Anyone else freaked out by the thought of there once being half-monkey/half-lemurs? I’m glad they’re dead.
By the way, I’ve gotten tired of atheist who think any evidence of evolution helps disprove God, so I’ve decide to declare by fiat that evolution is property of Christianity and proof of God. Thus any evolution evidence helps disprove atheism. Evolution is way too complicated for Athor, god of atheism, to figure out, but its child’s play for my god, God. So every time some half-monkey/half-lemur thingee is found that is further disproof of atheism. So, if you’re an atheist, you have to give up believing in evolution or become a Christian.
Announcement over!
Pingback: Google Celebrates “Missing Link” [Dan Collins]
Having seen Henry Waxman and James Carville, I find it hard for anyone to be shocked by “some half-monkey/half-lemur thingee.”
The author comments on the missing link no being found without ever once having mentioned not looking in the White House.
When I first read the story about the Lemur/Monkey, Waxman’s face leapt unbidden to mind… perhaps the Lemur/Monkey is evidence that Waxman’s breed evolved on a branch that was superior to his?
Well I’ll be a lemur’s Uncle. Noticed in the article that the ‘missing links’ between species is still MISSING. ‘Scientists’ say the term, ‘missing link’ is irrelevent because all GAPS in the fossil record are missing. DUH! Talk about leaps of faith and circular logic. It is just as likely that some lemurs from Madagascar hitched a ride on a plane that was flown by penguins, to Frankfurt, Germany, got caught in a bog, fossilized, and dug up by said ‘scientists’ years later. I suspect that ‘Lucy’, the missing link from Africa, is going to be miffed that she evolved from Lemurs from Germany.
Atheists are more than willing to give up evolution. It’s widely known that atheists are offspring of the Lizard People of Planet X. A large colony resides in Minnesota, and gets votes for U.S. Senator.
Hey Son of Bob Henery Waxman is a scary looking dude. Looks like a pig and a liberal hybred pig person thing. As for James Carvile he just a mutant moonbat of some sort
I think this is a good idea because people don’t declare things by fiat often enough any more. I therefore declare the month of July to be “white history month”, I declare Arlen Specter to be a total douchebag, and I declare Scion xB the ugliest car ever.
Creationism must be false, how do you explain harry reid, nancy pelousy, and janasinine grrawful-oh. Explain the baldwins, john kerry, and the douchebag in the White House. And what benificent God would create rosie odonnell?
Finally a commonsense declaration on evolution/religion. I’ve been working on something similar for many years but I think you’ve finally nailed it perfectly. Thanks, Frank J!
Just try to get away with that at LGfoozballs.
Half-monkey/half-lemur thingies have been around for years only now days they are called Democrats. They gave up swinging through the trees in favor of being in charge of things. That’s called evolution.
Now (thankfully) extinct, the feared half-monkey/half-lemur was called the lemunkey. Not to be confused with a Sea Monkey, which is a merely a brine shrimp that unscrupulous vendors peddle to unsuspecting 8 year olds via misleading ads in the back of MAD magazine. Also, aggression towards Space Monkey is unwarranted at this time, as there has been no proven connection established between him these other monkey-themed menaces. But vigilance is still advised.
The name “lemunkey” is the anglicized version of the French “Le Moonkay.” In an epic battle the last remaining French warriors, descended from Napoleon himself, fought the lemunkeys to a bloody draw. In the fierce chaos of this fight, death was the only constant. Both sides were slain, down to the very last man (and lemunkey.) Hence, the lemunkeys were finally eliminated, and the tradition of French guys who weren’t wussies, ended forever.
The end of French machismo allowed pacifist weasels to move in from Belgium. These liberal revisionists removed every trace of lemunkeys and tough French guys from all history books and literature. For years, generations grew up thinking the lemunkey and the Tough French Guy were just myth and superstition. Everybody said I was crazy for believing in them. Today the fossils prove me right. I am vindicated.
That’s okay, I’ve always been fond of Spontaneous Biogenesis, it was proven with the scientific method!
At Live Free Or Die,
I find that extremely offensive. I think you owe me an apology. Your bigotry towards us Lizard People is unacceptable, I’d never vote for that monstrosity or live in Minnesota.
