[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The free world’s most potent weapons against China have been crippled

The free world’s most potent weapons against China have been crippled

GOD BLESS THE USA - TRUMP MUSIC VIDEO

Landmark flight: US tanker refuels Russian jets in Malaysia

AIex Jones Studio Seized! lnfowars Website Pulled From Internet! But He's NOT Going Away!

Gutfeld: This was Kamala's Achilles' heel

BREAKING! DEEP STATE SWAMP RATS TRYING TO SABOTAGE TRUMP FROM THE INSIDE | Redacted w Clayton Morris [Livestream in progress]

The Media Flips Over Tulsi & Matt Gaetz, Biden & Trump Take A Pic, & Famous People Leave Twitter!

4 arrested in California car insurance scam: 'Clearly a human in a bear suit'

Silk Road Founder Trusts Trump To 'Honor His Pledge' For Commutation

"You DESERVED to LOSE the Senate, the House, and the Presidency!" - Jordan Peterson

"Grand Political Theatre"; FBI Raids Home Of Polymarket CEO; Seize Phone, Electronics

Schoolhouse Limbo: How Low Will Educators Go To Better Grades?

BREAKING: U.S. Army Officers Made a Desperate Attempt To Break Out of The Encirclement in KURSK

Trumps team drawing up list of Pentagon officers to fire, sources say

Israeli Military Planning To Stay in Gaza Through 2025

Hezbollah attacks Israeli army's Tel Aviv HQ twice in one day

People Can't Stop Talking About Elon's Secret Plan For MSNBC And CNN Is Totally Panicking

Tucker Carlson UNLOADS on Diddy, Kamala, Walz, Kimmel, Rich Girls, Conspiracy Theories, and the CIA!

"We have UFO technology that enables FREE ENERGY" Govt. Whistleblowers

They arrested this woman because her son did WHAT?

Parody Ad Features Company That Offers to Cryogenically Freeze Liberals for Duration of TrumpÂ’s Presidency

Elon and Vivek BEGIN Reforming Government, Media LOSES IT

Dear Border Czar: This Nonprofit Boasts A List Of 400 Companies That Employ Migrants

US Deficit Explodes: Blowout October Deficit Means 2nd Worst Start To US Fiscal Year On Record

Gaetz Resigns 'Effective Immediately' After Trump AG Pick; DC In Full Blown Panic

MAHA MEME

noone2222 and John Bolton sitting in a tree K I S S I N G

Donald Trump To Help Construct The Third Temple?

"The Elites Want To ROB Us of Our SOVEREIGNTY!" | Robert F Kennedy


Science/Tech
See other Science/Tech Articles

Title: Fossil Reanalysis Pushes Back Origin of Homo sapiens
Source: sciam
URL Source: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?ch ... DFE-C0B7-1213-80B783414B7F0000
Published: Feb 17, 2005
Author: unlisted
Post Date: 2005-02-17 05:49:36 by 2Trievers
Keywords: Reanalysis, sapiens, Fossil
Views: 2019
Comments: 185

A new analysis of human remains first discovered in 1967 suggests that they are in fact much older than previously believed. The results, published today in the journal Nature, push back the emergence of our species by nearly 35,000 years.

Ian McDougall of the Australian National University in Canberra and his colleagues worked with two well-known fossil finds known as Omo I and Omo II, which were recovered from Ethiopia's Kibish Formation by Richard Leakey. The remains include two partial skulls as well as arm, leg, foot and pelvis bones for Omo I. "Anthropologists said they looked very different in their evolutionary status," remarks study co-author Frank Brown of the University of Utah. "Omo I appeared to be essentially modern Homo sapiens and Omo II appeared to be more primitive." At the time, the bones were dated to 130,000 years ago, based on radioactive decay of uranium and thorium from oyster shells found nearby. This time the scientists returned to the southern Ethiopian site and identified the resting places of both individuals. They also unearthed another part of a femur bone for Omo I that fits together with the original remains.

The researchers then analyzed the volcanic ash layers above and below the river sediment that contained the fossils using argon dating. They determined that the rock just below the fossils dated to 196,000 years ago. Because the layers of the Kibish Formation formed quickly during wet seasons that inundated the area with organic matter, the team posits that the bones are only slightly younger than this underlying layer. In addition, a layer of ash more than 150 feet above the burial sites dates to 104,000 years old, putting a limit on their age. Using other evidence, which drained from the Nile and the Omo rivers onto the Mediterranean seafloor, the researchers attest that the Omo fossils are most likely no younger than 190,000 years old.

