―
" Did they evolve?"Response: Aside from your shallow and confused all over the map explanation, they evolved out of Africa over the Past 200,000 years. And melanin production is different from getting a sun burn Dr Thiel.
Actually, they did.
He didn't so don't keep yourself up at night wondering why.
"What is a Cushite?"
Who cares. A small cushion?
"Is one race superior to any other?"
No. And there are no chosen people either unless they choose themselves then made up stories about being chosen by the gods to give the small cultic people they actually were a huge pedigree. This concept gets humans into nothing but trouble
"Why are people different shapes and sizes and with different hair color, etc.?
Evolution in their environmental situations over tens of thousands of years works its magic. Neanderthals evolved as they did due to Ice Age challenges. Modern humans as they did in the walk out of Africa 130,000 to 115,000 years ago.
Actually no. These folks never existed in reality and are Sumerian mythologies given a Hebrew spin in the very recent past of total human history.
Small cushions evidently according to you
"What is the purpose of multiple races?"Chips, beer, ice cream and cigarettes. Others go to the gym more often and take better care of themselves. The less bulky types evolved intelligence to outsmart the stronger ones. Environmental factors powered by time, location and evolution of the species did what it does.
Catch up with reality. Race Is Real, But Not in the Way Many People Think
It isn't.
"Does God have a plan for each INDIVIDUAL?"
We'd like to believe that wouldn't we? No. A nice thought but in reality "The Universe has not given us Center Stage"
10 comments:
Hey, Booby has a new backdrop! The flowered curtains must have finally fell apart!
Here is a question of the ages for Boob... Why are some created with mental balance, while others have to be "Special Prophets" even when the exhibit no irrefutable evidence whatsoever for being such???
Bob speakth.........and says nothing.
Perhaps he should try politics?
As to the question as to why various differences in the human race, size etc....
the answer is obvious.........DRIVE-TRU’s.
Wouldn't a debate between Dennis and Bob be interesting?
Dennis:
There is a plausible counterpoint to your view on this but I would not be able to relate it without becoming verbose. In brief, I disagree with both you and Dr. Thiel. My view would fall into the category of theistic evolution with all the implications of science considered. I would also say that some of your views are expressed pre-emptively and I do not think atheistic materialism affords the foundation for pre-emption. But neither does my modified creationist viewpoint afford truncated debate due to obviousness. Some might seek to settle this matter by simply pronouncing the story of human origins in the Bible to be allegorical. But I do not think it was allegorical for the ancients who wrote the accounts. The accounts became poetry gradually under the pressure of advancing science. Though the origin account may be protean in its externals, its moral content is not lost which is the important issue, the only issue.
******* Click on icon for Disclaimer
out Africa 130,000 to 115,000 years ago.
Deil can you precisely pin down the exact time! to the quote?
glue guise the time.
"Wouldn't a debate between Dennis and Bob be interesting?"
Bob is too big of a coward to debate with Dennis.
Correct, I, misspelled your name. Should have been Diehl.
can you precisely pin down the exact time! to the quote?
glue guise the time.
out Africa 130,000 to 115,000 years ago.
Inrd asked: "can you precisely pin down the exact time! to the quote?
glue guise the time."
=========================
It was around 3 in the afternoon. If that's not what you meant, the time frame is an estimate based on the fossil record etc. "When did the first humans come out of Africa" works well in Goggle.
I have no idea what "glue guise the time" means.
At least [unless I missed it] Bob didn't perpetuate HWA's "Adam was white... Noah was white" delusion.
This post has been around for a while and I have debated with myself about how to respond to it without gushing information. I would just like to point out that we have here two perspectives under consideration: the scientific perspective and the Armstrongist. Armstrongism follows traditional Christianity in believing that the table of the clans of Noah in Genesis 10 is the map of human racial definitions. The science of genetics states that this map of race is actually hardcoded in our DNA. And the genetic DNA map does not support this traditional interpretation of Genesis 10.
Whereas the traditional view clearly is deficient and leads to false conclusions, genetics also does not clarify the issue of race. Genetics leads to the conclusion, for instance, that Norwegians are very distantly removed from the British so as to be a separate race. The Norwegian population has a large component of haplogroup I and the British are mostly haplogroup R. Haplogroups R and I are quite distant from each other. Haplogroup I represents and early hunter-gatherer population and haplogroup R represents a later pastoral population from the steppe lands of Eurasian. The Norwegians are much closer genetically to the people of the Middle East and the British are much closer to the people of east Asia. Yet, we would see the Norwegians and British to be the same "race" - White people. This view is based on appearance and appearance may be the critical deciding factor in this debate for most people. Nobody can see a genome.
I think that most people in the world are not racial in outlook but tribal anyway. Race is too large a classification for most people to deal with. You like people who, first, look like you but also speak your dialect, live on your terrain, have the same culture, eat the same food and dislike the same people that you do. And this can all exist in a small subset within the large category of race.
So what is race? Go figure.
******* Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Post a Comment