12)A R, you misinterpret my meaning of post #5. In the last election for U.S. Senator of Minnesota, Lizard People was an actual write-in vote, on a contested ballot. I have the highest respect for Lizard People. I am currently attempting to read a book of theirs, titled “To Serve Mankind’.
Ernie Loco says:
“and I declare Scion xB the ugliest car ever.”
I’ll have you know the the neighborhood milk delivery truck was very fashionable in its day!
Who is this “God” you speak of? Is it not written in the Book of Hope and Change: Thou shalt have no other god before The Lord Thy Obama.
Unfortunately, this whole lemur-monkey missing link thing is your usual combination of media hype and scientists exaggerating the importance of their work in hopes of getting more grant money.
If you read the article closely (i.e., the last two paragraphs), this was a type of lemur missing the usual tooth comb and grooming claw. According to the article, in all respects other than the tooth comb and grooming claw, it was exactly like a regular lemur. In other words, it was not remotely any kind of monkey. Just a weird, probably poorly-groomed lemur. The only way it resembles a monkey even slightly is that this lemur didn’t have the tooth comb and grooming claw that regular lemurs do, and monkeys don’t have those things either.
Calling it a “missing link” is just your usual baseless evolutionist speculation.
*Sigh* I miss the good old days when the words “Scientific Method” actually meant something…
I beginning to wonder about evolution. Seems to me there are quite a few “half human-half jackasses” and “half human-half ostriches” out there. Maybe there’s something to this stupid idea ; {
“Sirs, perhaps there are those among you who believe you are descended from an ape. I suppose there may even be those among you who believe that I am descended from an ape. But I challenge the man to step forward who believes that General Robert E. Lee is descended from an ape.”
At Live Free or Die
Ah, I misread it. I thought you were saying Lizardmen voted for Franken.
>>>Krig said “Just a weird, probably poorly-groomed lemur.”
Protohippie?
Well, I hardly ever chime-in on this topic, being an engineer, and all. But we’re living with the results of genetic mutation in almost all aspects of our lives, whether we like it or not. The food we eat has been bred (i.e., “selected”) for its traits. Our pets have likewise been deliberately made to change over thousands of years looking nothing like they did when they were first “domesticated.” The very viruses, bacterium and fungi in our bodies are altering their genetic code on a daily basis and our immune systems respond in kind to keep them in check.
Unique species of animals of every sort have been documented in isolated locations around the world with their DNA mapped backwards to their parent species. They’re “evolving” right before our eyes.
So, ladies and gentlemen, genetic evolution is a fact – not a theory. What we make of it beyond that – as a religious matter – is up to each of us. But the machinery of our bodies – of all living things – is changing all the time. That much is indisputable fact for those willing to investigate it. It’s called ‘science’ – the pursuit of truth about the physical world.
[Just to be super technical, the observed data you mention are the facts of evolution, and the explanation of how it all works together is the theory of evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory considering the context.
And all of it disproves atheism. -Ed.]
While I don’t believe in this ‘theory’ of evolution (I have no problem believing God created earth and withall in six days), I can get behind this, Frank.
“evolution is property of Christianity and proof of God”
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
There’s that Ed guy. Hehe.
Just to be super-technical, Ed, nothing in the ‘context’ you correctly mention has anything to do with any ‘belief system.’ It’s pure biomechanics.
But connecting that context to a belief system is a most fascinating topic, don’t you think? Without stating my belief system, I do believe there’s room for everyone’s beliefs. Of that, I am certain! 😉
Yo… you’re too late… the Catholic Church said that evolution was one of their more esoteric rites and that it was ok to swing from trees – just as long as you didn’t swing in another way…
There is no way that I came from those loins, which were probably not girded.
“So, ladies and gentlemen, genetic evolution is a fact – not a theory.”
I agree. Well, partly. The only problem is that evolution is a lot like love — the word has so many different definitions, it’s practically meaningless. If you mean Natural Selection, then yes, that’s an empirically proven fact (well, as close to proven as these things ever get). If you mean Natural Selection + Mutation, then yes, again, we have lots of empirical evidence showing that mutations do take place, and are then acted upon by natural selection. Even creationists agree on that. But if you mean “all living creatures on Earth are descended from a common ancestor,” well, then you’re venturing into territory I would say is largely unproven.
