Meet “Ardi”

Evolutionists aren’t yet sure if they should call it a human ancestor, but one thing they do know is that “Ardi” does away with the idea of a “missing link.”



8 Responses to Meet “Ardi”

  1. gonovelgo says:

    Ardi doesn’t do away with the ‘missing link’ because it never existed in the first place. I’m truly astonished at how poorly the media is reporting these things – Ardi does not fall into some sort of hole in the human lineage that needed to be filled, nor will any future discovery. That’s not how it works.

    (That Answers In Genesis writer is also missing the point so hard he might as well be blindfolded.)


  2. I thought the article was a bit hastily done, but made some very good points.


  3. Jesse says:

    “…It is evident that the evolutionists fear the increasing speed of creationist information, despite their best efforts at censorship. So they are desperate to counteract this information. But their efforts don’t withstand scientific scrutiny.” (Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D. Physical Chemistry, Refuting Evolution, p. 198)


  4. Jesse says:

    “Since its advent in the mid-nineteenth century Darwinism has stirred up debate about many questions touching the very heart of human existence. Not least among these is: How should we live? While many philosophers and theologians ruled this question outside the purview of science, most prominent advocates of Darwinian theory—including biologists, physicians, social theorists, and popularizers—believed Darwinism had far-reaching ramifications for ethics and morality. Many argued that by providing a naturalistic account of the origin of ethics and morality, Darwinism delivered a death-blow to the prevailing Judeo-Christian ethics, as well as Kantian ethics and any other fixed moral code. If morality was built on social instincts that changed over evolutionary time, then morality must be relative to the conditions of life at any given time. Darwinism—together with other forms of historicism ascendant in the nineteenth century—thus contributed to the rise of moral relativism.

    But, interestingly, many Darwinists were not willing to live with complete moral relativism. They still retained one fixed point of reference—the process of evolution itself. Since morality arose through evolution, they argued that the purpose of morality is to advance the evolutionary process. They thereby imported the nineteenth-century cult of progress into evolutionary theory. The problem with this is that it presupposed that some forms of morality are “better” than others. But, of course, Darwinism provided no basis to consider some form of morality “better” than any other, or for that matter, it gave no reason to think that morality was “better” in any real sense than immorality. Yet most used morally charged language quite freely, apparently oblivious to the contradiction this entailed.

    Those Darwinists who made the evolutionary process the new criteria for morality radically altered the way that people thought about morality. Since they generally affirmed that good health and intelligence were key factors in the upward march of evolution, improving physical vitality and mental prowess—especially of future generations—became the highest moral virtue. The greatest sin was to contribute in some way to the decline of physical life or intellectual ability. This kind of evolutionary ethics flew in the face of Christian morality, in which one’s health, vitality, and mental faculty play no role in determining moral or immoral behavior. While Christian morality demands a relationship of love toward God and one’s neighbors, which involves self-sacrifice, evolutionary ethics focused on breeding better humans, even it if meant sacrificing other people in the process.”

    Richard Weikart, From Darwin to Hitler, pg.229-230


  5. Steven 147 says:

    I don’t see how creationism has discredited evolutionary theory as it is plainly clear the universe is older than the alleged 6000 yrs and it has no scientific findings or carbon dating or anthropological data at its figertips . The account in Genesis explains nothing .


  6. Jesse says:

    So you think that Genesis is irrelevant to our worldview? Sad. I’m a gap creationist.


  7. Steven 147 says:

    I am quite happy to be a creationist if it can be reconciled with the main elements of evolutionism without detracting from its credibility. This means re-interpreting Genesis.


  8. How about the absurdity of macroevolution?  Besides, Scripture testifies of creation.
    Paul wrote:
    “ For his attributes which are invisible, since the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being perceived by the things that are made, both his eternal power and divinity, so that they are without excuse;
    because, though they knew God, they did not glorify him as God, or give him thanks, but became vain in their reasoning, and their heart, void of understanding, was darkened.” (Rom 1:20-21)
    The creation is referenced in the New Testament several times including by Jesus:
    “But Jesus said to them: Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote for you this commandment.  But from the beginning of creation, male and female made he them; for this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and the two shall be one flesh: so no longer are they two, but one flesh.” (Mark 10:5-8)
    Science, which is always having to tweak its understanding of things, hasn’t proven macroevolution in the slightest.  Applying dating techniques that rely on known constants simply doesn’t work on anything older than known history.  In my line of work it would be like testing product without calibrating the test equipment.  It’s simply unreliable.
    But regardless of all that, the extreme complexity of the human body alone should convince a person that evolution had not part in its existence.  The odds that we evolved through any evolutionary process is astronomically small – to the point of absurdity.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: