/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8996170
>The original flares out like a chimps, not like a man's.
lie after lie after lie. pic related.

>The evidence that goes against you is for me.
you haven't provided any

>They were filthy deists trying to play God, much like evolutionists now.
so...it wasn't a "real" controversy because you don't like them? sounds like you ARE claiming to know everything.

>I see a lot of ape, but absolutely no human of any sort.
your inability to perceive is your own problem

>The holes in yours say otherwise.
you claim there are, but you have yet to demonstrate others. you make your arguments only by telling blatant lies.

>I know the earth is not flat from the curve I observed in an airplane.
so you admit that common sense is wrong? that further investigation proves some seemingly counterintuitive things to be true?
right now you are on the ground, trusting your "common sense" that tells you we can't possibly have evolved from apes. I am in an airplane, where I understand from molecular data and the fossil record that such a strange proposition is actually true.

>The tracks look nothing like STW 573's foot.
so? hominid trackways show imprints of two feet, not four, conclusively proving bipedalism.

>Like stated previously, the "evidence" is ambiguous at best, and fallacious at worst.
again, just because you're too stupid to understand it doesn't mean it's useless.

>I see models and plaster, not the actual fossils.
those ARE the actual fossils. the pale areas on one are where it has been reconstructed with plaster.
this is what Creationists do when they see evidence that disproves their opinions; they simply deny it.

Hey /sci/, does anyone know of a site that lists identifying features of ape, early hominid, and human bones? I checked out the wiki but couldn't really find something like that. Thanks in advance.