September 8th, 2011
10:00 AM ET

Ancient fossils question human family tree

At a family reunion of the direct evolutionary predecessors of our species, there would be a lot of arguing over whether Australopithecus sediba gets in the door.

Australopithecus sediba is the name of an ancient species discovered in South Africa in 2008. Researchers now have substantial evidence, published in this week's edition of the journal Science, that Australopithecus sediba could be a direct ancestor of the Homo genus, of which humans are a part (we are Homo sapiens). If that's true, it means our family tree may have to be redrawn, with Australopithecus sediba at the stem of the Homo line.

But that's just one possibility, and a controversial one at that.

Researchers studied two partial skeletons, a young male named Karabo and an adult female who has not yet been named, which were found in the remains of a collapsed cave. "Australopithecus" means "southern ape," and "sediba" is "natural spring" or "fountain" in the Sotho language. The team announced the discovery of the previously unknown species in 2010.

'Lucy' discoverer: Why I study human evolution

Scientists have several theories about what these skeletons might mean for human evolution.

The earliest undisputed Homo genus member is Homo erectus, which researchers estimate to be about 200,000 years younger than Australopithecus sediba, so Homo erectus could theoretically be the direct evolutionary descendant. Alternatively, Australopithecus sediba could be the direct ancestor of Homo habilis, considered to be a toolmaker because its hand bones were found next to stone tools, or of Homo rudolfensis, a contemporary of Homo habilis of disputed evolutionary origin. Australopithecus sediba could be related to both of them, and perhaps their current labels are inaccurate. Or, of course, it could be a dead end, although researchers say the skeletons' human-like features suggest otherwise.

Species as experiments in evolution

It makes sense that there seem to have been many variations in anatomical form evolving around 2 million years ago, said Lee Berger, paleoanthropologist at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa, who led the discovery of the fossils.

"As you’re beginning to have the stresses and stressors of environmental change and the things going on in Africa around 2 million years (ago), you would think that many experiments would emerge, Sediba just being one of those," he said.

There can be only one species that gave rise to Homo erectus, which is our direct ancestor, however. To demonstrate stronger evidence, Berger said, archaeologists would have to find fossils that come before and after Australopithecus sediba in the evolutionary lineage.

Based on the variety of Australopithecus forms that have been found, Ian Tattersall, paleoanthropologist and curator at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, who wasn't involved in the study, said he believes Australopithecus sediba probably did not give rise to Homo. Instead, it represents the context in which our true ancestor, in whatever form it was, did arise: during a time when there were many different forms of upright creatures. About 2.6 million years ago there was a huge change in the African fauna, with more grasslands arising; these kinds of environmental factors probably shaped the evolution of different species.

"In some population, some genetic novelty became established which basically set the patent for the genus Homo in a short period of time," Tattersall said. "What we’re not going to see, I think, is the gradual modification over millions of years of an Australopith into Homo."

Exploring the skeletons

Based on the two skeletons studied so far, Australopithecus sediba represents a curious, unique combination of human-like and primitive features.

For instance, consider the brain: Australopithecus sediba's skull shows a cranial capacity of 420 cubic centimeters, whereas a chimpanzee's is about 380 cubic centimeters. Homo erectus is about 200,000 years younger than Australopithecus sediba, and its cranial capacity would be a whopping 900 cubic centimeters. If Australopithecus sediba is the direct evolutionary ancestor of Homo erectus, it suggests a more rapid expansion of brain size over the course of evolutionary history than previously believed. Also, the overall shape of the brain appears to resemble a human's more than a chimp's.

Then there's the matter of feet. Australopithecus sediba has a mostly human-like ankle joint, but the heel bone is mostly ape-like. That's surprising because the species of Lucy, the famous 3-million-year-old skeleton classified as Australopithecus afarensis, has a more advanced heel than Australopithecus sediba. If Berger's skeletons descend evolutionarily from Lucy's species, that would mean that heel anatomy would have evolved from advanced to primitive to advanced again - which is unlikely. Alternatively, Lucy's species may be more of a cousin to Australopithecus sediba, and to our genus, on the evolutionary tree, rather than an immediate relative.

"If that's the case, then there may very well be a ghost lineage," Berger said. In other words, there are probably more fossils out there to explain where these species came from.

At the same time, Australopithecus sediba's pelvis is the most human-like of any found in the Australopithecus genus, Berger said. While females of Lucy's species have wide, stable platforms with a birth outlet, the human pelvis is more bowl-like and curves around the body, and Australopithecus sediba's pelvis is closer to that.

Researchers have good evidence from the hands and feet that Australopithecus sediba was spending a decent amount of time climbing in trees. And the hands, which have grasping capabilities, are more advanced than those of Homo habilis, suggesting it, too, was an early tool-user.

"Sediba and the other early bipedal apes were creatures of relatively small stature that retained a lot of climbing features, particularly in their upper body skeleton, so they spent a lot of time in the trees even though, when they came to the ground, they walked on two legs," Tattersall said.

What led to the deaths of these possible proto-humans that Berger's team studied? They appear to have fallen, perhaps while looking for water, Berger said. But further investigation will reveal more precise details.

From the other evidence that hasn't yet been unearthed or examined, Berger promised his team will also likely discover the dietary habits of Australopithecus sediba and whether they were hairy. Researchers may already have found evidence of soft tissue. And they've got more skeletons to explore from the same area.

"What makes this really exciting is that this is opening this whole question of where the genus Homo came from to re-examination. What they have is a wonderful sample of individuals, of a kind that we don’t really expect to find in the human fossil record. Just one complete skeleton is rare, let alone a whole bunch of individuals," Tattersall said.

Post by:
Filed under: Human ancestors • On Earth
soundoff (2,014 Responses)
  1. free lesbian chat

    Thank you a lot for sharing this with all folks you actually understand what you're talking approximately! Bookmarked. Please also consult with my site =). We can have a hyperlink exchange arrangement among us

    September 12, 2012 at 11:37 pm |
  2. John P. Tarver

    I believe the fossil record being aproached as parallel species is a recognition of the global geological record proof that species occur rapidly following a mass extinction. This indicates that these scientists are being allowed by their patron to use current science in making valid conclusions. Often times blind faith taints science, as Einstein pointed out in his statement about great spiritis.

    September 1, 2012 at 4:55 pm |
  3. John P. Tarver

    The cult of the ant study are looking more like flat earthers every day.

    September 1, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
  4. Faithful Scientist

    Simply question....Can you get something from Nothing?
    If you answer yes, you believe in evolution.
    If you answer no, you believe in creationism/ intelligent design.
    Think about it! It takes more faith to believe in evolution.

    August 9, 2012 at 8:23 am |
    • John P. Tarver

      I believe a vacuum fluctuation proves that something can come from nothing. Black box radiation was a curiosity for many years before Einstein expalianed it with QM. I can see no reason to doubt the Global Geological Record proof that species occur rapidly following a mass extinction, the opposite of Evolution.

      September 1, 2012 at 4:50 pm |
    • John P. Tarver

      I believe that something can come from nothing. Black box radiation was a curiosity for many years before Einstein expalianed it with QM. I can see no reason to doubt the Global Geological Record proof that species occur rapidly following a mass extinction, the opposite of Evolution.

      September 1, 2012 at 4:51 pm |
  5. Google

    [...]Here are a number of the sites we advise for our visitors[...]

    March 13, 2012 at 3:50 pm |
  6. lawn maintenance bloomington in

    I have been exploring for a little bit for any high quality articles or blog posts on this kind of area . Exploring in Yahoo I at last stumbled upon this site. Reading this information So i am happy to convey that I've a very good uncanny feeling I discovered exactly what I needed. I most certainly will make sure to don't forget this website and give it a glance on a constant basis.

    February 24, 2012 at 12:01 am |
  7. find hosting

    Anklagen find hosting dasjenige Trompeter renovieren neben oder i wo! aeu�erst Sie.

    January 3, 2012 at 4:41 am |
  8. Yahaira Soltow

    I'm a life-long Libertarian conservative. Not a liberal. You fascist lemmings need to get a grip on reality. If describing yourselves as fascist is too much hard work' for you, then a more polite way of putting it would be fundamentalist Christian neo-cons. What other words begin with neo- ???? Hmmm, I can't think of any offhand, can you?

    December 11, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
    • fimeilleur

      Wow, this comes completely from left field... Is there any context you could add?

      December 11, 2011 at 10:50 pm |
    • John P. Tarver

      Fascists of the 20th century were both evolutionist and socialist, like someone you know.

      September 1, 2012 at 5:00 pm |
  9. Interesting post , I'm going to spend more time reading about this subject

    Thank you for your commitment to good writing. Your use of persuasive content impresses me. I like your views and concur many points. Please continue to put out great work.

    November 27, 2011 at 11:48 pm |
  10. Meggan Stansell

    Great publish, very informative. I'm wondering why the other experts of this sector don't notice this. You must proceed your writing. I am confident, you have a great readers' base already!|What's Going down i'm new to this, I stumbled upon this I've discovered It absolutely useful and it has aided me out loads. I am hoping to contribute & help other users like its aided me. Good job.

    November 24, 2011 at 2:23 am |
  11. stop arguing

    The bible was created by stories and tales. Some are true and some aren't; however, people write and tell stories to explain unknown thing(s), event(s) or phenomenon(s) . Moreover, stories can also help people with moral values such as being kind or learning a lesson. Just because something is written in a 2000 year old book that has been revised by everyone, doesn't make it 100% true. The world is ever evolving. People should be aloud to follow their beliefs freely, yet people should use their head to decide on what is real or not. I highly doubt that god would be angry over people's curiosity in understanding where they originally came from.