Previously the oldest known traces of our species were fossils from Herto, Ethiopia, that date to about 160,000 years ago. The older age of the Omo remains is concordant with dates suggested by genetic studies for the origin of our species, says study co-author John Fleagle of Stony Brook University. He adds that "as modern human anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of the modern skeleton and 'modern' behavior."

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 145.

#1. To: 2Trievers (#0)

Would love to see some of the creationist types on LP "respond" to this new information.

Wait...no, I wouldn't

My favorite explanation so far came at a church service I attended where you could "ask the pastor anything". Someone asked about the apparent difference between the measured age of the universe and the actual Creation timeline.

Answer: God created it already "old."

Politicians could learn a lot from preachers on the subject of spin.

Created it old, He did. Yup.

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-17   6:22:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Samuel Gray, 2Trievers (#1)

Would love to see some of the creationist types on LP "respond" to this new information.

Ok, fine. I believe in the creation viewpoint.

What exactly is in this article that is supposed to "shake my world?"

Don  posted on  2005-02-17   13:20:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Don (#13)

What exactly is in this article that is supposed to "shake my world?"

Your words, not mine.

I've found that worlds built on faith aren't open to much shaking, static, rather than dynamic, but if you want, we can start with the arithmetic.

Creationism in general holds that God (re)created the earth and all its lifeforms in six literal 24 hour days, roughly 6,000 years ago. Data in this article says roughly 190,000 years for these human remains, minus your 6,000, gives 184,000 years we gotta explain away somehow.

Was he just "beta-testing" the species til he got to Adam and Eve?

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-17   14:13:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Samuel Gray (#15)

Was he just "beta-testing" the species til he got to Adam and Eve?

You do know that animals were created before man, right?

Don  posted on  2005-02-17   16:07:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Don (#18)

Homo sapiens = you, Don. Not an "animal" in testing. The 190,000 year old fossils were HUMAN remains. "Adam's" great grandfather times 1000.

I'm quoting from the Creationist playbook. They generally believe 6 literal 24 hour days for God to do all this.

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-17   16:26:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Samuel Gray (#20)

Generally? I am a creationist, and I have no problems with the "day" mentioned in Genesis as being much longer than 24 hours.

Don  posted on  2005-02-17   16:29:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Don (#21)

It'd have to be a few hundred million years long to match everything up in the timeline.

You know all this.

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-17   16:29:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Samuel Gray (#22)

The time element doesn't bother me one way or another. We don't know how long the "day" was. The "day" is a convenient measurement of time. The Bible states that to the Lord, a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. That means to me that time is not important in divine thinking. A divine being would have no concept of time.

Don  posted on  2005-02-17   16:36:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Don (#25)

This is why I don't talk about these issues much. When one runs up against a wall of faith, it is virtually impenetrable.

Just look at the thousand plus reply "crevo" threads at FR, and the vitriol expended on both sides.

I'd rather just be civil and say "you believe, I'll disbelieve, and we'll see what washes out in the afterlife, should there be one."

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-17   16:39:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Samuel Gray (#28)

When one runs up against a wall of faith, it is virtually impenetrable.

Of course, you do know that the evolutionist theory is built on the same thing, right? It takes a lot of faith to believe that the origin of mankind is something that dragged himself out of the ocean to become modern-day man.

Don  posted on  2005-02-17   16:41:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Don (#30)

Evolution has its own sets of problems, not the least of which is the same timeline problems that creationism has.

With physicists dating the age of the known universe, suddenly the evolutionists find themselves up against a huge timeline problem of their own, ie, how all these complex, interlocking systems could have evolved within the time that they now know they had to get it done.

Both biologists and Christians have been known to take extraordinary leaps of faith and fancy not supported in any way by the facts on record. ;)

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-17   16:46:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Samuel Gray (#32)

not supported in any way by the facts on record. ;)

And, of course, that is faith enters the picture. But, I have heard the idea that it takes less faith to believe that a divine being, God, created this thing. I have to agree.

Don  posted on  2005-02-17   16:49:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Don (#33)

It takes no faith at all to understand that evolution is the best scientific explanation of how the Human species and the others species of the world got to be what they are today.

Sure, it has some problems, but it is still the best SCIENTIFIC explanation there is.

