Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Glark said:
And I’d like to know how and why a dinosaur would evolve a bird respiratory system while keeping it’s reptilian respiratory system (the two systems are very different, so the former could not have evolved into the latter - therefore the bird system had to evolve alongside the reptilian system until it “took over”).
Click to expand...
And evolution put the dinosaur/ bird DNA in a lock box until the dust settled from the meteor, and that’s how the bird came to be.
 
PetraG said:
What is the connection between roses that have been artificially given the genetic material of delphiniums and comparing their “intelligence” to a literal vegetable?
Click to expand...
I forget, but there must be one.
 
PetraG said:
Oh I think we’re seeing evolutionary history right now. Species are dying out at a terrific rate.
Click to expand...
It’s likely that the “terrific rate” of extinctions is more Greenie-propaganda than fact.
 
Glark said:
It’s likely that the “terrific rate” of extinctions is more Greenie-propaganda than fact.
Click to expand...
Actually, you can see the difference in places like the Great Barrier Reef; it doesn’t take an expert to see how much is just dead. You can say the changes are not anthrogenic, but there are big changes. There are animals that don’t exist any more.
 
PetraG said:
Note the Grade Level in that. Also remember that while we are in school we’re supposed to come away with more substance than just the pictures, LOL.
Click to expand...
It’s interesting that some adults never grown out of a fairy tale they were taught as children. For example, I still believe in Santa Claus and many adults still believe that whales evolved from a rodent (and humans from a monkey-man).
 
Curious11 said:
Look, my friend, Rossum has given very good explanations here. You have to make an effort, I’m stating to think you have an agenda here, not simple curiosity.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree. I would like to see this Techo2000 (probably not even his real name) individual interrogated by the GEG (Global Evolutionary Guard) and re-trained in a concentration camp.
 
Yes, a great many adults don’t exert themselves to achieve an adult understanding of science any more than others achieve an adult understanding of St Nicholas. Sad but true.
 
PetraG said:
40.png
Glark:
It’s likely that the “terrific rate” of extinctions is more Greenie-propaganda than fact.
Click to expand...
Actually, you can see the difference in places like the Great Barrier Reef; it doesn’t take an expert to see how much is just dead. You can say the changes are not anthrogenic, but there are big changes. There are animals that don’t exist any more.
Click to expand...
Don’t worry evolution is working behind the scenes to remedy the situation, in a couple million years something will evolve from all this.
 
Hugh_Farey said:
Local climate change resulted in some populations being colder than they were before, favouring feathers as insulation. … An increase in predators stimulated camouflage.
Click to expand...
How does cold climate stimulate the growth of feathers (that were previously non-existent)?

How does the present of predators stimulate the growth of the feathers (that were previously non-existent)?
 
Last edited:
PetraG said:
Think of all the breeds of dogs there are. Put them in the wild, and all that structural diversity would all be gone in a few decades, maybe even a few years.
Click to expand...
In other words, genetic variations exist but are actually an evolutionary dead-end.
 
edwest211 said:
But meteors take everything out. They aren’t very discriminating.
Click to expand...
Some meteors have evolved intelligence - the so-called smart meteors - and are thus able to discriminate. No surprise … some vegetables have evolved intelligence too, the cauliflower being the foremost example.
 
Last edited:
Aloysium said:
Or so the story goes, when day to day experience says the exact opposite.
Click to expand...
Thousands of years of intensive breeding of animals and plants by human beings provides no evidence whatsoever that a “kind” can evolve into a different “kind”.
 
It doesn’t.

They don’t.

Nobody ever said that any individual thing is caused or stimulated by environmental pressure.

It’s pretty simple-- those animals which can survive and mate pass on their DNA. If that DNA, whatever it does (thicker skin, scales, etc.) leads to a survival advantage, then the number of individuals in a species with that DNA will increase over generations.

At no point is there anything doing anything to adapt.
 
Last edited:
. . . except for the ones which we’ve found, or which are still buried. That’s right. Because organic matter decomposes, and inorganic matter erodes over time.
 
Last edited:
Another genuine question from me:
@hugh_farey
Are ideas and feelings evolutionary?

Ie it seems most of human history people have believed in religion. Is this part of natural selection?
Why have humans evolved to be so insecure of themselves that they turn to religion?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top