    September 16, 2011 at 2:29 am |
  12. John Galt

    The reactions offered so far makes one think that proponents of Darwinism have a problem, for if they really could answer the issue convincingly, why do they feel compelled to vilify and insult? Why don't they calmly present rebuttals and let the force of truth sweep away all error.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
    • fimeilleur

      Because you refuse to listen and find out what people are ACTUALLY saying rather than arguing points that they are not.

      December 12, 2011 at 12:44 am |
  13. Sonia

    What a great article! We are discovering that, like today, there were many different forms of a similar species. It makes me impatient to know what will be discovered next to get a more clear picture of human evolution. What an exciting study!

    September 13, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
  14. USEYOURBRAIN

    One thing I'd like to point out about all of you arguing for the sake of your religion... why is it that you can only question my beliefs, which have evidence to back them up, when you never offer anything to defend or support your own? You use no scientific evidence, no evidence of any kind. You simply refute what I and other scientific minds say with questions. You ask me to show you proof of evolution, I give that to you, but show ME proof of YOUR god.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
    • John Galt

      You are proof.
      If there was no God why would we need Atheist?

      Cap "A" because you guys are a religion too ;)

      September 13, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        Funny how you answered his post with... another question...

        I'm going back to my hobby of not collecting stamps.

        December 12, 2011 at 12:46 am |
  15. John Galt

    so are we cabbage patch kids?

    what came first the plant or the animal and how did the other come about or how did the plant develop a circulatory system since you need the entire thing to function or did it appear over a single generation?

    September 13, 2011 at 2:22 pm |
    • USEYOURBRAIN

      When did it all begin you mean? hmmm... I'm not totally sure. Maybe I'll write a book about it based on creatively invented IDEAS and see how many people I can BRAINWASH with it.

      September 13, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
      • John Galt

        no not "When did it all begin you mean?"
        I said what I ment, you can't answer the question so you avoided it...

        September 13, 2011 at 3:07 pm |
      • USEYOURBRAIN

        You want me to tell you if you're a cabbage patch kid? Mr. Galt if you need me to answer that then you are beyond any recognizable hope. The answer is no, even though I haven't met you I am willing to make an educated guess that you are not a cabbage patch kid.

        September 13, 2011 at 3:21 pm |
      • John Galt

        so plantes evolved from us?

        September 13, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
      • John Galt

        plants*

        September 13, 2011 at 3:28 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        Mr Gault...

        I've traced my family tree back to the early 1700's when my first relative arrived in North America... by your way of thinking, I should have no relatives in Europe because you obviously have no concept of how evolution works... You seem to think that because two branches have changed, one of them must cease to exist. Well, I'm here to tell you that my relatives are doing fine in Europe... funny how I resemble a great portion of my Norh American relatives (especially the ones more closely related through my grand father), yet I don't resemble any of the ones in Europe...

        Now, evolution explains this easily, no gods required...

        but, alas, you have your fingers in your ears and blinders over your eyes.

        December 12, 2011 at 12:56 am |
  16. John Galt

    so then you should have no trouble proving evolution but I didn't see a link a photo a video nothing that connects ape and man you are assuming they are connected nothing has ever been found that connects the two.
    so a bee turned into a flower interesting or is it the other way around

    September 13, 2011 at 2:17 pm |
    • USEYOURBRAIN

      Well, dear Johnny, I cannot provide you with the enigmatic "missing link," but I can give you evidence that it must exist. What evidence can you give me that your "god" exists? Science has substantial evidence. Which is what I gave you before. Evidence of evolution, which traces back to austrolopithicines, which evidence of evolution leads us to believe that we indeed evolved from apes. So while there is no clear "missing link," we have a lot more links on the chain of life than you and your cult do. I can tell you, though, that we will keep digging until we find it, because it is there. Where do you dig?

      September 13, 2011 at 3:01 pm |
      • John Galt

        first Im not saying evolution can't be true only that it isn't proven and that I don't believe it can be because there is to many gaps in the fossil records

        proof of god for me is the existence of the universe however it happened it happened what ever it is that brought everything into existence would be God
        P.S. I didn't say God loved anybody either but the bibles ten commandments are by no means a bad way to live your life as it provides moral direction.

        September 13, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
      • USEYOURBRAIN

        Evolution HAS been proven. You haven't really questioned evolution, only creation and the "missing link." Laws are a great way to live by too, and they were written by mankind just like your precious book was. Practice your morals, John, but they were given to you by man, not the divine.

        September 13, 2011 at 3:24 pm |
      • John Galt

        and where does this proof of evolution come from... man your using false logic, everything you know comes from man for you are man you must interpret all data you receive therefor is inherently flawed by you way of thinking

        September 13, 2011 at 3:32 pm |
      • John Galt

        If God does not exist then objective moral principles and obligations do not exist. Morality would only be a matter of individual or cultural opinion. But this would mean that torturing babies for fun, rape, & child abuse are not really objectively wrong, and are only a matter of opinion. How likely is it, though, that these atrocities are not really objectively wrong? Can you live with this conclusion? Our deepest intuitions inform us that these actions are horribly wrong.

        September 13, 2011 at 3:34 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        Mr Gault... You've talked about the Ten Commandments, being a good basis for moral direction, and you talk about God's objective morality (one we've already discussed below) and how without it, we'd be raping and abusing children for fun... funny how the protection of children is not mentioned AT ALL in the big 10 from the sky daddy.

        And no, atheism is not a religion, unless not collecting stamps is a hobby.

        What you are arguing (the missing link fallacy) is preposterous. You are asking the scientific community to provide EVERY generation of fossils between the dawn of time, to present day... because without THAT, there would always be a missing link. This is a much higher standard of proof, than you are willing to accept of the existence of God. (I can't explain it, so it MUST be God... are you serious?)

        No, Mr Gault, your god is as fictional as the book from which you've taken your pseudonym.

        September 15, 2011 at 11:53 am |
      • John Galt

        "no, atheism is not a religion, unless not collecting stamps is a hobby"

        A religion doesn’t have to posit a god who must be identified or worshiped. Some religions are polytheistic (Hinduism, Mormonism), some monotheistic (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), some non-theistic (Buddhism). I’d say the new atheists and their religion are “anti-theistic.” But their atheism is religious nonetheless and my proof is as follows

        1: one of the definitions of religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

        2: They have their own worldview. Materialism (the view that the material world is all there is) is the lens through which atheists view the world. Far from being the open-minded, follow-the-evidence-wherever thinkers they claim to be, they interpret all data ONLY within the very narrow worldview of materialism. They are like a guy wearing dark sunglasses who chides all others for thinking the sun is out.

        3: They have their own orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is a set of beliefs acceptable to a faith community. Just as there are orthodox Christian beliefs, there is an atheist orthodoxy as well. In brief, it is that EVERYTHING can be explained as the product of unintentional, undirected, purposeless evolution. No truth claim is acceptable if it cannot be subjected to scientific scrutiny.

        4: They have their own brand of apostasy. Apostasy is to abandon one’s former religious faith. Antony Flew was for many years one of the world’s most prominent atheists. And then he did the unthinkable: he changed his mind. You can imagine the response of the “open-minded, tolerant” New Atheist movement. Flew was vilified. Richard Dawkins accused Flew of “tergiversation.” It’s a fancy word for apostasy. By their own admission, then, Flew abandoned their “faith.”

        5: They have faith. That’s right, faith. They would have you believe the opposite. Their writings ridicule faith, condemn faith. Harris’s book is called The End of Faith. But theirs is a faith-based enterprise. The existence of God cannot be proven or disproven. To deny it takes faith. Evolution has no explanation for why our universe is orderly, predictable, measurable. In fact (atheistic) evolutionary theory has no rational explanation for why there is such a thing as rational explanation. There is no accounting for the things they hope you won’t ask: Why do we have self-awareness? What makes us conscious? From what source is there a universal sense of right and wrong? They just take such unexplained things by … faith.

        6: They have their own preachers and evangelists. And boy, are they “evangelistic.” Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens (Speaking of which, our prayers goes out to Christopher Hitchens in hopes of a speedy recovery for his cancer, we need more time with him Lord) are NOT out to ask that atheism be given respect. They are seeking converts. They are preaching a “gospel” calling for the end of theism.

        7: They have their own messiah: He is, of course, Charles Darwin. Darwin – in their view – drove the definitive stake through the heart of theism by providing a comprehensive explanation of life that never needs God as a cause or explanation. Daniel Dennett has even written a book seeking to define religious faith itself as merely an evolutionary development.

        8: They have their own prophets: Nietzsche, Russell, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx.

        Not only is Atheism a religion, the entire premise is a negative proof fallacy.

        September 15, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        @ John Galt,

        I know it's been a while, but...

        "the negative proof fallacy" ? Are you for real? Ok, I'll play your game. You claim to believe in the ONE true God, the god of the Christian Bible. And you state he is real because atheists cannot disprove his existance. You must accept the existance of Leprechauns, Unicorns, Bigfoot, Vampires, Werewolves, Zombies, the Minotaur, and other creatures because we cannot disprove of them either. You must also accept the existance of Vishnu, Baal, Ra, Thor, Odin, Zeus, Jupiter, Mars, ect. for the same reason that atheists cannot disprove their existance either. So if these other gods and goddesses exist, your God must have lied about being the ONLY god out there. Your god is a LIAR.