It takes a HUGE amount of faith to believe in creationism, because the scientific evidence around us, shows us that it is complete and utter nonsense.

It is a great morality tale, it has a wonderful message, but it was NEVER meant to be taken literally, just as a lot of things in the bible were NEVER meant to be taken literally.

Aric2000  posted on  2005-02-17   23:50:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Aric2000 (#40)

If this is the best that science can come up with, science has a lot to be deserved. Nonsense is nonsense and a theory that mankind crawled out of the ocean and evolved into mankind is nonsense.

Don  posted on  2005-02-18   9:03:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: Don (#49)

If this is the best that science can come up with, science has a lot to be deserved. Nonsense is nonsense and a theory that mankind crawled out of the ocean and evolved into mankind is nonsense.

Well, if this is your idea of evolution, no wonder you believe in creationism.

Evolution is a bit more complicated then that, then again, you really don't care to learn about REAL evolution, because then it might call your faith into question, which would bring your entire world down upon your head.

I feel bad for people that NEED religion in order to give their life purpose. I feel bad for people that have a need to tear down science in order to make their religion somehow stand up and be real.

Aric2000  posted on  2005-02-18   10:59:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: Aric2000, All (#64)

Eric, for starters, how about stopping to be a condescending prick?

Don  posted on  2005-02-18   13:11:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#90. To: Don (#65)

Sorry, I can't help it when it comes to upstart Christian Creationists that know nothing about evolution but spout about how it isn't science.

Total and complete nonsense, so I speak to you as if you are a child, because you are about as ignorant as one...

Aric2000  posted on  2005-02-19   0:45:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#92. To: Aric2000 (#90)

Total and complete nonsense, so I speak to you as if you are a child, because you are about as ignorant as one...

At least you know what you are. Take a hike.

Don  posted on  2005-02-19   2:22:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#93. To: Don (#92)

Total and complete nonsense, so I speak to you as if you are a child, because you are about as ignorant as one...

At least you know what you are. Take a hike.

Ahh, poor baby, the truth hurts doesn't it? WAAAAHHHHH....

ROFLMAO!!

Poor wittle Cweationist, did I hut yo wittle feewings?.....

Aric2000  posted on  2005-02-19   3:40:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#95. To: Aric2000, Don (#93)

When you battle faith , Aric, a system of reasoning which is not founded on pragmatics, the challenges you suggest may never be received in the same light as they are offered, especially in the tone you offered Don. Can it be that science and logic are also a form of religion .........faith in mans perception of the universe by the means of experiment and logic. And by golly, it comes from the same place. Don is a worthy opponent and deserves respect. At least he has mine.

2Trievers  posted on  2005-02-19   8:34:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#96. To: All (#95)

I found this fun science v religion piece ...

"LET ME EXPLAIN THE problem science has with Jesus Christ." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. "You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"

"Yes, sir."

"So you believe in God?"

"Absolutely."

"Is God good?"

"Sure! God's good."

"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"

"Yes."

"Are you good or evil?"

"The Bible says I'm evil."

The professor grins knowingly. "Ahh! THE BIBLE!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help them? Would you try?"

"Yes sir, I would."

"So you're good...!"

"I wouldn't say that."

"Why not say that? You would help a sick and maimed person if you could... in fact most of us would if we could... God doesn't.

[No answer.]

"He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"

[No answer]

The elderly man is sympathetic. "No, you can't, can you?" He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. In philosophy, you have to go easy with the new ones. "Let's start again, young fella."

"Is God good?"

"Er... Yes."

"Is Satan good?"

"No."

"Where does Satan come from?" The student falters.

"From... God..."

"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he?" The elderly man runs his bony fingers through his thinning hair and turns to the smirking, student audience. "I think we're going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies and gentlemen." He turns back to the Christian.

"Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"

"Yes, sir."

"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? Did God make everything?"

"Yes."

"Who created evil?

[No answer]

"Is there sickness in this world? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness. All the terrible things - do they exist in this world? "

The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

"Who created them? "

[No answer]

The professor suddenly shouts at his student. "WHO CREATED THEM? TELL ME, PLEASE!" The professor closes in for the kill and climbs into the Christian's face. In a still small voice: "God created all evil, didn't He, son?"

[No answer]

The student tries to hold the steady, experienced gaze and fails.

Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace the front of the classroom like an aging panther. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues, "How is it that this God is good if He created all evil throughout all time?" The professor swishes his arms around to encompass the wickedness of the world. "All the hatred, the brutality, all the pain, all the torture, all the death and ugliness and all the suffering created by this good God is all over the world, isn't it, young man?"

[No answer]

"Don't you see it all over the place? Huh?"

Pause.

"Don't you?" The professor leans into the student's face again and whispers,

"Is God good?"

[No answer]

"Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor. I do."

The old man shakes his head sadly. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you? "

"No, sir. I've never seen Him."

"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"

"No, sir. I have not."

"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus... in fact, do you have any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?"

[No answer]

"Answer me, please."

"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

"You're AFRAID... you haven't?"

"No, sir."

"Yet you still believe in him?"

"...yes..."

"That takes FAITH!" The professor smiles sagely at the underling. "According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Where is your God now?"

[The student doesn't answer]

"Sit down, please."

The Christian sits...Defeated.

Another Christian raises his hand. "Professor, may I address the class?"

The professor turns and smiles. "Ah, another Christian in the vanguard! Come, come, young man. Speak some proper wisdom to the gathering."

The Christian looks around the room. "Some interesting points you are making, sir. Now I've got a question for you. Is there such thing as heat?"

"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."

"Is there such a thing as cold?"

"Yes, son, there's cold too."

"No, sir, there isn't."

The professor's grin freezes. The room suddenly goes very cold.

The second Christian continues. "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold, otherwise we would be able to go colder than 458 - You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."

Silence. A pin drops somewhere in the classroom.

"Is there such a thing as darkness, professor?"

"That's a dumb question, son. What is night if it isn't darkness? What are you getting at...?"

"So you say there is such a thing as darkness?"

"Yes..."

"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something, it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, Darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker and give me a jar of it. Can you...give me a jar of darker darkness, professor?"

Despite himself, the professor smiles at the young effrontery before him. This will indeed be a good semester. "Would you mind telling us what your point is, young man?"

"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with and so your conclusion must be in error...."

The professor goes toxic. "Flawed...? How dare you...!""

"Sir, may I explain what I mean?"

The class is all ears.

"Explain... oh, explain..." The professor makes an admirable effort to regain control. Suddenly he is affability itself. He waves his hand to silence the class, for the student to continue.

"You are working on the premise of duality," the Christian explains. "That for example there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science cannot even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism but has never seen, much less fully understood them. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, merely the absence of it."

The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from the desk of a neighbor who has been reading it. "Here is one of the most disgusting tabloids this country hosts, professor. Is there such a thing as immorality?"

"Of course there is, now look..."

"Wrong again, sir. You see, immorality is merely the absence of morality.

Is there such thing as injustice? No. Injustice is the absence of justice. Is there such a thing as evil?" The Christian pauses. "Isn't evil the absence of good?"

The professor's face has turned an alarming color. He is so angry he is temporarily speechless.

The Christian continues. "If there is evil in the world, professor, and we all agree there is, then God, if he exists, must be accomplishing a work through the agency of evil. What is that work, God is accomplishing? The Bible tells us it is to see if each one of us will, of our own free will, choose good over evil."

The professor bridles. "As a philosophical scientist, I don't vie this matter as having anything to do with any choice; as a realist, I absolutely do not recognize the concept of God or any other theological factor as being part of the world equation because God is not observable."

"I would have thought that the absence of God's moral code in this world is probably one of the most observable phenomena going," the Christian replies.

"Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it every week! Tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"

"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."

"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

The professor makes a sucking sound with his teeth and gives his student a silent, stony stare.

"Professor. Since no-one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a priest?"

"I'll overlook your impudence in the light of our philosophical discussion.

Now, have you quite finished?" the professor hisses.

"So you don't accept God's moral code to do what is righteous?"

"I believe in what is - that's science!"

"Ahh! SCIENCE!" the student's face splits into a grin. "Sir, you rightly state that science is the study of observed phenomena. Science too is a premise which is flawed..."

"SCIENCE IS FLAWED..?" the professor splutters.

The class is in uproar.

The Christian remains standing until the commotion has subsided. "To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, may I give you an example of what I mean?" The professor wisely keeps silent.

The Christian looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out in laughter.

The Christian points towards his elderly, crumbling tutor. "Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain... felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain?" No one appears to have done so. The Christian shakes his head sadly. "It appears no-one here has had any sensory perception of the professor's brain whatsoever. Well, according to the rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science, I DECLARE that the professor has no brain."

