Evolutionists continually tell us that there's no difference between apes and humans. (They insist on this despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary.) Let's take a look at yet another example.
Quotes and comments;
1. The article quotes Sommer, an evolutionary anthropologist, saying: “It’s untenable to talk of dividing humans and humanoid apes because there are no clear-cut criteria – neither biological, nor mental, nor social.’” [1.]
- my question is this; why would anyone believe what these people have to say about the subject of Origins? i.e. if these poseurs can't (or won't) admit the most obvious reality on the planet, why should we believe they are going to be honest about the origins issue? (Or about anything else.)
- Not clear-cut criteria? Really? I can give you dozens; but I'll content myself with one. Have you ever read anything by [Jurgen] Habermas? Here's one clear cut difference. Human beings write tedious philosophical tomes that no one on earth has any interest in reading... while apes do not :=)
- Aren't there any intellectual standards anymore? Why is it Evolutionists are allowed to lie so outrageously? It's my conviction that not one person on this planet honestly believes there is no difference (of a categorical difference) between man and apes. I don't believe that one person on this planet honestly believes apes and humans belong in the same class. Despite all this Evolutionists every day get up in class and say the very opposite. In my opinion this eviscerates their credibility. I don't mind if they claim E. is true until the cows come home; but I do object to them telling outrageous lies to young students.
Notes;
1. Reference; Evolution to the Rescue for Abused Ape [Creation/Evolution Headlines; 04/05/2007]
'Activists are trying to ditch the “species barrier” that allows such discrimination. The article quotes Sommer, an evolutionary anthropologist, saying: “It’s untenable to talk of dividing humans and humanoid apes because there are no clear-cut criteria – neither biological, nor mental, nor social.’”
- I take it some folk thought some ape was being mistreated. (It was being imported into Australia for medical research purposes.)
2. Do apes (like Habermas) claim that there's great value in imagining an ideal world? that we need some utopian vision to motivate us to improve our social behavior?
- if you still doubt there's no clear-cut difference between human beings and apes I suggest you read 'The theory of Communicative Action' - in 2 volumes. (This should remove any doubts you have; and well before you reach the end.)
3. This is the same crowd that pretended no evil was going on in the USSR. The point? They don't care a fig for honesty or the truth. (If they do I'd like to see some evidence for it.)
- try reading the 'Gulag Archipelago' and tell me how these professors managed to miss all that; tell me how they ignore it to this day; tell me how they can pretend to see no danger in Collectivization. In modern academia few people have any interest in truth. They're too busy studying techniques of manipulation to have an interest in intellectual integrity.
- are we supposed to believe they couldn't see the evidence staring them in the face? that they couldn't see the evidence shining in the sky?
4. Read the 'Gulag' and tell me there's no difference between human beings and animals. (It's the most telling document of our time; but I doubt if one professor in a thousand has even read a chapter.) Animals are incapable of such evil machinations.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