        Or, you can accept that the "negative proof" is not falacious, and in fact, the most likely of all senerios.

        December 12, 2011 at 12:02 am |
      • fimeilleur

        @ John Gault,

        and now on to your "proofs"...
        1. a definition... ok...
        2. another definition... this time of world view... yes, the material world is all that we have to go on... it's a pretty basic tenant.
        3. Orthodoxy... ??? Conformity? In that evolution happened? Ok...
        4. Apostacy... LOL. Flew "wrote" about his conversion "with" Varghese, but couldn't remember any of the basis of his debate during a later interview... The contempt is not toward Flew, rather Varghese who penned most of the book, while Flew was in a degenerative state. That would be like Ronald Reagan writing his memoires in 2003, co-authored by Boris Yeltsin.
        5. "Evolution has no explanation for why our universe is orderly, predictable, measurable..." Nor is it meant to. Evolution explains the diversity of life... nothing more, nothing less.
        6. Hitchens politely declines your prayers, you are wasting your time. Mass media has given the people you listed an elevated status... I found rational thought far before I read any of their books, I sought them out and realized that they put into words MY thoughts that I've had for many years... not the other way around.
        7. Charles Darwin assembled the thoughts and ideas of many other promenent scientists of the day, where one stopped his study, another picked up, all Darwin did was find all these ideas, encompass them into one coherant thought, and vaildated the premiss with his own study of the Galapagos Islands.
        8. Pardon me if I'm wrong but, would a prophet PRECEED the messiah? You know, PROPHECISE his arrival... oh, never mind, I see history, language and debate are not your strong suit.

        December 12, 2011 at 12:41 am |
    • John Galt

      sorry about the typos I'm home with a cold hopped up on a lot of nyquil

      September 13, 2011 at 3:39 pm |
  17. frespech

    Most of these articles preamble including the wooly rhino state may. or could, might or possibly and yet everyone jumps aboard like yup thats proof enough for me. I ain't buying it,but keep up the good work and the very lucrative research.

    September 13, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
    • frespech

      It suddenly struck me as being quite miraculous, that they keep unearthing these ape like fossils in of all places Africa.
      Where is it apes live? You almost had me for a second there.

      September 13, 2011 at 1:03 pm |
      • USEYOURBRAIN

        I don't understand your quarry. Are you denying the credibility of the scientific finds? Or are you saying that there is a discrepancy with the fact that apes and humans coexist? I feel I must add.... the survival of the homonid evolutionary change relied in part on the dispersal of groups to europe and other land masses, for resources and territory alike. I would also like to point out that apes live in forests, because forests have trees, and trees are pretty nifty if you're a brachiating mammal. No need to be bipedal in the forest, hence: no evolution into a bipedal organism.

        September 13, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
      • frespech

        USeURbRaiN
        My point is they find nothing but apes in Africa and want to somehow join the dots to connect them to humans when they in fact ate not humanoid at all. And your arguement that the humans needed to disperse for what you stated was rescources. If the tree swingers were quite successfull staying put with what apparently seems to be a more than adequate amount of vegetation to eat. What makes you certain they had to leave at all.

        September 13, 2011 at 3:51 pm |
  18. John Galt

    please link this "proof" you speak of because evolution has never been observed what you are talking is adaptation not a change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:17 am |
    • USEYOURBRAIN

      Here's some proof for you, Mr. Galt, google ancient homonids and australopithicines and absorb the scientific discoveries that unfold before your ignorant little eyes. The proof is in the dirt that I'm about to make you eat. Archaeologists have dug up your ancestors, we know they're your ancestors because there is a series of changes that corrospond directly to environmental changes. For instance, when the climate in Africa became more hot and arid, the forests that called for brachiating primates disappeared. For survival, apes began a practice called BIPEDALISM, which freed their limbs to carry their offspring. It was also a much more energy efficient way to travel, it allowed them to see predators over tall grass, it allowed them to cool their bodies more efficiently, and it allowed them to cover larger distances in search of food. This is an evolutionary change that is PROVEN by the skeletons that archaeologists have unearthed, which have downward-facing foramen magnums and begin to devolop flatter feet. I have my proof, where is yours? Oh wait, you have faith... thats all you can say. Well ponder this, my fellow homonid: you are a product of your upbringing, as goes for your upbringers. If nobody told your great great great great.... grandparents that there was this thing called GOD, would he "exist?"

      September 13, 2011 at 1:24 pm |
      • frespech

        If God exists does the fact that you repeat over and over and over and over that he doesn`t mean it`s a fact that he doesn`t. You argue in one post why the apes stayed and argue the opposite why other ape like ones left. Which is it oh wise and wonderful one.

        September 13, 2011 at 3:55 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        @ Frespech,

        Let's assume your grandparents had two sons, Bob, and John. Bob got married and had a child, we'll call Frespech... my question to you is... does John disappear? If John got married and had children, would they be just like Frespech?

        Evolution is the same, except for on a grander scale. What is so hard to understand?

        September 15, 2011 at 12:04 pm |
  19. USEYOURBRAIN

    All of you religious loons are the apes that forgot to evolve. i can hold fossils and human skulls in my hands... where is your "god" to prove his existence? he is a man behind a curtain, CREATED BY MEN with the creative brains that evolution has allowed. scientific PROOF not THEORY thank you, has educated those who decide to listen to FACT not BRAINWASHING. Neanderthals were among the first homonids to begin practicing religion; their brain capacities even larger than ours. they began asking questions about their own existence with their new tool (language) with their newly developed body part (a hyoid bone.) they began burying their dead with cerimonial purposes. imagine that.... PROOF OF EVOLUTION. Apes came first, then they wrote your stupid book. check your facts, fanatics.

    September 13, 2011 at 12:14 am |
    • frespech

      Why don't you first show me an ape capable of writing a book.
      Apes and man as having a common ancestor is a bunch of bunk.

      September 13, 2011 at 12:33 pm |
      • USEYOURBRAIN

        That's where this fancy thing called evolution comes in. it's why we're not still apes; we can use our brains, our dexterous limbs, and our creative capabilities to manipulate our environment. we have evolved, and we have changed our surroundings. I can even get REALLY creative and write a mind-numbing brainwashing book of instructions, validations, and fables and call it a Bible. THAT'S evolution.

        September 13, 2011 at 1:00 pm |
    • frespech

      This great evolutionary brain which by your standards barely advanced over the first 50,000 years, then in a marvelous quantumn leap made a trip to the moon and back when less than 120 years ago couldn`t even conceive of a motor car, let alone an aircraft to say nothing of a lunar spaceship.I`ll take my chances with a concept of intelligent design.

      September 13, 2011 at 4:00 pm |
  20. Anonnymous

    Alright everyone it should not take a 15 yearold to say this but you are all making yoursleves looking very foolish. Who care if we have different beliefs? Seriously thats what makes the world an amazing place. We do not need to argue over whether or not someone is right or wrong in their beliefs. That itself is morally wrong so stop worrying about it seriously.

    September 12, 2011 at 7:33 pm |
  21. quickstrong

    Follow the money. Huge amounts of money are given for research that supports evolution. You have to accept evolution as a religion to be committed to it, evolution is in itself a religion of theory. Faith in the unprovable is a religion. No one can prove what happened more than 5000 years ago. All speculative science and manipulating data to fit the cause. Besides there is a ton of money in it for those who seek to support it.

    September 12, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
    • Acromyrmex-versicolor

      Nonsense. The specifics of *human* evolution (in terms of exact lineages and which species gave rise to which, which were able to interbreed, and which were actually distinct species) may be speculative, as well as the evolution of many other species, because we can not have witnessed their evolution, but whether or not evolution occurs is not really up for serious debate. It does not require faith on the part of scientists to believe in evolution when it has been observed in other species.

      September 12, 2011 at 9:35 pm |
      • frespech

        Experiments on genetic alteration of 200 generations of fruit flies. Take a guess what they produced. That's right fruit flies. Not dragon flies not butterflies, not french fries but fruit flies you fruit loops.

        September 13, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
  22. Timothy McVeigh

    Only Muslims kill innocent people....oh wait.

    September 12, 2011 at 3:16 pm |
    • Anonnymous

      Thats an extremely dangerous and untrue statement. Only radical islamists do so.

      September 12, 2011 at 7:35 pm |
  23. crc

    If you believe in evolution after living in God's creation, you are willingly ignorant.

    September 12, 2011 at 1:19 pm |
  24. CvG

    Sure – read The Mysterious Stranger – Letters from the Earth by Mark Twain. He has it figured out.

    September 12, 2011 at 11:56 am |
  25. OMG

    Judging from many of the comments here, many people still live in caves!

    Today's debate subject: God created evolution. Discuss!

    September 12, 2011 at 9:46 am |
    • Acromyrmex-versicolor

      If you're willing to make a few compromises with the concept of God – why not? Not a belief that I personally subscribe to, but I don't think there's anything wrong with people believing that evolution is the mechanism for the diversification of species that God designed and allowed to occur as long as they are able to reconcile the reality of evolution with their religious beliefs.

      The hardest part of that reconciliation is that evolution is imperfect (in the sense that not all species are perfectly adapted to their habitat – to use the example of a classroom evolution is not an A+ student all of the time, but rather is often a C- student doing just enough to "pass"), so you would have to either decide that God is also imperfect or come up with a good reason for why God would design and implement in imperfect system. Or fall back on the "God works in mysterious ways" explanation.

      September 12, 2011 at 1:46 pm |
  26. Harvey

    I love it when articles of this nature are published. The drivel posted by the Bible Bangers is most entertaining.

