I never took issue with your insistence of having evolved from monkeys. I have not evolved from monkeys. The "research" you cited is almost an insult to an intelligent being.
conduit said:
. You seem to want to pick some dummies that dont live by their faith, maybe you can balance it out with someone who does live by his faith and is intelligent to articulate himself as well:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. You did not read my link. Then you talk about homosexuals. Why? I am not homosexual but my opinion is the homosexuals are not choosing, they are born to be homosexual.
Why do you day "dummies", for the link I show you?
Here is one article from the link. You think he is (dummies)?
Dennis Venema is professor of biology at Trinity Western University in Langley, British Columbia and Fellow of Biology for BioLogos. He holds a B.Sc. (with Honors) from the University of British Columbia (1996), and received his Ph.D. from the University of British Columbia in 2003. His research is focused on the genetics of pattern formation and signaling using the common fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster as a model organism. - See more at: http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...-primate-to-human-part-1#sthash.0Q4tjWPA.dpuf
From hominid to hominin
Having surveyed the hominid crown group (orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees and humans, their last common ancestral population, and all descendant species of that population), we are now prepared to examine our own branch within it – species more closely related to us than to chimpanzees. Such species are known as hominins. Though humans are the only surviving hominin lineage, there was once a wide diversity of hominin species on the planet, some of which lived alongside early humans. One interesting fact about our own lineage is that our “branch” emerges from a rather “bushy” phylogeny. There are many hominin forms in the fossil record, and teasing out their precise relatedness to one another is a challenging exercise (for more detail, see the series by anthropologist James Kidder in “For further reading” below). Forms for which DNA sequence is available are easy to place in a phylogeny, but those known only from fossil remains are more difficult to place. Given our forgoing discussion of stem-group and crown-group species, however, we are now prepared to appreciate these fossil hominins for what they are: stem-group species on our own branch, with some species possibly ancestral to our own, or located very close to the branch points with our lineage:
- See more at: http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...-primate-to-human-part-1#sthash.0Q4tjWPA.dpuf
Here is more.
Adam & Eve, Apologetics, and Christian Witness
December 14, 2015 | By Dennis Venema on Letters to the Duchess
- We’ve come a long way in this series, covering both the scientific evidence that humans descend from a population, rather than a pair, as well as the responses to these lines of evidence by two leading Christian apologists. As we have seen, however, those responses have not stood up to scrutiny. Indeed, in several cases the arguments we have examined are based on a significant misunderstanding of the relevant science.
As a Christian and a scientist, I have long been perplexed by the desire that many Christians have for apologetics arguments made by those without training or expertise in the area under discussion. Unfortunately, most Christians don’t know enough about evolutionary biology or population genetics to know if the apologetics they are reading is sound. One of the reasons for this series, as well as my previous series, Evolution Basics, is to try to help reverse that trend. Once one understands the relevant science, one is in a much better position to evaluate an apologetics argument as helpful or misguided.
- See more at: http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...cs-and-christian-witness#sthash.juh71Wlj.dpuf
