Questions about evolution and origins

  • Thread starter Thread starter amaxiner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Last time. Because I think you’re a troll. And I have better things to do then have fun feeding them.
Last Time? 🤣
Self-appointed Knowledgeable one?
Who Tells but never Shows?
Forgot that I’ve Told you that you presume upon me…
Which suggests that I view you as sorely lacking in Bio-Sciences Knowledges
Strongly suggests that suggestions claiming ability to teach me have fallen flat
But do keep on trying to prove whatever version of ‘evolution’ (that) you’re currently on.
 
Last edited:
40.png
Wozza:
Last time. Because I think you’re a troll. And I have better things to do then have fun feeding them.
Last Time?
Yup. As I said, I’m not here to educate you. Neither am I here to play straight man to jesters or to feed the trolls. Life is too short. Enjoy the rest of your time here.
 
Last edited:
Are who suggesting that you know more than Gould about Paleontology
What strange ideas your mind produces. Gould was a distinguished palaeontologist and I’m not even a scientist. He knew a million times more about fossils than I do, and then some.
 
Gould was an evolution theorist… a Paleontological Scientist. AntiCreationist.
So, your God is incapable of setting up a universe in which evolution works? Such a God would not be omnipotent, because there is something He cannot do.

An omnipotent God is perfectly capable of setting up a universe in such a way that evolution works. He can set the rules and He can set the starting conditions so that exactly the outcome He wants will happen.
 
Darwin: “Evolution occurs so slow - we cannot see it…”
Gould: “Macro-Evolution occurs so fast - we cannot see it.”
Lol…good point :crazy_face:

So-called 4 billion years has passed, and I still don’t see anything that’s half one thing ,and half another… walking around . 🙂
 
Last edited:
I still don’t see anything that’s half one thing ,and half another… walking around…
So if we saw something that swims and lives underwater and could walk and breathe on land and even climb trees I guess that would be ‘half one thing ,and half another… walking around…’

And what if we saw a bird that lived entirely on the ground but could swim like a fish? Or a mammal that lives entirely in the ocean. Or another that isn’t a bird but can fly. Or one that lives on land, swims like a fish and lays eggs like a bird? Or a bird that swims underwater?

Take your blinkers off, Techno. You only see what you want to see.
 
Darwin: “Evolution occurs so slow - we cannot see it…”
Gould: “Macro-Evolution occurs so fast - we cannot see it.”
Yeah…evolution works slow, except when it has to overcome a sudden environmental challenge. Then it can spit out fit offspring overnight. :roll_eyes:
 
Last edited:
40.png
EndTimes:
Darwin: “Evolution occurs so slow - we cannot see it…”
Gould: “Macro-Evolution occurs so fast - we cannot see it.”
Yeah…evolution works slow, except when it has to overcome an sudden environmental challenge. Then it can spit out fit offspring overnight.
I love it when you nail various explanations of evolution. Without realising it.
 
40.png
Techno2000:
I still don’t see anything that’s half one thing ,and half another… walking around…
So if we saw something that swims and lives underwater and could walk and breathe on land and even climb trees I guess that would be ‘half one thing ,and half another… walking around…’

And what if we saw a bird that lived entirely on the ground but could swim like a fish? Or a mammal that lives entirely in the ocean. Or another that isn’t a bird but can fly. Or one that lives on land, swims like a fish and lays eggs like a bird? Or a bird that swims underwater?

Take your blinkers off, Techno. You only see what you want to see.
You know what I mean. Rabbits aren’t producing offspring with new little wings poking out of their fur.Or baby pigs with new fins growing on their head. 🙂
 
40.png
Wozza:
40.png
Techno2000:
I still don’t see anything that’s half one thing ,and half another… walking around…
So if we saw something that swims and lives underwater and could walk and breathe on land and even climb trees I guess that would be ‘half one thing ,and half another… walking around…’

And what if we saw a bird that lived entirely on the ground but could swim like a fish? Or a mammal that lives entirely in the ocean. Or another that isn’t a bird but can fly. Or one that lives on land, swims like a fish and lays eggs like a bird? Or a bird that swims underwater?

Take your blinkers off, Techno. You only see what you want to see.
You know what I mean. Rabbits aren’t producing offspring with new little wings poking out of their fur.Or baby pigs with new fins growing on their head. 🙂
A young child who thought that evolution worked like that might make a comment like that. But as someone said:
Yeah…evolution works slow…
 
Last edited:
A young child who thought that evolution worked like that might make a comment like that. But as someone said:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) Techno2000:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Yes, I’ve read that quote in the original … and many times on these forums from those who think it undermines evolutionary theory.
Are who suggesting that you know more than Gould about Paleontology? 🙂
No, I am suggesting that this quote has appeared frequently in creationist posts on these forums and this could mean …

1 that these creationists are close readers of Professor Gould’s work and when they came across this passage were struck with the thought that perhaps he has given the game away

or

2 that they have seen the quote on a creationist website somewhere which persuades them that he has given the game away

and

3 that the first explanation is somewhat less likely than the second.
 
Yeah…evolution works slow, except when it has to overcome a sudden environmental challenge. Then it can spit out fit offspring overnight. :roll_eyes:
You got it!

Dame Evolution keeps a very close eye upon all critters and the challenges they face… 😃

"Need a Longer Neck Mr. & Mrs. Giraffe? No Problem! Dame Evolution to the Rescue!" 🤣
 
Lol…good point :crazy_face:

So-called 4 billion years has passed, and I still don’t see anything that’s half one thing ,and half another… walking around . 🙂
Yep! That’ll fly (wings suddenly needed - go to it, Evolution) right over the heads of some reading this.

All creatures - have fully formed and extremely complex sub-assemblies - such as eyesight…

We’ve never ever observed any examples which were “transitionally” on their way to completion…

De Novo :crazy_face:
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
hahahaha… Even as a thought experiment - a one million point mutation couldn’t come close to “evolving” the Organism preceding the whale into the whale.
 
40.png
Techno2000:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
hahahaha… Even as a thought experiment - a one million point mutation couldn’t come close to “evolving” the Organism preceding the whale into the whale.
Evolution produces organisms that are fit/unfit fit/unfit fit/unfit . Now try and ask a detailed question like what was it exactly that caused the die out of all those previously fit transitional whales.

You can’t get a detailed answer, because Darwinism thrives on vagueness.
 
rossum…gonna chime in with the marbled crayfish.

PS IT’S STILL A CRAYFISH
Somebody called?

I have better examples of transitional features. What does a fish lack? Lungs and legs. Lungfish (Dipnoi) have lungs (obviously) and can survive for months away from water. Coelacanths have proto-legs, basically fins-on-stumps. Both Coelacanths and Dipnoi are Sarcopterygian fish. Guess what else is included in the Sarcopterygii?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top