What is the current theistic explanation for archaic human fossils?

[DeMotts]

There's quite a body of fossils that exist that illustrate a variety of archaic humans, from australopithecines to Homo rhodesiensis, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo naledi, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, and Homo habilis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_h ... on_fossils

For the theistic anti-evolutionists on the board: how do you explain such a variety of human fossils? What are australopithecines? How do they fit in with the creation story of the bible? Do you believe these fossils are legitimate or forgeries?

[Inquirer]

You mean like publicly insinuating someone is an advocate for the sexual abuse of children?

You were asked if taking little girls (only girls and only virgins, as the Bible depicts) for one's own "use" was good and moral, and you answered "it depends".

Your answer speaks for itself. Might as well own it.

And if you truly didn't appreciate that what the Bible depicts constitutes sexual slavery, again I have to question your knowledge of your own holy book.

You're a liar Jose, you abuse all the time, you attack your opponent all the time, you break rules of civility all the time - all of this you do because you are a poor debater, you are a bully and I suspect you are a bully in person, it is your nature.

The moderators know this but do precious little, you get away with much of the time, you turn any polite discussion into a personal attack on your opponent.

So enough of your lying crap Jose, this is what you said to me - the first time sex was mentioned in this discussion:

Like I said, I've no interest in debating morality with someone who thinks taking little girls as sexual slaves just might be a good thing (and also frequently engages in kindergarten-level boasting).

See? lies, libelous disgusting lies, insinuations, abuse and the moderators don't care, they pretend to moderate.

I never ever mentioned taking children for sexual gratification YOU DID THAT and now have the audacity to accuse me of being the originator of such filth. I reported this to the moderators and they did nothing, you continue to do it and they do nothing, I have lost all respect for the site at this point.

So fuck you, fuck the forum and fuck the pretend rules.

[Jose Fly]

You mean like publicly insinuating someone is an advocate for the sexual abuse of children?

You were asked if taking little girls (only girls and only virgins, as the Bible depicts) for one's own "use" was good and moral, and you answered "it depends".

Your answer speaks for itself. Might as well own it.

And if you truly didn't appreciate that what the Bible depicts constitutes sexual slavery, again I have to question your knowledge of your own holy book.

You're a liar Jose, you abuse all the time, you attack your opponent all the time, you break rules of civility all the time - all of this you do because you are a poor debater, you are a bully and I suspect you are a bully in person, it is your nature.

The moderators know this but do precious little, you get away with much of the time, you turn any polite discussion into a personal attack on your opponent.

So enough of your lying crap Jose, this is what you said to me - the first time sex was mentioned in this discussion:

Like I said, I've no interest in debating morality with someone who thinks taking little girls as sexual slaves just might be a good thing (and also frequently engages in kindergarten-level boasting).

See? lies, libelous disgusting lies, insinuations, abuse and the moderators don't care, they pretend to moderate.

I never ever mentioned taking children for sexual gratification YOU DID THAT and now have the audacity to accuse me of being the originator of such filth. I reported this to the moderators and they did nothing, you continue to do it and they do nothing, I have lost all respect for the site at this point.

So fuck you, fuck the forum and fuck the pretend rules.

Ah yes, now it seems the Christian has finally realized how his attempt to debate morality ended up casting him and his Bible in a terrible, awful light, but rather than admit any of it, he stomps his feet, throws a tantrum, and swears at everyone.

For the record, you were asked "Under what circumstances would you consider genocide and taking little girls as spoils of war good and right", and you answered "It depends". And as we've covered before, "taking little girls as spoils of war" constitutes "subjecting girls to sexual slavery".

But it looks like you're intent on flaming your way out of the forum and making yourself into a laughingstock, so by all means....please proceed.

[otseng]

[Replying to Inquirer in post #341]

Moderator Action

Banned.


______________

Moderator actions indicate that a thread/post has been locked, moved, merged, or split.

[William]

[Replying to Jose Fly in post #342]

Ah yes, now it seems the Christian has finally realized how his attempt to debate morality ended up casting him and his Bible in a terrible, awful light, but rather than admit any of it, he stomps his feet, throws a tantrum, and swears at everyone.

Fortunately such behavior is the exception rather than the rule. Christians generally do not behave in such a manner so I would council resisting painting all with the same brush.