    September 12, 2011 at 8:43 am |
    • Aezel

      Entertaining like watching a monkey throw it's own poop or a dog chasing it's own tail, but entertaining nonetheless.

      September 12, 2011 at 9:01 am |
  27. Correct Answer

    Actually, you all are wrong. We are simply well constructed animated players in a giant video game created from the beings in another dimension for amusement. We do not really exist!

    September 12, 2011 at 8:04 am |
  28. oopscanada

    This is clearly an ape. Next item please. this is getting boring.

    September 12, 2011 at 1:34 am |
    • fimeilleur

      And your credentials are.... ?

      September 12, 2011 at 2:22 am |
      • oopscanada

        are you blind. Any child can tell you if they look at a human skull and an ape skull, that this guy is an ape.
        Or do you a PHD to see properly.

        September 12, 2011 at 2:33 am |
      • fimeilleur

        No, I don't have a PhD, and even if I did, I wouldn't be arrogant enough to make a call like that based on a 2 dimensional photo without physically handling it. There is more to the fossil than this picture. So, I'm going to guess you have no credentials other than the willingness to dismiss the article based on the fact that it doesn't fit with your belief system.

        September 12, 2011 at 2:50 am |
    • Aezel

      Oh look another armchair creatard dips**t who thinks he knows it all, even though his education about science falls somewhere in between a kindergartener and a first grader. Surprise surprise.

      September 12, 2011 at 8:43 am |
  29. Calimafia

    WTF?????????????????? WTF does WTF mean????????????????????

    September 12, 2011 at 1:03 am |
  30. therealjesus

    WTF? This doesn't match any of the fairy tale we made up in the bible!!

    September 12, 2011 at 1:00 am |
  31. Calimafia

    There's no such thing as evolution. This whole thing started 6000 years ago. Ask Rick Perry or Michelle Bachmann if you don't believe me.

    September 12, 2011 at 12:56 am |
  32. Veritas

    Did humans evolve from lower animals? Most definitely. Does God exist? Most definitely. Did I just irriate both sides? Good. They need irritating. Anyone claiming to have all the answers is probably mentally unbalanced.

    September 12, 2011 at 12:36 am |
    • Calimafia

      I was mentally unbalanced but now I'm

      September 12, 2011 at 12:57 am |
  33. WG Marshall

    As a non-Muslim, I would like to thank Muslims for saving Western culture from the Christians. In the early days of Christianity, Christians were out to burn and destroy all books by "heathen" Greek and Roman authors. For example, they burned the ancient Library at Alexandria and all its priceless works. The ONLY reason we now have some of the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Euripedes, etc. is because Arabic Muslim scholars were more tolerant than Christians and preserved them for posterity. The Renaissance in Europe was largely inspired by the re-discovery of these works saved by Muslims. Again, thank you Islam!!!!

    September 11, 2011 at 11:50 pm |
    • Veritas

      What does any of that have to do with anything nowadays? Muslims are backwards and intolerant. Christians have left the Dark Ages. This isn't about the 11th Century; it's about the 21st Century. Get with the program.

      September 12, 2011 at 12:38 am |
      • Calimafia

        Pretty broad statement about Christians having left teh dark ages. Read any good Texas schoolbooks about evolution altely?

        September 12, 2011 at 1:00 am |
    • KrashUndBurn

      """The Renaissance in Europe was largely inspired by the re-discovery of these works saved by Muslims."""

      It was certainly inadvertent. Another reason for the Renaissance was the upheaval of intellectuals from areas (like Constantinople) invaded by Muslims; they fled to Italy to escape Islam's ignorance.

      September 12, 2011 at 11:03 am |
  34. Greg G.

    Excellent article, with a lot of good information. My only wish is that more time would be spent here by the readers of material such as this discussing the material at hand rather than automatically getting into the standard religious arguments. Religion is wishful thinking and operates on hope and fear, not fact. Factual understanding of human origins can only be gleaned from the natural world through the scientific method. If you're not interested in the facts and prefer the magical (non-)explanation handed down by well-meaning parents, so be it...BUT LEAVE THE REST OF US ALONE.

    September 11, 2011 at 11:11 pm |
  35. Qularkoo

    truly an incredible world we live in ... pure chance has filled all of nature's niches with unique plants and animals; providing each with all they need to live and thrive, and all incredibly complex!

    September 11, 2011 at 10:14 pm |
  36. TG

    To accept evolution as fact requires gullibility. For example, if man evolved, then where did the woman come from ? And if man evolved, then the woman would have to evolved at the same time and at the same place, for these to mate and produce children. The odds of this happening are not only astronomical but beyond scope. It is like finding a locking mechanism and low and behold the key was there beside it. However, it is well understod that both the lock and the key were intentionally designed and mated together to function as one. This was not a random event, but a thought out invention. So is both man and woman a product of a designer, God, whose name is Jehovah.(Ps 83:18)

    Getting down to "brass tacks" on the molecular level, what are the odds of a protein that is needed for life to form at random ? Evolutionists some years ago acknowledged it as 10 to 113th power.(10 followed by 113 zeros) But any event that has one chance in just 10 to 50th power is dismissed by mathematicians as never happening. And this is just a protein.

    Yet how many different proteins are needed in a human cell ? Some 2,000 are needed for the cell's complex activity, with some serving as enzymes and others structural materials. So now, what are the odds of this happening at random ? One chance in 10 to 40,000th power. Thus, the odds of the very foundation of life happening at random being so astronomical high, in fact out of the universe, then why are people so gullible to accept evolution as "fact" ?

    September 11, 2011 at 8:59 pm |
    • UncelM

      This has to be the dumbest argument against evolution I've ever seen. You do realize that men and women are the same species don't you?

      September 11, 2011 at 10:00 pm |
      • frespech

        And yours is the dumbest comment.

        September 13, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
      • frespech

        The point was the accident that caused a male human is astronomical. The same accident that simulteneously caused the female counterpart is nothing short of mystical or impossible.
        Choose your God carefully.

        September 13, 2011 at 12:44 pm |
    • Greg G.

      The fatal flaw in your "argument" is that you're arguing probability backwards.
      It is comparable to a person having won the state lottery coming to the conclusion that they did NOT win, because the odds were so astronomically against them to win...but reaching that conclusion AFTER winning.
      I won't bore you with the details of protein formation and RNA and DNA chains forming with one or more energy sources present, but suffice to say that many of your fellow humans smarter than you have no problem wrapping their minds around the process, and it does not require a magical creater god / sentient mind to occur.

      September 11, 2011 at 11:17 pm |
      • frespech

        Your arguement works just as well for explaining the existence of God.

        September 13, 2011 at 12:49 pm |
    • Acromyrmex-versicolor

      The existence of distinct sexes predates humans and even chordates – in fact sexual reproduction in animals predates the evolution of bilaterally symmetry or even the CNS. Sexual reproduction probably predates *animals* – it is an ancient means of increasing genetic diversity and really one of the first significant adaptations of life on earth.

      Therefore there was no need for the separate forms of men and women to simultaneously evolve when humans evolved, because those forms were already well-established.

      September 12, 2011 at 12:02 am |
      • frespech

        Did you just pull a rabbit out of your hat?

        September 13, 2011 at 12:51 pm |
  37. xlion

    If you want proof of gods existence I can tell you how to find it. You don't have to believe any of this. You don't have to pray. All you have to do if be willing to say to yourself, " I will give it a shot. If this guy says he can PROVE God exists (a wildly bold claim) I will do what he tells me to do in order to know for sure" Any takers??? Okay, first get yourself a bible. A quoran might work, maybe a torah, but I believe Jesus was trying to tell people to disregard all the bullshit in the book, which would have been the torah, right? The old testament. Good stories. Lots of examples of the truth, but the Red words is important. So get a bible. It will be easier for me to help you if you do. I have never read it myself, so we will be on the page, or I guess you have probably read it and dismissed it as false, huh? I'm pretty new at this. I was an atheist/ skeptic only a few weeks ago, then, Well I't one hell of a story, you might call it biblical. LOL. So.....Get yourself a bible. Read it. Disregard the obvious crap. Don't stone anybody. No, you can not own slaves, and if you enjoy shellfish, by all means eat shellfish. Now all that other stuff- the wise stuff. the stuff that is true, the stuff that seems like ordinary old common sense, LIVE IT! That's right. Do as it says. Wait.... I can see I'm losing ya. No, really. That's all you got to do. LIVE IT! BE LIKE CHRIST! IT"S THAT SIMPLE. Hey....where you going. I thought you wanted proof? All you have to do is be perfect, Why is that too much? I promise you will get proof. God will reveal himself to you, all you have to do is be like Jesus, Live like Jesus Christ. Still there? Hellllooooo? Hellllllo? Well, I tried.

    September 11, 2011 at 8:37 pm |
    • KrashUndBurn

      """A quoran might work, maybe a torah, but I believe Jesus was trying to tell people to disregard all the bullshit in the book, which would have been the torah, right? """

      Wrong. You seem to forget that the Qur'an came AFTER both the old and new testaments. This means, by your "logic" that the Qur'an is the latest religious text to come along.

      God Version 3.0, so to speak.

      The Qur'an, then should be your misguided guide.

      September 12, 2011 at 11:07 am |
  38. John Galt

    so how is it matter exist? and happened to form in just the right order to work perfectly?

    September 11, 2011 at 8:08 pm |
    • Greg G.

