Evidence for God from Science

In biology two species usually can't reproduce and have fertile offspring, but sometimes they can. It seems that for whatever reason, this happened with Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens Sapiens. However, they were rather similar to us genetically and there could've been other factors such as social norms at play to keep the amount of "interbreeding" low.
So, debate continues as to if they're a subspecies of us or a closely related species of human. This is important because it's been proven that most non sub-Saharan African DNA has some Neanderthal in it, and would God create another species of human, or should we disregard the term species for humans when it comes to reconciling theology and biology?
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/
Plz no bullcrap, I want serious answers.
Thank you.

Here's some non-bull crap that may be of help.

Reasons.org has some articles on Neanderthals, if you want to sift through them.

http://old.reasons.org/Search?q=Are+Neanderthals+human

They are in the process of transitioning from their old website to their new one, FYI.

No one else knows?

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:No one else knows?

I gave you Hugh Ross! What else do you want, AnswersinGenesis?




Fine.

Here's a search from a Christian evolution perspective.

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:No one else knows?

I gave you Hugh Ross! What else do you want, AnswersinGenesis?




Fine.

Here's a search from a Christian evolution perspective.

Hugh and even Ken Ham is fine, but I was wanting other users opinions. Thanks for the link too.
See, what I'm saying is, since it's proved Neanders got it up with early ppl of our subspecies, but only some, and since many think, as on here, Neanders were subhuman or otherwise non human, it throws the bible into a potential loop. How would one get around it is what I was asking, n it seems they were actual humans like u and me, just not our subspecies. Or were they a diff species? Hmm, I'll look at this new link to see.

Hugh and even Ken Ham is fine...

Ah, some kind of comedian, eh?

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:No one else knows?

I gave you Hugh Ross! What else do you want, AnswersinGenesis?




Fine.

Here's a search from a Christian evolution perspective.

Hugh and even Ken Ham is fine, but I was wanting other users opinions. Thanks for the link too.
See, what I'm saying is, since it's proved Neanders got it up with early ppl of our subspecies, but only some, and since many think, as on here, Neanders were subhuman or otherwise non human, it throws the bible into a potential loop. How would one get around it is what I was asking, n it seems they were actual humans like u and me, just not our subspecies. Or were they a diff species? Hmm, I'll look at this new link to see.

I'm not sure what the issue is. If it's somehow shown that humans successfully reproduced with Neanderthals, why would that hurt the validity of scripture? What am I missing?

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:No one else knows?

I gave you Hugh Ross! What else do you want, AnswersinGenesis?




Fine.

Here's a search from a Christian evolution perspective.

https://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-venem ... w-evidence
this link is really good, everyone on here should check it out

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:No one else knows?

I gave you Hugh Ross! What else do you want, AnswersinGenesis?




Fine.

Here's a search from a Christian evolution perspective.

Hugh and even Ken Ham is fine, but I was wanting other users opinions. Thanks for the link too.
See, what I'm saying is, since it's proved Neanders got it up with early ppl of our subspecies, but only some, and since many think, as on here, Neanders were subhuman or otherwise non human, it throws the bible into a potential loop. How would one get around it is what I was asking, n it seems they were actual humans like u and me, just not our subspecies. Or were they a diff species? Hmm, I'll look at this new link to see.

I'm not sure what the issue is. If it's somehow shown that humans successfully reproduced with Neanderthals, why would that hurt the validity of scripture? What am I missing?

Because a lot of ppl, like on here, keep saying Neanderthals weren't human. It's even in the wording of your question. When ppl on here realize that we and them did have fertile kids, n still continue to think theyre not human, then one would begin to doubt how "special" we are as a creation of God's. Then one might look at non Africans as inferior which is unbiblical, in short we need to expand our useage of the word human to more than Homo Sapiens.
It's also a pet peeve of mine.
PS: imagine this-humans in heaven with us, that aren't us, but still human. So exotic and foreign, but God doesn't care. He looks at the heart of man.

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evol ... sing-link/
this is actually really well done tho its about australiopiths than humans

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:No one else knows?

I gave you Hugh Ross! What else do you want, AnswersinGenesis?




Fine.

Here's a search from a Christian evolution perspective.

Hugh and even Ken Ham is fine, but I was wanting other users opinions. Thanks for the link too.
See, what I'm saying is, since it's proved Neanders got it up with early ppl of our subspecies, but only some, and since many think, as on here, Neanders were subhuman or otherwise non human, it throws the bible into a potential loop. How would one get around it is what I was asking, n it seems they were actual humans like u and me, just not our subspecies. Or were they a diff species? Hmm, I'll look at this new link to see.

I'm not sure what the issue is. If it's somehow shown that humans successfully reproduced with Neanderthals, why would that hurt the validity of scripture? What am I missing?

Because a lot of ppl, like on here, keep saying Neanderthals weren't human. It's even in the wording of your question. When ppl on here realize that we and them did have fertile kids, n still continue to think theyre not human, then one would begin to doubt how "special" we are as a creation of God's. Then one might look at non Africans as inferior which is unbiblical, in short we need to expand our useage of the word human to more than Homo Sapiens.
It's also a pet peeve of mine.
PS: imagine this-humans in heaven with us, that aren't us, but still human. So exotic and foreign, but God doesn't care. He looks at the heart of man.

Ok. When I use the term "human", I mean modern humans. If you prefer, Homo sapiens sapiens.

Do you have proof that Homo sapiens sapiens successfully reproduced with Neanderthals, over generations?

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:https://answersingenesis.org/human-evol ... sing-link/
this is actually really well done tho its about australiopiths than humans

My phone won't let me read links from that site.

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

RickD wrote: I gave you Hugh Ross! What else do you want, AnswersinGenesis?




Fine.

Here's a search from a Christian evolution perspective.

Hugh and even Ken Ham is fine, but I was wanting other users opinions. Thanks for the link too.
See, what I'm saying is, since it's proved Neanders got it up with early ppl of our subspecies, but only some, and since many think, as on here, Neanders were subhuman or otherwise non human, it throws the bible into a potential loop. How would one get around it is what I was asking, n it seems they were actual humans like u and me, just not our subspecies. Or were they a diff species? Hmm, I'll look at this new link to see.

I'm not sure what the issue is. If it's somehow shown that humans successfully reproduced with Neanderthals, why would that hurt the validity of scripture? What am I missing?

Because a lot of ppl, like on here, keep saying Neanderthals weren't human. It's even in the wording of your question. When ppl on here realize that we and them did have fertile kids, n still continue to think theyre not human, then one would begin to doubt how "special" we are as a creation of God's. Then one might look at non Africans as inferior which is unbiblical, in short we need to expand our useage of the word human to more than Homo Sapiens.
It's also a pet peeve of mine.
PS: imagine this-humans in heaven with us, that aren't us, but still human. So exotic and foreign, but God doesn't care. He looks at the heart of man.

Ok. When I use the term "human", I mean modern humans. If you prefer, Homo sapiens sapiens.

Do you have proof that Homo sapiens sapiens successfully reproduced with Neanderthals, over generations?

Personally I dont, but others have, you can see for yourself on google. Its rather well known ppl of Eurasian ancestry have their DNA, up to 4% too.

RickD wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:https://answersingenesis.org/human-evol ... sing-link/
this is actually really well done tho its about australiopiths than humans

My phone won't let me read links from that site.

I wonder why...

If you're right, and non-African humans have DNA of Neanderthals, and Africans don't, then it may prove that Africans are more evolved, and we white people are less human.

Kinda throws a monkey wrench in the Theory of white supremacy, doesn't it?