amid the bewildering array of early fossil hominoids, is there one whose morphology makrs it is man's hominid ancestor? If the factor of genetic variability is considered, the answer appears to be no." - Robert B.Eckhardt ('Population genetics and human origins', scientific American, Vol 226 (1), January 1972, p.94.

Tell me Linda, do you draw any line between apes or humans? or are you simply convinced they're part of your ancestory, and willing to close the gap at all costs? even though parrots have a better brain and vocal range than any ape could hope for.

The "ape-man" claims are often based on fragmentary remains which are more open to interpretation, but when more bones are found, the specimens are found to be either man or non-man (e.g. australophithecine), neither transitional nor "mosaic". E.g. analysis of a number of characteristics shows that H.ergaster, H. eretus, H. heidelbergensis, and H. neanderthalensis were most likely racial variants of modern man, while H rudolfensis and H. habilis were just types of australopithecines.

Evolution emphasises physical and especially DNA similarities between human and other living organisms, and this is alleged to be evidence for evolution. However, again this is not a direct finding, but an interpretation of data. A common designer is another interpretation that makes sense of the same data.