>Firstly, you are always appealing to hominid technology to support your
>claim that an Australopithecine/Homo habilis could have built a huge 3-decker
>ark. But there is no evidence that such hominid technology died away. By
>the evidence of your own posts it shows a steady increeasing sophistication.
>
Stephen get past this. Are you deaf? This is the second time tonight and
there are uncountable times past that I have admited that I don't know quite
where to put Australopithecus. So please either criticise what I say or
cease acting like the proverbial harpy who can't get past the liver.
>Secondly, if Noah was an Australopithecine (as your championing of
>the Lothagam jaw fragment indicates), then there is no evidence they
>were all wiped out 5.5 mya. If they were not all wiped out, then the
>world wasn't left with 8 Australopithecines (humans in your book).
No Stephen, considering that you haven't read my book you really don't know
what is in it. But the fact is that the australopithecines walked upright
like you and I, not like an ape. Their foot prints were nearly identical to
yours. It is at least worth a non-emotional consideration of what their
status is.
>The Tasmanian aborigines therefore provide no evidence that
>neolithic farming and technology, once discovered, can be
>completely lost. Besides, the Bible clearly indicates that farming
>resumed after the Flood (Gn 9:20), technology advanced (Gn 11:3),
>and cities were built both before (Gn 4:17), and after (Gn 11:4-8) the
>Flood.
This is silly. Anything can be forgotten and lost. Or are you suggesting
that farming entered the gene pool and is now an instinct?
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm