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.
Hugh_Farey said:
Did you know “Glark” is Mongolian for “gullible”.
Click to expand...
I was going to invite you to my birthday party, but now I having second-thoughts. (The reference to the Smithsonian wasn’t my quote, by the way.)
 
Last edited:
Techno2000 said:
40.png
Bradskii:
40.png
Techno2000:
40.png
PickyPicky:
Moreover you haven’t shown that the pinkish sheep is a better fit:
Click to expand...
That’s the problem, how can any transitional form be better fit if it has to start out as just a small little modification.
Click to expand...
If the small modification means that it has slightly better eyesight or it is a faster runner then it will be a better hunter. I can explain all this better in the pub…
Click to expand...
Sorry, I have to work overnights and sleep in the afternoons.But if I had the money I would take off from work and fly out to Australia just to meet Glark. 🙂

If the small modification means that it has slightly better eyesight or it is a faster runner then it will be a better hunter

How long is this evolutionary process going to take?
Click to expand...
I’m really not sure why you keep asking questions that have been answered countless times over the last few months. Aren’t you absorbing any of the information that is being presented? Even if you don’t agree with it, surely it’s not difficult whatsoever to understand. It is an extraordinarily simple theory that can be explained and understood by even very young children. Even my grandkids understand it. Which is NOT the same as accepting it as valid, but that does not appear to be the problem here.

As I said…I will buy the beer. For as long as it takes. Any day. Any time.
 
buffalo said:
But He certainly leaves evidence all over the place.
Click to expand...
… and the Bible contains innumerable references to evolution! Somehow those stupid creationists have missed them all; instead, they’ve somehow come up with a fairy tale about “six days” or something.
 
rossum said:
What you did was a quotemine, just as I did with the Bible. Cutting away the context of the statement to make it appear to say something the originator did not intend.
Click to expand...
Thank you, but I was already aware of the concept of “quotemining”.
 
Techno2000 said:
Well if you saw where I’m from, then you must have saw my age also, so I can only extrapolate that your post is to mock me.
Click to expand...
That’s all Bradsii does on this thread - mock all creationists (as all good atheists do), whom he considers intellectually inferior.
 
edwest211 said:
That’s right. Two identical birds exist in the United States but live on different coasts and can’t interbreed. Different species? They’re both birds.
Click to expand...
Apparently there are “different” magpies in Australia that don’t interbreed and the only known difference between them is slightly different patterns of black and white feathers. I suspect that technically they could interbreed, but the different colour patterns prevents this from happening naturally (due to some kind of magpie “racism”). So when it is said that speciation leads to “the loss of the ability to interbred”, this might be a bit misleading.
 
Last edited:
Glark said:
40.png
Techno2000:
Well if you saw where I’m from, then you must have saw my age also, so I can only extrapolate that your post is to mock me.
Click to expand...
That’s all Bradsii does on this thread - mock all creationists (as all good atheists do), whom he considers intellectually inferior.
Click to expand...
Shooting fish in a barrel has never appealed to me.
 
buffalo said:
"Hence I’m surprised by calls for extending the neo-Darwinian Evolutionary Synthesis. You can’t extend something that is broken.” Jim MacAllister
Click to expand...
This explains why it’s useless to science. Dud theories are like that.
 
Last edited:
Please cite an example of the term “indirect empirical evidence” being used by a scientist.
 
Yes, it appears to be a dud. But when a dud is a dud and doesn’t go off but people tell you it did, then what?
 
edwest211 said:
Aliens exist!? There’s no evidence of that.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe in them, but those who do insist there is plenty of evidence - you know, just as evolutionists insist there is plenty of evidence for their respective fantasy. The good news is, holding “lunatic-fringe” beliefs is not necessarily a sin.
 
Bradskii said:
Shooting fish in a barrel has never appealed to me.
Click to expand...
Atheists think it’s “scientific” to believe that life can arise naturally from inanimate matter - and they think creationists are the stupid ones!
 
I was watching TV and learned that scientists believe if another planet was the right distance from its sun, had water and the “building blocks of life” (amino acids), that life would just get going there. At the time, I had not gotten over the spell of scientific authority. Later, I realized “They don’t know that!”
 
You’ll have to explain some other mechanism.

Find what it is, for example, about living matter that is distinctly different from normal matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top