The class is in chaos.

The Christian sits.

2Trievers  posted on  2005-02-19   8:39:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#107. To: 2Trievers (#96)

So...God must exist because we only notice when he's NOT around?

No wonder I can't fathom Christians.

If the Creation is flawed, which even the Bible says it must be, then so must the Creator, IMO. That passive statement "sin entered the world" places no blame, really, but God created the agent of sin, (I'm speaking in the language of Christian myth now) Lucifer himself,

If He knew all things before he "breathed" this place into existence, he can't blame all the mistakes on our exercising of free will.

Even a third rate programmer debugs his stuff before compiling it.

He made the mess, He can clean it up.

Sorry, I still don't buy it, the nice story notwithstanding. Interesting read, though, despite the theo-philosophical sleight of hand. :)

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-19   10:22:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#108. To: Samuel Gray (#107)

Interesting read, though, despite the theo-philosophical sleight of hand. :)

Which is why I find Eastern thought so interesting ... besides if you meet Buddha along the path you get to kill him ... put me somewhere beween *Henry Miller and Buddha ... yep. That's where I am.

* I have found God, but He is insufficient. I am only spiritually dead. Physically, I am alive. Morally, I am free. The world I leave behind is a menagerie. The dawn is breaking on a new world. A jungle world, in which the lean spirits roam with sharp claws. If I am a hyena, I am a lean and hungry one. I go forth to fatten myself. ~~ Henry Miller, Tropic of Cancer

2Trievers  posted on  2005-02-19   10:38:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#109. To: 2Trievers (#108)

I like the Henry Miller approach. I bet the social functions are a hell of a lot more fun...

He was exactly right...I have found God, but He is insufficient. "We'll understand it better by and by" or "we see through a glass, darkly", and that's supposed to fix it all?

Pie-in-the-sky-when-you-die-by-and-by. I'll have my dessert up front, while I'm here, thanks.

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-19   10:41:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#112. To: Samuel Gray (#109)

I like the Henry Miller approach. I bet the social functions are a hell of a lot more fun... Pie-in-the-sky-when-you-die-by-and-by. I'll have my dessert up front, while I'm here, thanks.

Interesting statement.. so are you saying that because you see God as rules and regulations.. that if you reject Him, the matter of right/wrong then vanishes?

Zipporah  posted on  2005-02-19   10:58:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#114. To: Zipporah (#112)

I like the liberation of Miller's idea. It sounds a little predatory, it's just the imagery he uses there, more of a metaphor for feeding the flesh, but yeah, why not? If no one gets hurt, why not do what you want, instead of depending on some extraterrestrial arbiter of Good/Evil with a celestial retirement system?

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-19   11:21:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#118. To: Samuel Gray (#114)

If no one gets hurt, why not do what you want, instead of depending on some extraterrestrial arbiter of Good/Evil with a celestial retirement system?

No man is an island...

Zipporah  posted on  2005-02-19   11:46:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#119. To: Zipporah, randge (#118)

No man is an island...

True, but I'm working toward peninsular status, and will dig the canal at some later date.

What'd you think of randge's essay?

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-02-19   11:51:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#143. To: Samuel Gray (#119)

I do not believe that evil is an entity.. but evil resides in all men.. men are not basically good but basically evil and they are mankind is predisposed to do evil .. it is a choice.. and it's quite convenient and serves people to disregard or destroy God in their minds as a way to justify their actions....

Zipporah  posted on  2005-02-19   14:15:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#145. To: Zipporah (#143)

I agree with you about where evil resides.

By saying "evil is an entity" I didn't mean that it was a being like Satan.

I meant that evil was not the lack of goodness alone. The propostion that it is the absence of good is part of the comology the writer was trying to present in defence of a God accused of being the author of both good and evil.

Evil exists. It's not the lack of something else.

What time is the game??

randge  posted on  2005-02-19   14:37:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 145.

#147. To: randge (#145)

By saying "evil is an entity" I didn't mean that it was a being like Satan.

Ah okay.. I misunderstood your meaning.. And I totally agree that evil is not the lack of goodness alone and that evil exists and not the lack of goodness.. athough I do believe that there is an entity that exists that shouldn't be depicted as the opposite of God.. which would put it/him on the same level as God..the antithesis..but it/he would eptomize evil.. but mankind has the choice to do evil which unfortunately is man is 'bent'..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-02-19 14:45:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 145.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]