*Tony Shalhoub
Being such a PC person I'd think you'd at least spell an ethnic name correctly... sheesh!
Evolution - A serious question.
- Thread starter TroutBum
- Start date
*Tony Shalhoub
Being such a PC person I'd think you'd at least spell an ethnic name correctly... sheesh!
On the important topic, I find Psych regularly funny but occasionally flat, when Monk ws often brilliant but somethimes stale.
There are bald mice.
What does "new attribute" mean, and why would a mouse have it? Are we back to saltationism (aka hopless monsters) again?
https://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
We share an ancestral population with all primates, so you could call than an early primate. Before that, there would not be a name in the vernacular.
This actually helps my point. 35% is on the low end for eukaryotes, meaning we're not that closely related to daffodils.
I fully acknowledge the evidence is consistent with a trickster God who wants us to believe in evlution falsely. Perhaps Loki, or Coyote.
The are sequences for the same protiens doing the same things. There is no progress involved.
All eukaryotes convert ADP to ATP in the same way, burn oxygen in the same way, etc. No progress there.
We recognize the black & white TV as being designed because it looks like other designed things.
There are bald mice.
What does "new attribute" mean, and why would a mouse have it? Are we back to saltationism (aka hopless monsters) again?
https://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
We share an ancestral population with all primates, so you could call than an early primate. Before that, there would not be a name in the vernacular.
This actually helps my point. 35% is on the low end for eukaryotes, meaning we're not that closely related to daffodils.
I fully acknowledge the evidence is consistent with a trickster God who wants us to believe in evlution falsely. Perhaps Loki, or Coyote.
The are sequences for the same protiens doing the same things. There is no progress involved.
All eukaryotes convert ADP to ATP in the same way, burn oxygen in the same way, etc. No progress there.
We recognize the black & white TV as being designed because it looks like other designed things.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
bald=hairless coat
You claim mice came from a "generic mammal." In order to go from a "generic mammal" to a mouse you have to gain new attributes or you are still a "generic mammal" and not a mouse.
No, you claim we share an "ancestral population" with all primates. "Before that" ain't in the vernacular because it doesn't exist in the fossil record, and that is where your "predictions" (aka ridiculous speculation) fall apart.
No **** Sherlock.
If God wanted us to believe in Darwinism he would have put some transitional species in the fossil record and put mountains of fossil evidence for all the random mutations that went wrong.
He probably has a good laugh that Darwiniacs continue to insist our beautifully designed eyes were nothing more than a series of random mutations.
You mean like how a toilet or a window does the same thing in the same way in different designs of buildings?
I think you are starting to get it now.
We also know coordinated mechanisms/systems that look designed don't just get that way accidentally.
Having a coat made from hair, and a "hairless coat" (whatever that is supposed to be), is still an example of different attributes. Parents don't need to have an attribure for their offspring to have it.
Why do you think that is a problem? Children often have attributes that parents do not. My son has an autism-spectrum disorder, which neither I nor my wife have.
So, you didn't read the link I offered, or didn't understand it, or disagree for reasons not based in evidence. Fine by me.
What're the vernacular names for Palaechthon and Cantius?
They are there.
That would be good evidence against the fossil record. Almost all the "random mutations that went wrong" would result in creatures that died long before being hatched/born. Obviously, Anansi is much cleverer than that.
These would be the human eyes full of kludges and cobbled-together ideas? Or, were you talking about camera eyes? Those are certainly beautifully designed.
More like how a fireplace does different things in a brick house and in a log cabin.
I've known for a long time that we identify design by comparison to other design. Of course, if you really want to allow comparison of designs, biological designs are incredibly inefficient by comparisns to humans. So, your designer is beomces the Incompetant Designer. That's why the ID movement is trying to find a different design argument. They don't wnt to believe in the Incompetent God.
Actually, they can and do all the time. There is no design behind the water cycle.
Does anyone know if this was ever discussed here on the board. I'm just listening to this podcast now that covers this absolutely amazing discovery.
https://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/09/11/2015/meet-homo-naledi-another-long-lost-relative.html
Also, that lady at the beginning is one bad ***!
https://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/09/11/2015/meet-homo-naledi-another-long-lost-relative.html
Also, that lady at the beginning is one bad ***!
Oh stop. Everyone knows that evolution is on par with the Atkins diet.
#longerfad
God created us and no amount of links can change that.
Btw, God created the links, indirectly, by creation of man in the first place.
#mindblown
Ever stop to think the reason their brains were the size of an orange was due to no light and no stimuli?
#dumbspelunkers
#longerfad
God created us and no amount of links can change that.
Btw, God created the links, indirectly, by creation of man in the first place.
#mindblown
Ever stop to think the reason their brains were the size of an orange was due to no light and no stimuli?
#dumbspelunkers
Okay, I have a serious question.
I don't get into science as much as I maybe should.
Can someone explain or link (God-provided) an explanation of infinite universe.
You know, the old kindergarten question about how does space neither stop nor go on forever.
I still don't know!
I don't get into science as much as I maybe should.
Can someone explain or link (God-provided) an explanation of infinite universe.
You know, the old kindergarten question about how does space neither stop nor go on forever.
I still don't know!
We don't know enough to answer any part of that question with any degree of certainty. As far as we can tell, it is flat and finite. I don't feel like explaining anything, but here's a link that discusses it a bit:
https://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-resources/universe-infinite-big-universe/
Thanks for the link. I will definitely read as time permits.
Until then, how the hell is space finite? lol
Why wouldn't it be? It had a beginning, didn't it? It is then of a finite age. And depending on what happened in the moment that followed creation, it is probably finite in size. It has been expanding like a balloon from a single point ever since.