questions about people

[Story]

teck while you go find faulty information on the internet by isolated scientists that no one cares about, and about things you have never been taught, im going to bed. this discussion is old. you belive in your ideas, ill belive in mine.


pz

 

[TecK NeeX]

teck the fact is, noyou havent. if your evidence as you put it, is so great, why arent we being taught this? why .

i am being taught that, just cause you arent does not mean no one is

another way to look at it is this, take a virus, which is a living entity, they evolve a immunity to certain medicines. same concept.

umm no that doesnt prove shit but nice try

YOU havent answered anything, youve posted some bs from a scientist no one even knows about or worries about because his results and his studies were never accepted by the science community and have been rendered moot about as quickly as he gets his results out.

lol and that is exactly what you did you with those so called transitional fossils that no ones heard of and are not found in the fossil record

where is ur answer about species today that didnt exist millions of years ago, or plants? where did they come from?

i explained that

and heres another your telling me God created parasites that live by killing other creatures or cause cholera, or river blindness? i dont think so, these evolved their way of survival, how come there are no mention of these parasites in the bible during the story of creation?

wtf? many animals live by killing other creatures how the fuck does that prove evolution, didnt know you were this desperate!. oh and i dont believe in the bible.

your "hellish world of blood and gore" is not an answer, its bullshit

just cause you think its bullshit doesnt mean it is now does it? i find it alot more believable than your all by chance bullshit

Fish to Amphibians
Hynerpeton
Acanthostega
Ichthyostega
Eryops
Densignathus rowei
Elignerpeton
Fish Similar to Sauripterus

those arent fossils. these arent a 'midway fossil of a fish and a dinosuar' etc. none have been found man. Fish and amphibians emerged on the Earth suddenly and without any predecessors. Evolutionists cannot explain the origin of either of these living classes and neither can you. there is not a single transitional link indicating that evolution occurred between these invertebrates and fish. Actually, the evolution of invertebrates that have their hard tissues outside their bodies and no skeleton into bony fish that have theirs in the middle of their bodies is a very big transformation which should have left a great number of transitional links.

All THREE subdivisions of the bony fishes first appear in the fossil record at approximately the same time… How did they originate? What allowed them to diverge so widely?.. And why is there no trace of earlier, intermediate forms?

your information comes a from a chick who is not very well informed in this field. talkorigins.org huh? its pretty funny that you attack my sources and call em bullshit and yet you did the exact same with talkorigins lol how pathetic

a very good refutaion to talkorigins.org

http://www.thedarwinpapers.com/oldsite/number6/number6.htm

 

[KFatal]

^tech check your pm

 

[TecK NeeX]

teck while you go find faulty information on the internet by isolated scientists that no one cares about, and about things you have never been taught, im going to bed. this discussion is old. you belive in your ideas, ill belive in mine.pz

lol arent you so glad that glockmatic posted that talk origins website huh? you may think it saved your ass from total humiliation but it didnt

 

[Story]

whta are you talking about, i dont visit glocks website..

those fossils ARE in the fossil record, what are you talking about, go to any university my friend. they did not live at the same time either WTF are you on about these are mutliple examples of transitions, ur not going to see it all at once in one species

your explanation on current species falls flat, someone "created" them because the world was bloody nice one aesop. im still waiting for a real answer

how a virus evolves is the same concept,

endosymbiont has yet to be disproven, im still waiting.

those are common fossils in the fossil record, again, nice try genius, they are transitional fossils, not to mention not all transitional species are extinct. this also extends to plants..

the "creator" made an animal whose primary function is to go into a humans eyeball, and reproduce in there until they go blind and die sure thing


the difference between me and you is this. im educated i know what im talking about, you do not, u copy others work off the internet. and then repeat what they say. basically teck you dont know what your talking about. you can keep babbling in here and visiting websites.


go home and go to sleep.

pz

 

[TecK NeeX]

whta are you talking about, i dont visit glocks website..

