Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleobabble’ is going to change that.” Alan Feduccia, Professor Emeritus at the University of North Carolina
 
edwest211 said:
I see. Keepin’ it vague.
Click to expand...
If we came from apes, why are there still apes around?

If (some) Americans are descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans around?

Yes, the question really is that stupid. I hope you intended it as a joke. If not, then it shows the level of argumentation that the anti-evolution crowd is reduced to.

rossum
 
rossum said:
You didn’t bother to do the calculations, did you. Yes, we do have a few examples of mistakes. Not many, because the great majority of organisms do not have significant or fossilisable mistakes.
Click to expand...
Not to sound snide, but I did ask you first.
But the way I figure it, if the majority of mutations are bad, then we should see at least as many examples of them as we do good mutation.
After all, the good ones are are the exception.
Right?
 
What is causing all these so-called common ancestors to die out?They were good enough to survive and multiply until a so-called “environmental change” came along and mutated them into something new.But evolution is supposed to be so subtle that it’s hardly even noticeable.
 
The answer is ‘all of the above.’ Not only did the claimed process create novel organs and things like wings, the mutant starting point survived until there were more, followed by an unknown number of further changes, which all survived. (?) You just need enough time in between catastrophes or changes in climate, etc.
 
And all these “environmental changes” always worked hand in hand in perfect Harmony to bring forth all these wonderful plants and animals we have on the planet.
 
But of course. They’re all here, right? The fittest survived because they survived. I think I’ll stick with ‘or something.’
 

Loading…

royaltyrrellmuseum.wpcomstaging.com

So, they can find a transitional frog fossil, but they cant find anything else out there. 🤔
 
It happens because it happens, except when it doesn’t… or when it does? You’re right. A lot has to be taken on faith.
 
Glark said:
Pierre Teihard de Chardin was a New Age nutter who remains a pin-up boy for the Church’s lunatic fringe
Click to expand...
As one who is not a fan of deChardin, the Vatican’s issue with him had nothing to do with evolution but a lot to do with his stance on the “noosphere”. But that was then and this is today…
 
buffalo said:
“Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleobabble’ is going to change that.” Alan Feduccia, Professor Emeritus at the University of North Carolina
Click to expand...
Feduccia? I too can quote Feduccia from Discover magazine, February 2003:
Question:
Creationists have used the bird-dinosaur dispute to cast doubt on evolution entirely. How do you feel about that?

Feduccia’s answer:
Creationists are going to distort whatever arguments come up, and they’ve put me in company with luminaries like Stephen Jay Gould, so it doesn’t bother me a bit. Archaeopteryx is half reptile and half bird any way you cut the deck, and so it is a Rosetta stone for evolution, whether it is related to dinosaurs or not. These creationists are confusing an argument about minor details of evolution with the indisputable fact of evolution: Animals and plants have been changing. The corn in Mexico, originally the size of the head of a wheat plant, has no resemblance to modern-day corn. If that’s not evolution in action, I do not know what is.
Click to expand...
I suggest that you tell the creationist website you found this quote on to remove it.

Oh yes, here is a quote from the Bible:
“There is no God”
Click to expand...
Convinced? No, I thought not. Creationist quotemines will not convince anyone who is not already a creationist.

rossum
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top