      Matter and energy, as we understand them, are just the "positive" versions. There are some who theorize that matter and energy in ALL their forms are merely vibration frequencies of "quantum strings". (See "String Theory"). Whether it's accurate or not, it's untestable at thie time so many opponents of the idea claim it's yet another form of religion. LOL
      That said, I would accept as an axiom that you can't get something from nothing. The current incarnation of the Universe is certainly due to it's 14+ billion year journey since the "Big Bang", which is a bit of a misnomer – more of a quantum reorganization of all matter and energy in the universe. (Singularity reduction / inflation).

      September 11, 2011 at 11:23 pm |
  39. John Galt

    please link this proof of evolution...

    Evolution:
    Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.

    September 11, 2011 at 8:02 pm |
  40. xlion

    All you atheists who've got nothing better to do than debunk other peoples religious myth are just as wrong as they are, but at least the religious folks have some humility. There's a lot of stories, and a lot of lessons to be learned from them. You however, already know everything. You believe yourselves to be gods.

    September 11, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
    • John Galt

      Atheism Is A Religion

      A religion doesn’t have to posit a god who must be identified or worshiped. Some religions are polytheistic (Hinduism, Mormonism), some monotheistic (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), some non-theistic (Buddhism). I’d say the new atheists and their religion are “anti-theistic.” But their atheism is religious nonetheless

      Religion is also defined as

      1: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

      2: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

      September 11, 2011 at 7:17 pm |
    • Greg G.

      Um, no. First of all atheism is not a religion and thus should never be capitolized.
      The word "atheist" means literally "without religion" or "without god".
      It is the rejection of all religions, superstitions and spirituality, not a structure or belief system unto itself.
      You could not possibly be more wrong calling it a religion.

      Second, if atheists seem over confident or arrogant to you, that's because we can actually back up what we say with facts. It is the theist who can not, and must ultimately invoke the deity or magic as a (non-)explaination.
      And quite frankly, it has been my experience that the more devout a believer of any given faith or belief system is,
      the more likely they are to be exclusionary and elitist. In other words, the most condescending arrogant nonsense I EVER hear comes from the religious zealot, not the skeptic or non-believer.

      September 11, 2011 at 11:30 pm |
  41. mikal rutledge

    Um. SORRY TO BREAK IT TO YOU ALL: GOD MADE HUMANS! THERE"S NO SUCH THING AS EVOLUTION OF HUMANS. FYI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    September 11, 2011 at 3:37 pm |
  42. John Galt

    Objective Morality Can Not Exist Without God!

    If God does not exist then objective moral principles and obligations do not exist. Morality would only be a matter of individual or cultural opinion. But this would mean that torturing babies for fun, rape, & child abuse are not really objectively wrong, and are only a matter of opinion. How likely is it, though, that these atrocities are not really objectively wrong? Can you live with this conclusion? Our deepest intuitions inform us that these actions are horribly wrong.

    September 11, 2011 at 1:40 pm |
    • fimeilleur

      Your objective morality is a load of crap. If God says it's objectively wrong to kill, unless he orders it, then killing is conditionally wrong... or subjectively wrong.

      September 11, 2011 at 2:00 pm |
      • John Galt

        God says it's bad to kill you have free will to do as you wish, morality is not a law of nature people have the ability to distinguish right from wrong but will do what they chose to do.

        if there is no God it is difficult to see how there could be any objective foundation, any universal standard for good and evil. How do you get ethics from only different arrangements of space, time, matter and energy? A purely materialistic universe would be morally indifferent. We would have only individual or cultural opinion, but no objectively binding moral obligations!

        September 11, 2011 at 2:06 pm |
      • John Galt

        By objective we mean independent of opinion, just like 2 + 2 = 4 is objectively true even if everyone in the world disagreed. Despite people’s claims to being relativists, most people live as if they do believe in objective moral principles & obligations. It’s easy to say there are no objective moral principles & obligations, but it’s much more difficult to live as if there are none.

        September 11, 2011 at 2:08 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        You don't get my point. God says it's immoral to kill. God says kill all the villagers... I command it. (following the commandments of God is moral, killing is moral). Your God makes it conditional what is right and wrong. That is subjective.

        Still got slaves? God says it's moral.

        September 11, 2011 at 2:12 pm |
    • John Galt

      The Bible is God? no

      You clearly do not understand my point and perhaps should read over what I said again.

      September 11, 2011 at 2:21 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        So you're not advocating the God of the Bible? So is it the Vedas then? Is it the Danetics? Do tell. Which of the world gods are you claiming to have the objective morality? Next question is how do you KNOW?

        September 11, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
      • John Galt

        The God of creation that of which is the panicle of good for us to reference in our everyday choices.

        The source of morality, that thing inside you that says even when you kill in war to protect your country that it's not good that people die.

        Only you can define what you consider right and wrong even if society tells you otherwise.
        Now how would you know what is wrong or bad if you have no greater good to compare it to?
        i.e... how would you know you had a good day if you have never had a bad day to compare with?

        September 11, 2011 at 3:00 pm |
      • Mason Myatt

        BTW, I am not Christian. I used the Jesus reference simply to make my point.

        September 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        Ok, so this god of creation, how do you know he's good? If he's the cause of the big bang, I'd think he has an explosive personality... explosions are usually bad. By any stretch, it's a pretty bold statement to claim the god of creation is also the source of our morality. Where's your supporting documentation? 'Cause if you're pulling this out of your a$$, I'm not sure I would get the same results.

        September 12, 2011 at 12:57 am |
    • Mason Myatt

      I strongly disagree with any philosophy that requires a supernatural entity for the establishment of morality. Those who believe that the burden of moral behavior lies within themselves and is manifested through their actions, have to give moral/ethical consideration to every thought word and deed. If I do not enslve myself to an external set of laws which are usually the creation of the men in power and with the purpose to hold on to that power more than to effect moral actions, then I must make a moral choice as I decide on my every action. Morality exists only through our actions rather than our words. I believe that those of us who assume the burden of morality as a fundamental facet of our being are apt to live far more moral lives than those attached to some ancient code. At least this is what seems to me to be right as I reach an age where one is apt to be quite serious about how he has lived his life.

      September 11, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
    • Mason Myatt

      I do not think your analogies always hold up. Regarding your claim that without an established code of conduct, writ from on high, we could not state categorically if kiilling babies was right or wrong. It seems to me that anyone following the laws of god as scripted in the Judeo-Christian tradtion face an equally ambiguous situation. In the OT parents are told to take their hateful children out to the city gates where they are to be stoned. Throughout the OT, god is tellling his people to kill wherever they turned. The Hebrew god was smiting here and smiting there. If one subscribes to the teachins of the NT then he is given something like a rule of love. Say and do only those things and actions wshich demonstrate love for all humanity. I believe that we can take that powerful generalization and use it to determine on an individual basis what the better-the right-choice is. The LAW says do not steal. But, would you tell a father who stole an ear of corn to feed his starving children immoral? The Law prohibited work on the sabbath, yet Jesus is said to have worked to feed the hiungry. Which is the moral position? Laws do not always work. Careful thought comboined with the desire to do the right thing can produce great moral actions. I think.

      September 11, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
      • John Galt

        "The LAW says do not steal. But, would you tell a father who stole an ear of corn to feed his starving children immoral?"
        Yes... the reason does not change the action, it is wrong to steal even if the reason was just the action is not

        September 11, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
      • John Galt

        Jesus is said to have worked to feed the hiungry. Which is the moral position?

        The judgments we make when ourselves and others are unjustly treated, reveal what we really believe about morality, regardless of what we say we believe. We believe that these atrocities are moral abominations, not just infringements of mere social conventions or personal dislikes. If objective moral principles & obligations do not exist where does our sense of duty and obligation come from?

        September 11, 2011 at 7:04 pm |
    • Greg G.

      :Objective morality"? Really? Thou shalt not kill... one of the most negotiable of the commandments.
      Except this, except when, unless this, or that... utter nonsense.

      September 11, 2011 at 11:32 pm |
  43. Justin Observation

    Maybe it's like the ancient Sumerian text says. Alien beings came to earth and created the first humans by combining their DNA with the DNA of various animals on earth in southern Africa. They created them to mine minerals for their home planet and taught them to obey, work, and sacrifice themselves for their creators. They called these first humans Adamu, later the story was modified and it became a supernatural god creating a guy named Adam.

    September 11, 2011 at 1:34 pm |
  44. xlion

    Whether or not God exists is irrelevant to the atheist state of being. All religions tell us to put our egos in check, to not allow pride to cloud our judgement, that desire is the root of despair. All the behaviors that supposedly keep us from god, atheist engage in without remorse, and justify it simply by saying, if It doesn't hurt anyone, it's not immoral. Immoral or not, you can not ever see the proof of gods existence without wanting to, enough so that your life is lived accordingly. It's a catch 22. You won't believe, therefore you have nothing to believe in. If you don't know, you can never be told. You see, the proof is all around us. It's everywhere. You want to hold onto that pride, feed that ego, and pursue worldly desires. You blind yourselves. Without committing, without believes, live the life of Christ. I challenge you. If you can do it, and you still don't see the proof of gods existence, you are right, he doesn't exist. But I promise you, that won't happen. You will see a whole new world you never knew existed. You will believe. Those of us who know this, know. If you choose not to even try to know god, because you believe your too smart, too proud, too blind. Oh, well. What an empty life, but it's yours to live. Many professed believers never know god in this world, and others like myself who have always denied his existence will stumble upon that proof, and it can not be denied. It's the life you choose, the world you choose to see. Why not open your minds. Logic and reason are great but a world based on logic and reason is what is keeping you from god. Everything in this world is on a need to know basis, including god. If you are not open to the possibility God exists, then you don't need to know that there is proof of gods existence.

