20 May 2009

Ida

Addendum 2/12/14.
So this bozo evolutionist named 'over the edge" is saying what I wrote on a page about a docu movie on Darwin is a rip off from this site and even goes as far as saying I better not try to say it's me. He sounds so triumphant about it, like he found the missing link evolutionist salivate over. I've written about the nastiness of evolution proponents and this tool is a shining example of that. And I thought MY grammar was bad.

"In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God."

-Charles Darwin.


Ida (a supposed "Missing Link") was heralded in the press today. Google even did a happy dance in her honor by making their banner to resemble a fossil in mud. This is what I think on this mess.

Ida being our Auntie ancestor is pure speculation and media hype at it's worst. Ida was not found yesterday, she was found in '83 and didn't warrant attention then. She, from what has been stated so far, is a lemur-type animal, from her racoon size body to her bushy tail, so what that does is make her a missing link between pro simians (read "lemurs") and simians (monkeys), not some kind of link from primate to human. The big selling point with Ida is that she has opposable thumbs (humans have opposable thumbs unlike most mammals), but guess who else has opposable thumbs? Lemurs. She also, unlike today's lemurs, lacks a “grooming claw” and her teeth are similiar to that of a primates instead of what is called a “toothcomb,” so what does that make Ida? An extinct type of lemur without a grooming claw and a toothcomb, nothing more. Keep in mind that every few years these kinds of hyped claims of a "Missing Link" are made and everytime these claims are found to have holes in them the size of dinner plates given time.

Let's get this straight, evolution is a perfect example of “If you say something long enough, people will believe it.” It’s so widely accepted because it’s taught to us at such a young age. It’s so ingrained in our society, theory has turned into fact.

Evolution states that organisms adapt to their environment via natural selection, but natural selection is an oxymoron. What or who chooses which traits will be beneficial? If it’s a case of trial and error over eons of time, there should be mass graveyards of what’s left of transitional junk animals that just couldn’t cut it. Instead we have a handfull of questionable bones that evolutionists trot out like it’s the second coming. They say it’s EXACTLY because of those long eons you won’t find the graveyards, but the massive amount of time natural selection supposedly needed to work it’s magic doesn’t matter because you still have to explain the theory as coming from randomness. Randomness begets chaos no matter the timeframe and only consciousness can manipulate matter and reverse chaos.

Former evolutionists and scientists like Phillip Skell, Stephen Meyers, and Henry Schaefer, who have embraced Intelligent Design, have gone through a nightmare of vicious personal attacks from the science community; yet their credentials are never questioned, why? because they’re impeccable. From the media, however, you get the idea that all I.D. believers are from the backwoods of Arkansas. I hate how evolution has become such a stumbling block to people’s faith when it really doesn’t need to be. Extinct, before unknown, primates and extinct lemur-type animals does not evolution make.

Now talk to God.

link

2 comments:

  1. The University of Oslo is behind this spectacle, headed by a man named Jørn Hurum. At the same time of the news conference unveiling Ida, book deals were cut and a documentary in conjunction with the History Channel were announced.

    Anthropologist Matt Cartmill of Duke University said it best:

    "The P.R. campaign on this fossil is I think more of a story than the fossil itself."

    ReplyDelete

I eat your comments with jam and butter.