SCOURCE plz

MOST LIKELY not definitively proven

I sent a link which talks a bit about it. Think for a second: why would it be believed if there wasn't any evidence?

I'll find more evidence if you insist

people believe a lot of things

Sure, but well educated scientists?

more? how about any?

Definitely proven is basically non-existent in science. It's always about what's most likely the case and the most likely scenario. It's all hypothesis and theory. That's how the method works

there is electric universe theory, there is string theory, scientists disagree on many things

Theories are just that: theories

They are not proven

So they cannot be taken as facts

Like your own Smithsonian source says viable ancestor for the genus homo

Or should not be

I don't know if any evidence exists that we will all be satisfied with, since none of us have any expertise in this area

scientific method. you do have to prove and others test and peer review. you perform experiments and so on

I would rather believe a theologian on the history of the Earth than a modern day materialist liberal scientist

i would rather believe the actual science

which does not support evolution

Lol

So wrong

lol

so wrong

good argument

we need a new discussion topic here

lol

Your own sources contradict your statements @Puppet Master

you do not know how to read the source then

Yes I do it says it there itself

I've already repeated it two times

it says it may be, could be, thought of, no where does it say this is evidence or proof

Viable ancestor. Meaning we can assume that it is our ancestor as there's enough for it

@Puppet Master I sent the link which talked about it a bit. Your own source speaks in detail about the remarkable anatomical similarities.

We're talking about history and paleontology and paleo archeology. There's never a 100% regarding that

Well done @El Comte, you just advanced to level 4!

Theory doesn't mean not proven. In science you have theories which are heavily backed up with fact but are still "theories". In addition, Charles Darwin was in no way a materialist liberal.

We'll never know the full truth

This mindset of evolution wrong cause religion is just as stupid as religion wrong cause evolution

anatomical, they are going on skull shape, like i said

Your entire argument is based off of pedantism @Puppet Master

Not just skull shape