thranx said:
|
How can you believe in evolution, but then say humans exist outside the scope of evolution?
Or are you simply saying that the most likely thing is that humans evolved, but there is not 100% proof?
A big problem with the anti-evolution crowd is that they deny every solution. A lot of the same people think radiocarbon dating is faulty. They also think the clonal tree ages are too complicated to be true. They reject using rock formation and things found on different layers of the earth's crust. They reject ice core dating. Pretty much everything that is used for dating which determines a timeline for human evolution is denied simply because they say that dating is accurate, but there is no way to tell whether dating before a certain time is reliable or not.
Especially for things like tree ring dating they say, the rings are accurate, but we don't know if some event caused them to grow rings faster or not. (a phenomenon which has never been recorded)
There will never be enough evidence to convince people that humans evolved. Even if we evolve in the distant future, there will be argument that it was our first time, and somehow predicted by the Bible or some such new religion.