When Darwin wrote “The Origin of the Species”, his treatise on Universal Common Descent, he knew the fossil record did not really back up his theory. For Universal Common Descent to be true, there would be thousands upon thousands of transitional forms, marking tiny, gradual little changes from animal A to animal B. This was not reflected in the fossil record. There were a few fossils of animal A, and a few of animal B, but nothing in between. Darwin figured this was due to a spotty geologic record, and the fact that paleontology was still in its infancy, and many fossils had not yet been discovered.
But here we are a century later, and still the transitional fossils are conspicuously lacking, to the point that some evolutionists proposed a theory (punctuated equilibrium) to explain away that fact. As one such scientist, the late Stephen J. Gould, said, “All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt.” As far as I know, punctuated equilibrium never really caught on, so things are back to square one.
In fact, evolutionists these days are so desperate to find a transitional fossil, any transitional fossil, that they leap upon the discovery of an unusual fossil lemur and begin to exclaim “Look! A missing link! It’s the ancestor of lemurs, monkeys, and people! Evolution is proven right once again!”
Universal Common Descent is an interesting theory, but until more evidence is discovered to back it up, I cannot regard it as anywhere near as “proven” as, say, Natural Selection or genetic mutation.
Indeed, Krig, you nailed it, IMO. Scientists have proven the mechanisms are there but they can’t play the movie backwards to find ultimate paths, relationships and consequences (and the paleontological record doesn’t help much!). That part of “evolution” is pure theory in search of evidence. But the strictly biological mechanics are getting less and less arguable all the time. I’ve tried keeping up with it (even a little) and it’s nigh impossible now (for me). The mutation/selection process (often helped by catastrophe?) that spawns incompatibly-new species seems to be the current hurdle.
Gee, this discussion sounds “Godless” which is not what the poster intended, I suspect. I’m always reluctant to link the science context with the supernatural context in public discussions – but do so privately (as I’ll wager most here do, also).
If there is evolution then there must be de-evolution. Liberals are devolving while we are evolving. And like monkeys, liberals like to throw their scat in our faces. However, monkeys don’t kill their unborn babies in order to keep their “swinging” lifestyles.
Jimmy–I’ll venture into the supernatural here for a sec. I believe God created us just as we are now. Do we adapt? Sure. Look at eskimos, for example. They’re fatter than most because they have to be to live in the cold. Look at dogs, cats, monkeys…many different breeds. But I don’t believe we or any animal descended from primordial goo or primitive shared ancestor. I think it’s patent nonsense.
For me, it’s not really a make-or-break issue when it comes to salvation. What matters is your belief in Jesus as God’s son, His crucifixion, and His resurrection. So if Jesus is your savior, does it matter whether you believe in evolution or creationism? No, I don’t really think so.
Won’t keep me or any other true christian out of Heaven.
Frank,
That was nicely put. I gave you five stars. Evolution, like everything else in existence, is all a part of G-d’s design.
So what you’re saying RightWingTink, is that evolution is at fault for fat chicks?
We must destroy evolution!
That’s okay, Frank: we atheists have gotten tired of snotty creationists who like the way they look with their fingers in their ears, but we’re becoming accustomed to it.
Didn’t the IMAO intelligentsia debate this very topic at length not long ago? Notta problem, just checking.
I’ve decide to declare by fiat that evolution is property of Christianity and proof of God.
Okay, but what does an Italian sports car have to do with it?
😉
At Some Hellcat Driver,
I’m the local atheist here! Either convert or leave!
Jimmy: “The mutation/selection process (often helped by catastrophe?) that spawns incompatibly-new species seems to be the current hurdle.”
And that’s the area where lies the only point of concern I have with the empirical mechanics of “evolution” (whatever that means) as described by modern evolutionary scientists: the idea that mutations can give rise to new information. DNA is basically a long string of code containing the information necessary to grow and run a creature. Sometimes a genetic copying error results in the code getting garbled, resulting in a loss information which can have curious and occasionally beneficial effects on function (like mutant flightless beetles who survive better on windy islands because they can’t get blow out to sea, or bacteria that have mutations that impede their ability to process nutrients, which helps them survive because they also can’t properly process antibiotics). But no example of a mutation that I’ve seen so far actually increases the amount of information in the genome, rather than decreasing it, and I find it difficult to imagine such a mutation, as it would have to be extremely specific and targeted.
So mutations may be able to explain the corruption and decline of the animal world (for example: the mutant freaks known as “poodles”), but I find it difficult to believe that all of the thousands of books’ worth of information in our DNA could arise by such a process.
Unless those mutations were divinely targeted, of course. Which is of course what Frank was saying all along. 😉
#32 RWT,
My biggest beef with macro-evolution theologically is that it *is* at odds with the Salvation narrative. For macro-evolution to be true, there would have to be billions upon billions of years of death and decay before the rise of humankind. The Bible clearly states that death entered the world through the Fall of Adam and the solution for death is though the Savior.
They are mutually exclusive. Both can’t be true.
[Paradoxes are not uncommon in either religion or science. Or are you saying science can disprove Jesus by proving evolution? -Ed.]
Tim, as I stated before, I am a creationist. I believe God created the world and all in it in six days. I believe sin and death entered the world through Adam. I believe the earth is 10,000 years old or less. I don’t believe in evolution. I don’t believe God created or directed evolution. What would be the point? I have no problem believing it, because come on, I believe Jesus came to earth, was born of a virgin, lived a perfect life, was crucified, resurrected, and is at the right hand of God and will return someday. Not a far fetch for me to believe God created us in one day like he said. LOL
My point of that post is for someone who says “I think God created evolution”, I don’t think that keeps them from being saved. What keeps them from God is believing evolution disproves God.
Isn’t it funny how the overwhelming majority of scientifically illiterate credulons like Tink and pompous ‘intelligent design’ ignorati like the Viking guy up there, are right-wingers. How embarrassing that must be for the rational, scientifically literate, reality-based arm of the right wing. Or is it pinky?
Evolution is a fact, and a theory, the unfortunately-hyped Darwinius fossil is certainly interesting but not a paradigm-changer, the phrase ‘missing link’ comes from a cartoon view of evolution, ‘transitional’ fossils are hardly rare (if you have a brain and can actually understand the theory of evolution, you’d understand that species are TYPICALLY ‘transitional’, not the end of the line), atheists don’t generally claim evolution ‘disproves’ God so much as makes It unnecessary to explain the diversity of life, and Viking dude, you really should try getting your facts from real evolutionary biologists, rather than regurgitating specious talking points blessed by the Discovery Institute.
I was going to respond to you with a different sort of post, #41, but all I’m going to say is:
You don’t like what we say, don’t read it. Just because you don’t agree doesn’t mean you need to put people down. And the fact that my post bristled you so much that you felt the need to insult me over my beliefs, well, that just makes me happy. 🙂
#42 – RightWingTink,
We have offended the disciples of Athor!
‘The thunder god went for a ride
upon his favorite filly.
“I’m Thor!” he cried.
The horse replied,
“You forgot your thaddle, thilly!”
GK Chesterton, The Everlasting Man
“Now as a matter of fact, there is not a shadow of evidence that this thing was evolved at all. There is not a particle of proof that this transition came slowly, or even that it came naturally. In a strictly scientific sense, we simply know nothing whatever about how it grew, or whether it grew, or what it is. There may be a broken trail of stones and bones faintly suggesting the development of the human body. There is nothing even faintly suggesting such a developement of the human mind. It was not and it was; we know not in what instant or in what infinity of years. Something happened; and it has all the appearance of a transaction outside time. It has therefore nothing to do with history in the ordinary sense. The historian must take it or something like it for granted; it is not his business as a historian to explain it. But if he cannot explain it as a historian, he will not explain it as a biologist. In neither case is there any disgrace to him in accepting it without explaining it; for it is a reality, and history and biology deal with realities.”
…
“We can accept man as a fact, if we are content with an unexplained fact. We can accept him as an animal, if we can live with a fabulous animal. But if we must needs have sequence and necessity, then indeed we must provide a prelude and crescendo of mounting miracles, that ushered in with unthinkable thunders in all the seven heavens of another order, a man may be an ordinary thing.”
Dear Mr. Sullivan:
“Ignorati?”
My dear fellow, if you’re going to insult me in Latin, at least spell it correctly. It’s spelled “ignoranti”.
Love;
Krig the Viking
4 of 7~~It’s great, isn’t it? Ah, nothing like the smell of screaming Athorites in the afternoon.