Originally posted by KeplerAll I am trying to do is point out that it is all speculation. I could also speculate that these Neanderthals were people that are called the Nephilim in Genesis 6:1-5. However, that does not make it true, anymore than any other speculation about the Neanderthals makes that speculation true.
I wasn't asking whether or not you have seen any evidence that it is correct. If you know it is wrong, as you claim, you should be able to show some evidence for that.
Originally posted by RJHindsThings based on evidence are not speculation. On that basis, your suggestion that it is wrong is speculation. The notion that neanderthals and modern humans interbred is based on evidence, controversial and somewhat flimsy evidence but still evidence.
All I am trying to do is point out that it is all speculation. I could also speculate that these Neanderthals were people that are called the Nephilim in Genesis 6:1-5. However, that does not make it true, anymore than any other speculation about the Neanderthals makes that speculation true.
Originally posted by KeplerHow is it that the bones of humans are evidence of Neanderthals rather than the Nephilim of Genesis 6:1-5 or any other race of people? Speculation? Certainly not fact for how do we know there was such a race of people called Neanderthals? Wasn't that just a made-up name? I think so. 😏
Things based on evidence are not speculation. On that basis, your suggestion that it is wrong is speculation. The notion that neanderthals and modern humans interbred is based on evidence, controversial and somewhat flimsy evidence but still evidence.
Originally posted by RJHindsHow do we know there was such a race of people called Nephilim? Wasn't that just a made-up name? I think so.
Certainly not fact for how do we know there was such a race of people called Neanderthals? Wasn't that just a made-up name? I think so. 😏
Creationist claptrap has no place in the Science Forum, I seriously wish you'd stay away.