Went to the Natural History Museum today

[d000hg]

Evolution is like Global Warming in that respect... if you raise any doubts about it you face derision as a crank and even solid scientific research gets ignored or viewed with a heavy bias.

[chef]

I'm sure the things on display are good, marred only by the evolution storytelling descriptions which are there to brainwash children away from the truth and glory of God's creation.

you are Chico and I claim my 5 free hail mary's

[contractor79]

You've gone too far to be believable even by your own standard.

You're not answering the question because it's patently obvious that evolution is nonsense.

I know evolutionists don't know when man first walked the earth so let's assume the first human walked the earth year X B.C.

My question is- who were his/her parents? Non-humans? We're supposed to believe non-humans gave birth to a human?

What utter nonsense. Zoom in on the evolution claims and you will find it for the fraud that it is.

[contractor79]

I read Behe's book. Some fascinating biochemistry. And I think he raises a case to answer toward evolution. It's a shame that the evolutionists attacked the man, rather than the ball

That's what they do since they cannot deal with the objections to this fraudulent evolution theory that so many treat like a religion.

Just watch this thread the same will happen here, I will be attacked rather than my questions answered.

[Churchill]

That's what they do since they cannot deal with the objections to this fraudulent evolution theory that so many treat like a religion.

Just watch this thread the same will happen here, I will be ignored rather than my questions answered.

FTFY

[NotAllThere]

...
My question is- who were his/her parents? Non-humans? We're supposed to believe non-humans gave birth to a human?...

No, you're supposed to understand that the evolution is about gradual species change. That populations diverge, until the reach a point they can no longer interbreed with the source population (or what that has evolved into), and then we classify that as a new species.

The reason your questions are not being answered and you are being ridiculed, is because the questions are based on what your idea of evolution is, not evolutionists think it is. This kind of logical fallacy is not limited to creationists. Dawkins, for example, has a view what Christians believe that is at variance with what many actually believe.

[d000hg]

Let's not get started on Dawkins. He's the most arrogant close-minded scientist I think I ever saw. He's like Stallman... smart but I imagine a total pain to work with.

[d000hg]

Just watch this thread the same will happen here, I will be attacked rather than my questions answered.

Only because your questions don't make any sense.

[d000hg]

I know evolutionists don't know when man first walked the earth so let's assume the first human walked the earth year X B.C.

My question is- who were his/her parents? Non-humans? We're supposed to believe non-humans gave birth to a human?

What utter nonsense. Zoom in on the evolution claims and you will find it for the fraud that it is.

I'll throw one attempt in, you can play with it as you see fit.

Forget humans. What about poodles? Have they existed from the start of the Earth? If not then by your logic a poodle was birthed by non-poodle parents. But poodles or other breeds are clearly recorded as being created by man... as are domestic cows.