sure you do, you never mentioned these so-called imaginary transitional fossils up until glockmatic posted the website

those fossils ARE in the fossil record, what are you talking about, go to any university my friend. they did not live at the same time either WTF are you on about these are mutliple examples of transitions, ur not going to see it all at once in one species

no they are not. i did go to the university of alberta so what? show me these fossils you speak of? you do know that the chick behind the website you got those imaginary transitional fossils said that 'few or none the speciation events are preserved' right? what she means by this is that sometimes the specimens are not thought to be directly ancestral to the next youngest fossil ( i.e they may be cousins, uncles rather than parents) lol wow

your explanation on current species falls flat, someone "created" them because the world was bloody nice one aesop. im still waiting for a real answer

no it makes perfect sence to me and it does to about 3/4 of the worlds population

endosymbiont has yet to be disproven, im still waiting.

yes it has ive disproved it in the other thread and all you had in reply was "teck you do not know what you're talkin about" remember that? why bother with disproving it again if that is all im going to get in reply?

those are common fossils in the fossil record, again, nice try genius, they are transitional fossils, not to mention not all transitional species are extinct. this also extends to plants..

than how come evolutionts are so quite about these imaginary transitional fossils? huh, how come many honest and edcuated evolutionists today still admit there are no TF found and they are simply waiting for them to be discovered in the future? the works of MS. hunts in talkorigins are the works of a desperate person out for one goal to fool the weak minds, and apparently she has fooled you man.

the "creator" made an animal whose primary function is to go into a humans eyeball, and reproduce in there until they go blind and die sure thing

tell me why not?

the difference between me and you is this. im educated i know what im talking about, you do not, u copy others work off the internet. and then repeat what they say. basically teck you dont know what your talking about. you can keep babbling in here and visiting websites.

you educated? yeah ok....

 

[TecK NeeX]

Synapsid reptiles to mammals
Protoclepsydrops
Clepsydrops
Dimetrodon
Procynosuchus earliest Cynodont

umm you do know that there are great differences between these two classes?Mammals are warm-blooded animals (this means they can generate their own heat and maintain it at a steady level), they give live birth, they suckle their young, and their bodies are covered in fur or hair. Reptiles, on the other hand, are cold-blooded (i.e., they cannot generate heat, and their body temperature changes according to the external temperature), they lay eggs, they do not suckle their young, and their bodies are covered in scales.

The Myth of reptile Evolution

Until recently, an imaginary sequence supposedly showing the evolution of reptiles was advanced as the principal fossil evidence for the theory of evolution. Today, however, many evolutionists themselves frankly admit that the scenario of reptile evolution is bankrupt. In 1990, a four-day symposium was held at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, with 150 evolutionists in attendance, to discuss the problems with gradualistic evolutionary theory. In addressing the meeting, evolutionist Boyce Rensberger noted that the scenario of the evolution of the reptiles adn mammals has no foundation in the fossil record

 

[TecK NeeX]

Diapsid reptiles to birds
Coelophysis
Deinonychus
Oviraptor
Archeopteryx

No evolutionist was/is able to explain the huge differences between these two different living classes. In terms of such features as their skeleton structure, lung systems, and warm-blooded metabolism, birds are very different from reptiles. Another trait that poses an insurmountable gap between birds and reptiles is the feathers of birds which have a form entirely peculiar to them.

the remaining article

The bodies of reptiles are covered with scales, whereas the bodies of birds are covered with feathers. Since evolutionists consider reptiles the ancestor of birds, they are obliged to claim that bird feathers have evolved from reptile

A professor of physiology and neurobiology from the University of Connecticut, A.H. Brush, accepts this reality although he is an evolutionist: "Every feature from gene structure and organization, to development, morphogenesis and tissue organization is different (in feathers and scales)."1 Moreover, Prof. Brush examines the protein structure of bird feathers and argues that it is "unique among vertebrates".2

There is no fossil evidence to prove that bird feathers evolved from reptile scales. On the contrary, "feathers appear suddenly in the fossil record, as an'undeniably unique' character distinguishing birds" as Prof. Brush states.3 Besides, in reptiles, no epidermal structure has yet been detected that provides an origin for bird feathers.4

In 1996, paleontologists made abuzz about fossils of a so-called feathered dinosaur, called Sinosauropteryx. However, in 1997, it was revealed that these fossils had nothing to do with birds and that they were not modern feathers.5

On the other hand, when we examine bird feathers closely, we come across a very complex design that cannot be explained by any evolutionary process. The famous ornithologist Alan Feduccia states that "every feature of them has aerodynamic functions. They are extremely light, have the ability to lift up which increases in lower speeds, and may return to their previous position very easily". Then he continues, "I cannot really understand how an organ perfectly designed for flight may have emerged for another need at the beginning".6

