Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [CreationTalk] Claim CC041:

Expand Messages
  • Lucas Hoffmann
    ... That s a little better. The main problem may just be the nature of the claim and required response. Lots of cranial capacity numbers and such. The
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Charles Creager Jr wrote:
      > Lucas Hoffmann wrote:
      > > Charles Creager Jr wrote:
      > >
      > >> http://tinyurl.com/h2fku
      > >>
      > >> I have posted the next response article. Any thoughts?
      > >>
      > >> ---- Charles Creager Jr.
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > > Honestly, I found it a bit confusing.
      > >
      > I reword and rearranged it a little, let me know if it helps. If you
      > still find it a bit confusing, it would help if you would give me a
      > better idea as to what you find confusing.
      >
      > ---- Charles Creager Jr.
      >
      That's a little better. The main problem may just be the nature of the
      claim and required response. Lots of "cranial capacity" numbers and
      such. The average browser of Creationwiki may not understand a lot of
      it. I've read Bones of Contention twice, and I still had to reread the
      article a few times to sort things out. Perhaps a page could be made to
      explain why cranial capacities are important to evolutionary theory?

      Lucas Hoffmann
    • Charles Creager Jr
      ... You are right that part of the problem is the nature of the material. In this case cranial capacity helps to show that the fossils in question belong to
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Lucas Hoffmann wrote:
        > Charles Creager Jr wrote:
        >
        >> Lucas Hoffmann wrote:
        >>
        >>> Charles Creager Jr wrote:
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>> http://tinyurl.com/h2fku
        >>>>
        >>>> I have posted the next response article. Any thoughts?
        >>>>
        >>>> ---- Charles Creager Jr.
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>> Honestly, I found it a bit confusing.
        >>>
        >>>
        >> I reword and rearranged it a little, let me know if it helps. If you
        >> still find it a bit confusing, it would help if you would give me a
        >> better idea as to what you find confusing.
        >>
        >> ---- Charles Creager Jr.
        >>
        >>
        > That's a little better. The main problem may just be the nature of the
        > claim and required response. Lots of "cranial capacity" numbers and
        > such. The average browser of Creationwiki may not understand a lot of
        > it. I've read Bones of Contention twice, and I still had to reread the
        > article a few times to sort things out. Perhaps a page could be made to
        > explain why cranial capacities are important to evolutionary theory?
        >
        > Lucas Hoffmann
        >
        >
        You are right that part of the problem is the nature of the material. In
        this case cranial capacity helps to show that the fossils in question
        belong to different species. While it is not the only factor it is a
        useful one. I added a statement about Homo habilis' alleged average
        cranial capacity that may help clarify things.




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.