    September 11, 2011 at 1:27 pm |
    • kyle

      See, you are wrong. Religious people are the ones with the ego. They think they know the will of god one second and then claim god is so beyond our comprehension that we cannot possibly evaluate gods will. Atheists have no ego, they think that the individual is nothing but a bag of chemicals and marvel and cherish the fact that for this moment of time they are conscious of their insignificance in the universe. Reason and logic allows atheists to experience this brief existence to its fullest capacity. They see what is, not what they want.

      September 11, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
      • xlion

        Do atheists "think" or do they claim to KNOW, that the human is a bag of chemicals? Most Christians are only better in that they believe things are more complex and complicated than they appear, and they are. There are people, like myself, who KNOW this.

        September 11, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
    • xlion

      No Kyle, I believe you mean Christians, of whom most are blind, are the ones with the ego. But when you are blind, you must follow. Jesus Christ himself told people the bible was full of bullshit, and those who derived their power from it had him crucified. That's the moral of the story. Follow Christ, I suppose, if you don't get it. At least align yourself with someone who claimed to be on your side. The truth about God, and I use that word loosely, for it's something other than a single entity, is that it is something most could not comprehend as were all the things attributed to God, before we had science. There are universal truths that all religions share, and collecting those truths and living by them is the only path to knowing god. As far as religion goes, heavy metal band Iron Maiden summed it up pretty well in the song Revelations. "An easy was for the BLIND to go, a clever path for the fools who KNOW the secret of the Hanged (or crucified?) man, the smile on his lips.

      September 11, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
    • KrashUndBurn

      """Logic and reason are great but a world based on logic and reason is what is keeping you from god."""

      And there it is in a nutshell, folks.

      September 12, 2011 at 11:21 am |
  45. Joepub

    Too bad the "supposed" enlightened atheists in this comment section had to devolve into school yard banter instead of intelligent conversation. Good job losers.

    September 11, 2011 at 12:50 pm |
    • stirringthepot

      School-yard banter always follows lack of proof and applies to both sides of the argument.

      September 11, 2011 at 1:07 pm |
    • Justin Observation

      Well I'm not an atheist or a theist but I know comment sections aren't the best place for intelligent conversation.

      The proof that humans were around two million years ago pretty much destroys the Jewish theology as well as the two descended branches of it. As for proving or disproving the theory of a god, well that all depends on what one's theory of god is, as it ranges from a human like entity living in an invisible fortress somewhere in the sky to energy to consciousness to nothingness to nothing at all. If people were to intelligently discuss the issue of most supernatural beliefs, the only thing anyone could say with absolute truth is "I don't know." But obviously most people like to pretend they know the absolute truth. (until confronted with absolute truth that is, then they usually admit they really don't know.)

      September 11, 2011 at 1:56 pm |
  46. wrathbrought

    ohhh, and you keep on running your mouths with lies and excuses esp. using the media to preach your lies. Of course with sin you don't need to preach but only teach. Everyone knows that God, the Catholic God, exist but deny that God exists. It is not because its to difficult or too intellegent for you to believe in God, the catholic God.

    As for this evolution/science. The science behind evolution is not bullet proof nor does it have concrete evidence. They are theories, ideas, by people who come up with something and just because they got a degree people, dumb people credit them. These so called theories always change once a so called scientist find a clue that proves that theory wrong and begin with a new theory so basically they are just thoughts. Carbon dating cannot tell not even 50% info about the past either nor can it show the age of materials esp. if unseen, heard of weathers, elements could of existed back in the past. Their are different elements on planets.

    Its no suprise that the stubborn who die without the grace of God will go to hell for eternity. You think the suffering in this world is horrible wait to you end up in hell where you will burn from the inside and the outside of your body while laying paralyzed. Your body burning for eternity.

    I could care less about these sinnful people but it becomes a problem when they try to convince others thru the media, school system that God, the catholic God, doesn't exist and that sinning is okay. Atheists, muslims, protestants, pagans will all be punished here on this earth and the stubborn that don't repent will be punished in hell. This is your outcome and your future. The cathoic bible is written for you that has the words of God and you have no exuse for your sins.

    To all those so called fake religious people the Lord God is not with you but against for it is said against his enemies those who disobey " Vegeance is mine and mine alone."

    September 11, 2011 at 12:23 pm |
    • stirringthepot

      It is people like you, the typical religous zealot, that cause most of the discord in the religion debate. Your creator gave you intelligence, but you still fail to use it, thereby hindering the the message Jesus preached.

      September 11, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
    • fimeilleur

      I'm only going to respond to one of your statements... "Carbon dating cannot tell not even 50% info about the past either nor can it show the age of materials esp. if unseen, heard of weathers, elements could of existed back in the past."

      Carbon 14 is found in organic matter... it decomposes. And you're right... it doesn't even come close to covering 50% of the matter available on earth... that's why we have other tools. See the link for a list of these tools that go beyond the 50,000 year limit.

      http://darwiniana.org/datingmethods.htm

      Also this link (http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/carbon.html) gives an excellent explanation on C14 dating without the scientific terminology that seems to confuse people. Keep in mind, when they say theory, they don't mean "guess", they mean a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

      September 11, 2011 at 1:56 pm |
    • Justin Observation

      If that is sarcasm it's brilliant, if it's not.... seek the truth about the history of your religion, and the prior sources from which it came. Nearly every story in the bible has a confirmed previous source, those previous sources are typically those "false" pagan beliefs of which you condemn. The truth shall set you free.

      September 11, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  47. Gene

    Man was created as man. There are no missing links, just people that act like them.

    September 11, 2011 at 12:20 pm |
    • fimeilleur

      prove it.

      September 11, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
      • Gene

        Neither of us can prove anything either way. But what if you're wrong and I'm right?

        September 11, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        No one can prove a negative statement. The burden of proof is on you. What if you're wrong and the muslims are right? or the hindu? or the ancient Norse? or the Ancient Greek? or... I can go on forever ... that's the problem with Pascal's wager... it's based on the false dichotomy that the Christian God is the only possible alternative to "no god(s) at all".

        September 11, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  48. Jim

    Last I checked, this was a science article. The fact that the discussion has deteriorated into a small minded religious cat fight is a sad commentary on the trash that pollutes people's minds.

    Get over it. Free yourself from the religious bull**** that you believe, simply because someone else has told you to believe it.

    And let's get on with something interesting – something that might expand someone's understanding of their world - like the science related to human origins

    September 11, 2011 at 12:12 pm |
    • stirringthepot

      Human origin will always relate to a creation debate, and untill science can prove without a doubt that all life sprang forth from a primordial pool, then the debate will continue.

      September 11, 2011 at 12:20 pm |
    • xlion

      Hello Jim. Welcome to the In·ter·net (noun \ˈin-tər-ˌnet\)

      September 11, 2011 at 8:09 pm |
  49. stirringthepot

    I like the previous posters comment about religous internet debates and the special olympics as it truly does apply, but lets dig a bit deeper into the issue. I honestly think the reason so many who do not believe in a god are so hostile to those who do, is the fact that those who believe have hope. Think about it, if you truly believe that your life on this planet is the only life you will ever have then when or if you fail to live your life as you think it should have been lived, accomplished what you think you should have accomplished, and posses whatever you think you should, then this very short life you live is rather pointless isn't it? If you truly believe that after death there is nothing, what reason does a non-believer have for living? fame? the hope that future generations will remember an accomplishment or discovery you may make? If so why? you won't be around or even aware of of your deed because after death there is nothing right? American school children know of Einstein, Washington etc. but do they really care? most of them could give a rat's behind and only remember because they needed to pass a test or write a paper, not because of the accomplishments these men made. You may say to yourself that a discovery you make or theory you prove will benefit mankind and that contribution is worth my effort and time...but why do you think this? again, when you are dead you won't know what you accomplished remember? Are you beginning to understand the futility of a life with no hope? Now, I support science and find the disciplines fascinating, but I think science has a major flaw and that is the fact that if something cannot be measured, tested or proven by experimental means then that something is considered bogus or fantasy, when in reality the answer could just be that the tools used to measure, test or experiment haven't been discovered yet. Lastly, I am in no way an expert on evolution theory or orgin of life theory etc, but how can science seriously believe that just because some basic amino acids were created in a lab, that all life arose from a primordial pool? Is that really all you have? don't you think that is a pretty big jump from primodial pool to life? science made some building-blocks, but still fails to create anything with them. I would love to have an intelligent conversation with some of you well-educated people on the subject some day, without the name-calling and charactor bashing.

    September 11, 2011 at 11:54 am |
    • jean

      Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

      Many non-believers become very frustrated with believers simply because religious groups try to push their often narrow and limited views on everyone through trying to undermine science education or trying to have their religious views enshrined into law, to the detriment of everyone else's freedom.

      When you don't look to the authority of an ancient view of deity to find your hope and your reason for living a good life, it actually frees you to see the genuine beauty in this world and appreciate that. It gives you the opportunity to recognize that the reason that we should treat each other well is because that is what leads to a peaceful life. Our hope may be limited to this life, but it is not limited in any meaningful way. I have hopes for my children and joy in every breath I take. And I care about other people and live an ethical life, not because I fear the consequences of some monster deity's wrath, but because it is preferable to live in a world in which people try to treat each other well and support each other.

      September 11, 2011 at 12:26 pm |
      • stirringthepot

        Which is the exact message that the bible preaches. I agree with you, no religion should be shoved into anybody's face, no person can be forced into believing anything, it is a personal matter between man and creator. I also agree with the idea that law should not be passed based on biblical beliefs, this doesn't help the christian cause, it only hinders it, I am appalled how some so called christians act toward those who don't believe as they do, it seems that they act but somehow passed up on reading the very book that their faith is based on.

        September 11, 2011 at 12:35 pm |
    • jean

      Oh, and in one breath you are acknowledging that you are not an expert in these particular scientific disciplines then you go on to dismiss scientific evidence that you admittedly are unaware of and don't understand with an "is that all you have". No it is not all we have. However, if you go into science with an open mind and look at the real science you will learn a great deal more than you will from simple blog posts. You may also find the awe inspiring joy and hope that sustain many who honestly delve into these studies.

      good luck to you

      September 11, 2011 at 12:30 pm |
      • stirringthepot

        Tell me then what evidence does science have that extends beyond manipulating life that was already present? What has science done that goes beyond just creating the simple building blocks that make up all know life on this planet? Please, lead me to a study or article that answers my questions.

        September 11, 2011 at 12:44 pm |
      • stirringthepot

        You mention hope, hope in what?

        September 11, 2011 at 12:45 pm |
      • fimeilleur

        @stirringthepot

        look up abiogenesis

        September 11, 2011 at 1:44 pm |
      • kyle

        Abiogenesis has no scientific backing because for something to have scientific backing it has to be described first, which has not been done with abiogenesis. What was the first self replicating molecule? RNA? Protein? Abiogenesis is really just a word invented to describe the naturalistic production of the first living system. What is sad is that so many people don't comprehend the problem with a "god of the gaps" belief. Just because science does not currently know does not mean it never will, and while science fills in gaps in the knowledge of our universe, the concept of God doesn't fill any knowledge gaps.

        September 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  50. JJT

    Most of you are dumb Americans whom cannot tolerate religion in your country. This war is on terror, not religion. Stop bashing on other people's religions and get some education!

    September 11, 2011 at 10:54 am |
  51. xlion

    Debating the existence of God on a message board is like competing in the special Olympics. If you think you're going to win, you've got to be retarded.

    September 11, 2011 at 9:47 am |
  52. doug

    And here we are with the Religious vs. Atheists round 4,320.622. Your arguments will never convince the other side, so it's kinda pointless. The hate speech on both sides is unproductive and stupid. Personally, I don't see how anyone can believe in a God with the state the world is in today. It is of course God's will that people are starving to death every day, and that women are being raped every day, and the innocent are dying in wars every day. That being said there are so many places where science has not explained it all yet. Let's all just believe what we want and move on. Go feed the homeless or something, and make the world a better place regardless of your belief. Then you render the arguments moot.

    September 11, 2011 at 9:37 am |
    • fimeilleur

      When they stop trying to influence the political world, we will stop confronting their unfounded beLIEfs.

      September 11, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
  53. whitman

    Joe- do really think you are a positive influence for people to endorse Christianity? Responses like that push people away from any faith as you are representing God. Remember the warning-You will say, and I am paraphrasing, that I have prophesied in my name, etc. I will say, I knew you not.

    September 11, 2011 at 9:22 am |
  54. whitman

    They still can't establish the link no matter how hard they've tried. The DNA doesn't match. Darwin's racist theory, which assumed lighter skinned people were more evolved than darker skinned people has so been swallowed hook, line, and sinker. As far as the Epic of Gilgamesh goes. It is the oldest document but that doesn't mean that Abraham stole the story and passed it as his own. For many centuries, the Jews used oral tradition. It could be the other way around. Either way the earth completely flooded. Fossils reach all the way to the highest peak.

    September 11, 2011 at 9:08 am |
    • fimeilleur

      yes, they do, and geological evolution explains exactly how that happened. open a text book.

      September 11, 2011 at 1:36 pm |
  55. MonkeyMan

    Religion is a bunch of bologna.

    September 11, 2011 at 8:54 am |
    • whitman

      Maybe to you but it takes a lot of faith to believe a blob of cells was floating around and one day scratched a rock and puff- magically- out pops the beginnings of a leg. How many rocks did it take? one? Two? Three? lololol- How long did it take for certain trees to make the propellers on some of it's seeds before it realized it seeds wouldn't grow if they dropped straight down because of lack of sunlight and nutrients? It takes a lot of faith.

      September 11, 2011 at 9:17 am |
      • fimeilleur

        Below you stated you were fairly educated... I see now that you are not. It is only the religious who claim things happened "magically over-night". Evolution doesn't work that way, and no matter how many times we tell you, you won't listen so, unless you come up with something better, you will be summarily dismissed.

        September 11, 2011 at 1:34 pm |
  56. BosephHeyden

    So...isn't this the umpteenth time we've found bones that are supposed to "revolutionize evolution"? And, every single one of those times, doesn't it wind up being a mixture of animal bones? And, once the mistake is figured out, doesn't the set of bones just quietly disappear?

    I'd make a bigger deal out of this, but, SPOILER ALERT, this will wind up being a pile of animal and human bones mixed together that will just mysteriously disappear from the headlines but will definitely be counted as a win for evolutionists.

    September 11, 2011 at 8:09 am |
  57. Jesus... Christ

    This finding is huge. Too bad everyone here is to blind to see the importance. Fighting over this and that, you're wrong i'm right... it will never stop.

    For you Christians here on this website, do you think your almighty prophet would want you to name call on a "website"?? It's pathetic

    For all of you that will send flak my way, don't worry. I will not be back. For i am human.

    Jesus

    September 11, 2011 at 3:40 am |
    • joe

      LOLOLLOLOLL you name says jesus christ you give more thought to him than most christians LOLOOOOLOOOOL FOOOOOLLLL you defeat yourself

      September 11, 2011 at 3:42 am |
  58. joe

    christians died fought and lived to keep the word of god alive WHY SHOULD WE BE ANY DIFFERENT. if you will die for nothing WHAT IS WORTH LIVING FOR

    September 11, 2011 at 3:17 am |
  59. The Jimster

    not again...you can't win an argument against the tons of christians who'll be invading this site...and you can't win against the retaliating atheists who are equally hateful and ignorant...i cry sometimes when I read all this bickering...we always have to find something to fight about...damn.

    September 11, 2011 at 3:14 am |
    • joe

      yesss because SOULS ARE AT STAKE take a stand DAVID HATED GODS ENEIMIES AS WILL WILL cant ride the fence on this

      September 11, 2011 at 3:16 am |
  60. joe

    ahahahah you spell bad hahah moron nothing in your mind besides foolishness nothing you put faith in SICENCE i put mine in Christ there is really no such thing as an aethists thats what makes you sooo stupid you alll believe in somthing retards

    September 11, 2011 at 3:13 am |
  61. joe

    THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART THERE IS NO GOD. mmmmmooooorrrrrroooonnnnssss idiioots muslims lovers come suck my balls you uselesss beings LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLL i would smash you like a kilstchko

    September 11, 2011 at 3:11 am |
  62. joe

    i guess you are to busy to make sure you are spelling stuff right to keep up THE TRUTH FLOWS LIKE RIVERS YOUR LIES ARE FORCED LIKED AN UNWANTED LABOR lololololol idiots go away and find yourself

    September 11, 2011 at 3:04 am |
  63. joe

    and you worry about speelinggg when you know the meaning because why lololololollololol moron you know it i know it if you can undersatand why does it matter see you are the kind of person who would be dead from another man not just 70 years ago because of your dumb mouth but now we have to put up with ppl with no purpose on life besides to distract from the real meaning of us being here you will get yours believe it

    September 11, 2011 at 3:02 am |
  64. joe

    you make no sense fullofitfillmore lolol why get the best of life your just dumb you will die off and right will be here HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA you know you cry at night you know you always think why you know the dark things in your mind drive you crazy YOU ARE A FOOOOLLL with no purpose LOLOLOLOL i wpould pity you but i hate you

    September 11, 2011 at 3:00 am |
  65. joe

    and if you think anything you think will matter in 100 years you are wrong BUT GUESS WHAT GODS WORD WILL BE HERE LOONNNGGGG AFTER YOU DUMB A S S S lolol count on it darwin 200 years CHRIST 2000 PLUS idiot

    September 11, 2011 at 2:57 am |
    • fimeilleur

      I may not matter in 100 years, but I guarantee you don't matter as of right..........now.

      September 11, 2011 at 3:00 am |
      • joe

        only to you because you are a fool with no mind

        September 11, 2011 at 3:08 am |
    • fool of a took

      Joe you are loved

      September 11, 2011 at 3:52 am |
  66. kyle

    For the non-science educated people out there I will try to explain this article in a way you can understand. The skeleton in question would be like a dog skeleton today. Lots of different breeds with different features. If todays dog breeds did not interbreed for a hundred thousand years, they would develop into different species unable to interbreed. Now imagine in that future all the dog breeds except ONE die out, and then you attempt through just looking at the skeleton to figure out which breed survived? It has significantly changed in those hundred thousand years so you would be comparing that future dog skeleton with the skeletons of labradors and cocker spaniels, where your BEST guess to which was the correct breed would be to look at specific bone structures, like ankles, or jaw shape, or brain size/complexity. Even though we continually find skeletons of new breeds, we could be wrong and the future dog could have evolved from coyotes.

    September 11, 2011 at 2:54 am |
    • whitman

      I am very educated but your analogy is more like comparing an older fossil of a separate four legged animal to a dog. They all have fur and four legs but are separate and so are we. There has been no DNA link found, and they have so tried to do so.

      September 11, 2011 at 9:12 am |
      • fimeilleur

        No DNA link... between who? dogs and coyotes? or humans and great apes? Difference in DNA between humans and chimpanzee is less than 2 % (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolutionary_genetics), the difference between humans and the bonobo is less than that. Before you go off on screaming "WIKIPEDIA!!!!", this article has 27 supporting references for the information contained and was updated as recently as 21 Aug 2011.

        September 11, 2011 at 1:27 pm |
      • kyle

        Generally FOSSILS do not provide usable DNA at all, which is why comparative anatomy is the primary method of fossil analysis. For instance, we know lungs are a more complex system then gills and developed after, so when we look at whales and dolphins, we know they evolved into aquatic animals after the development of lungs. Comparing primitive hominid skeletons with modern humans is the same, when you have skeletons resembling humans but separated by hundreds of thousands of years or more you COULD try and claim that they are sequential examples of human evolution but that would be wrong, some could be separate breeds or species that died off or possibly remixed combining evolutionary changes that each acquired separately. Genetic evidence is that ancient homo species intermixed with neanderthals.

        September 11, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  67. joe

    youi know nothing fool because you put FAITH in science JUST LIKE muslim BUT YOU DONT EVEN KNOW THATS WHAY THE SUPPORT IDIOT IDIOT i pray for you even though honestly I hope you suiffer in hell but god is grewater than me and will prolly see you saved

    September 11, 2011 at 2:54 am |
  68. joe

    and you should be scared retard fool as called by pslams that doesnt believe in god YOU ARE GOING TO HELL BELIEVE IT OR NOT YOU WILL BE THERE SHOORT OF THE GRACE OF GOD AND TO THINK THERE IS NOT ONE WILL SEND YOU RIGHT THERE

    September 11, 2011 at 2:52 am |
    • fimeilleur

      Ummm. if I don't believe in your god, why would I be afraid of his punishment? Do you still try to find the pot of gold at the base of the rainbow?

      September 11, 2011 at 2:56 am |
      • joe

        yeah idiot because thats thew same thing moron you just proved how foolish youn are with your nonsense commnets with no rebuttals moron go kill yoiurself and save the world of your foolishness

        September 11, 2011 at 3:10 am |
  69. joe

    lololololol you look at this world this space this moon these outer worlds and think wooow that a randomn thing that happened geez how lucky we are the earth is ecaxtly at the right orbital limit to produce life REALLY ARE YOU THAT DUMB AND STUPID I WANT TO STRANGLE THE SENSE INTO YOU

    September 11, 2011 at 2:50 am |
    • fimeilleur

      Yes, the earth was exactly positioned for life... which is why humans can't live on 80% of the earth's surface... Brilliant planning by your "intelligent designer". The moron couldn't even give his "chosen" favourite beings, the best eye sight in the animal world, nor the best sense of smell, nor the best sense of hearing, nor the best stamina, etc. Stay off the science threads you violent psychopath.

      September 11, 2011 at 2:54 am |
      • joe

        you are sooo stpuid LOLOLOLOLOLOL i dont care who u are yopu are a fool born of a fool with a fools mind and will be buring in the fires of hell TO BAD LULU I

        September 11, 2011 at 2:56 am |
    • xlion

      It doesn't matter how we got so lucky, but we did. Ever heard the card analogy? Take a deck, shuffle, deal into equal piles, write down the order of the cards in each pile. Now, do it again. Do it until you get the exact same results as the first time. You won't. Not in your lifetime. But that does not change the fact that it happened that way that first time. To say everything is just right, so some intelligent planning had to be involved, is bogus logic. Doesn't mean there wasn't, but you are a fool to believe that if something exists it must have been created.

      September 11, 2011 at 7:55 pm |
  70. joe

    when push comes to shove christians will stand up the reason the south lasted so long even though they had 1/3 the numbers was because they believed in a cause greater than themselves aethists only care about themselves ONLY DO THEY CARE ABOUT THEMSELVES

    September 11, 2011 at 2:46 am |
    • fimeilleur

      Now you're scaring me, I'm pretty sure you're even scaring my buddy Spanky101... Please get help... and don't reproduce.

      September 11, 2011 at 2:49 am |
      • joe

        YEP NO REBUTTAL JUST NONSENSE FROM A RETARD

        September 11, 2011 at 2:51 am |
      • fimeilleur

        What's there to rebut? Only some lunatic ramblings... I don't see a point to it, you brought nothing to the table except really bad spelling.

        September 11, 2011 at 2:58 am |
  71. joe

    I will kill if need be for christ I will die if need be for christ SOULS AND THE THE FURTURE SOULS OF CHILDREN MATTER MAYBE NOT TO ATHETISTS BECAUSE THEY ARE FOOOLS BUT THE REST OF THE WORLD SEES IT WHY CANT YOU IDIOTS

    September 11, 2011 at 2:44 am |
  72. joe

    please please scinece explain to meee the meaning of life because if we are from slime and spit like idiots would have you believe then really ity doesnt mean what i do in lkife means i can be hilter do whatever I want because there is nothing after life to condmen what i do REALLLLTYYYYYY IDIDOTS ARE YOU THAT STUPID TO BELIEVE YOU WONT BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT YOU DO get real f off get with the pictuire even the muslims you hold so dear believe in god even tho the koran was written almost 400 years after the bible IDIOTSSSSSS IDOOTS JUDEAH BASED CHRISTIAN NATION WHO SUPPOERTS ISREAL SUPPOERT JEWS OR DIE look at history morons if you havew the stones

    September 11, 2011 at 2:42 am |
  73. joe

    ok lulus has anyone every heard of giantism ie anderson silva from mma or elphantizious ort however u spell it FORGET U HAVE TO HAVE MILLIONS OF MISSING PIECES TO MAKE EVOLUTION CREDIBLE consider mutations or over venues before your try aND PROVE AQ THEORY THAT SHOULD BE A HYPOTHESISES WITH BS BONES i hate ppl who are dumb and cant understand someone created them stupid stupid ppl

    September 11, 2011 at 2:36 am |
    • fimeilleur

      Please don't reproduce... thanks.

      September 11, 2011 at 2:38 am |
      • joe

        yah no comman sense with you just another idiots with no brains and you my friend are a goat with no response

        September 11, 2011 at 2:47 am |
  74. John

    Could someone rational please explain to me how the universe is run by such an emotionally unstable being.I mean if there is a person called God that has a human personality,why doesn't he end all suffering out of compassion.I'm a Buddhist and we for the most part don't believe the universe is controlled by a person with a human ego and emotions.

    September 11, 2011 at 2:16 am |
    • joe

      who are you mere human to understand God you think about him all the time you live every day thinking about how he doesnt exist giving his existence even more crediblility and want to understand someone who created the world just exepct you are dumb and the world will make more since noone is smart god is not respecxtor of men lulu you are nothing compared to god and the universe stop tryin to explain things you cant understand

      September 11, 2011 at 2:38 am |
    • joe

      who are you mere human to understand God you think about him all the time you live every day thinking about how he doesnt exist giving his existence even more crediblility and want to understand someone who created the world just exepct you are dumb and the world will make more since noone is smart god is not respecxtor of men lulu you are nothing compared to god and the universe stop tryin to explain things you cant understand lalalalalalalallalalalalalalala

      September 11, 2011 at 2:39 am |
    • KrashUndBurn

      """Could someone rational please explain to me how the universe is run by such an emotionally unstable being"""

      I don't have an answer to that. But if god made man in His image, maybe Joe is a good clue.

      September 12, 2011 at 11:16 am |
  75. John

    You people need to accept one another's different belief. Not their belief's, but the fact the have them. I don't care if you are an athiest, Muslim, Christian or something else. When you resort to name calling and bashing, it is only because you do not know your own belief's well enough to express them without bashing others. I am doubtful of many science things because I know that scientists have to make progress to continue to get funding. People always make assumptions, right or wrong and sometimes you end up with something like Piltdown man, even though it was totally made up, it was believed for years. It goes that way with medicine, and every other field. I prefer to study science, religion and history because all are a part of human learning and experiences. If you don't know how a Muslim thinks, it is harder to talk to him about something else or what he believes. Name calling and saying it is a lie only makes you children. Grow up please.

    September 11, 2011 at 12:23 am |
    • Sparky101

      And please, John, don't forget the way the "scientific" community shut out Gregor Mendel's stellar work, because they just couldn't get behind a Monk that hadn't gone to the "right" schools. Their bias set genetics 50 years behind, and it's the same bias displayed so forcefully and so negatively on this thread, the erroneous belief that people of faith are somehow not as intelligent, not as well educated. It's been easy for people name-call here. I used the words of one poster right back at him, to make that point. It really does make the poster look bad, and it clearly takes away from their argument.

      September 11, 2011 at 1:24 am |
      • fimeilleur

        Oh, get off your high horse. Everyone on this thread can easily read that you continued to misname my screen name from the onset of our discussion, and continued to do so after I asked you to stop disrespecting me, unlike you, my screen name IS my name and initials, I don't hide behind a pseudonym... so you are no better than Kyle or any other on this thread. If you had such a beef with the scientific community supposed shut out of Mendel... why is this EXACTLY the first time you mention it on this thread?

        September 11, 2011 at 2:13 am |
1 2 3 4

Contributors

  • Elizabeth LandauElizabeth Landau
    Writer/Producer
  • Sophia DengoSophia Dengo
    Senior Designer