I am serious. I liked my little one liner, and I don't care where you are. Don't tell me what I can or cannot believe and remain logically consistent. I can make a logically consistent argument for the casting of chicken bones to divine the future.
You're on a debate forum too, and the topic is a 1.8 million year old skull. It is possible to believe in the Bible and evolution and remain logically consistent. At some point I'll take that on in the religious forum, but not here, and not today just because you demand it. I operate on my schedule. You operate on yours. When I have the time necessary, I'll take it up with you, if you'd like.
I didn't drone on at all. I have two, count 'em, two posts on this thread prior to your comments, and both were offered in a light hearted manner. If you want to correct my vastly incorrect statements, you'll have to do it in the appropriate forum with me, and when I have the time to devote to such a topic. Bring it up again (I'm sure) in the religious forum, and if I have the time, you can correct my vastly incorrect statements.
Wait a minute. So I can get dinged for not accepting his little belief system? I don't need protection and I'm criticized virtually every time I post here. What makes you think I avoid it? Is it that you would like to have an argument concerning religion? Go for it. You already know where the forum is. I think you guys just got your panties in a twist a little too fast, and now you're complaining that you didn't get a cookie for your trouble. Live with it.
So now it's not me, but Mak. Damn that Mac. I made comments that shouldn't have offended anyone, and they were offered in the most light hearted way. You're the one crying foul because you're trolling, and I pointed it out. Many of us do, so it's not like I'm not guilty. Just don't get pissed off when it's pointed out. And the topic was, since I have to remind you again, a 1.8 million year old skull. That doesn't seem to be a topic of your liking. And who's this "we". What? Are you guys traveling in packs, or what?
It doesn't say it was created 6,000 years ago, but it implies it from the series of events. You can follow the lineages down from Adam and Eve to Moses, Abraham, and other major biblical characters, which we can historically place.
That means for you to accept this skull isn't a hoax, you have to accept that somehow at least 1.8 million lost years occurred between Adam and Eve and Jesus. Why would the bible magically omit 1.8 million years? How could any society, much less the jews, survive 1.8 million years?
Then you'd have to admit that Adam and Eve looked something like Australopithecus.
Which then would require you to believe that god was somehow unpleased with his first models of humans, destroyed them and created hundreds of new versions until he finally got it 'right' about 6,000+ years ago.
If you can fit all these things into a nice, logical model, then I applaud your mental gymnastics.
As you can see above, the history of the homo genus spans millions of years, which no matter how you count it, doesn't match with the biblical lineages traced from Adam and Eve. Either they weren't actually the first humanoids god created, or there's a massive 1.8 million+ year gap in the bible and the lineages are just wrong.