The design of feathers also compelled Charles Darwin ponder them. Moreover, the perfect aesthetics of the peafowl's feathers had made him "sick" (his own words). In a letter he wrote to Asa Gray on April 3, 1860, he said "I remember well the time when the thought of the eye made me cold all over, but I have got over this stage of complaint..."And then continued: "...and now trifling particulars of structure often make me very uncomfortable. The sight of a feather in a peacock's tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!" 7

you really need to update yourself on this topic and stop living in darwins time man

 

[Glockmatic]

no it makes perfect sence to me and it does to about 3/4 of the worlds population

It also made perfect sense to egyptians that the pharoah turned into Osiris after his death, and it made perfect sense to the chinese that their emperor was the manifestation of the Jade Emperor.

tell me why not?

You said that God wiped out the dinosaurs because it was a bloody place where death was everywhere, yet he created parasites that cause only death and destruction.

 

[kman_69]

adapting to environment.....Evolution

 

[TecK NeeX]

It also made perfect sense to egyptians that the pharoah turned into Osiris after his death, and it made perfect sense to the chinese that their emperor was the manifestation of the Jade Emperor.

umm your point? the shit above makes alot more sence to me than something that popped out of no where and by chance/coincidence it started evolving into billions and billions of species. it appears that this single celled organism had more power than God himself.

You said that God wiped out the dinosaurs because it was a bloody place where death was everywhere, yet he created parasites that cause only death and destruction.

not only that but also to make room for us humans, and created animals we can CONTAIN or handle in place.

and let me guess it was coincidence that dinousaurs just happened to evolve into creatures much smaller and much less destructive when humans cropped up huh?

 

[Glockmatic]

umm your point?

point is people believed in that shit, and now we know it was false. Saying that "God HAD to have made everyone, a lot of people believe in it!" doesn't mean its true.

not only that but also to make room for us humans, and created animals we can CONTAIN in place.

and let me guess it was coincidence that dinousaurs just happened to evolve into creatures much smaller and much less destructive when humans cropped up huh?

making stuff up now? God killed dinosaurs to leave room for us...right.

 

[TecK NeeX]

point is people believed in that shit, and now we know it was false. Saying that "God HAD to have made everyone, a lot of people believe in it!" doesn't mean its true.

yeah just like evolution, people believed it to be true and now we know it was/is false

making stuff up now? God killed dinosaurs to leave room for us...right.

wow you must have put alot of thought into that one, you totaly out did me with that

 

[Glockmatic]

yeah just like evolution, people believed it to be true and now we know it was/is false

no, we don't know if its false, if it was false they wouldn't teach it in schools.

wow you must have put alot of thought into that one, you totaly out did me with that

oops sorry i didn't use the rolling eyes emote like you always do

 

[Glockmatic]

this thread is like the other threads we had about this, its just the same shit. You're religious and i'm not, we can't change each others minds about it.

 

[Jokerman]

it appears that this single celled organism had more power than God himself.

God is a single-celled organism.

And it's not the cell that had the power, it's the forces of nature.

and let me guess it was coincidence that dinousaurs just happened to evolve into creatures much smaller and much less destructive when humans cropped up huh?

The dinosaur form became extinct between 144 and 60 million years ago. Any thing resembling man came on the scene no earlier than 3 million years ago. That's a sixty million year gap. Hence, no need for evolutionary coincidences or the hand of God here, just slow natural selection at work as usual.

 

[TecK NeeX]

my problem with evolution or natural selection is that it would have us believe that for example some long past creature developed wings so it could fly, escape enemies, and capture food. that horses developed long legs so they could run fast, and graze. that lizards lost their legs and became snakes so as to move faster in certain terrains, on and on and on. What underlying force or intelligence explains this? How would a wingless bird know how to grow wings? How would a short-legged horse know to grow larger legs to enable better mobility? How would any species "know" how to perfectly mutate the exact addition or alteration in body form which would give it the new capability?

The only scientific evidence available to explain this is NONE. all evolutionists could come up with to explain this phenomenon is that all genetic mutations were accidental, and that things such as physical organs, entire bodily systems, and organic mechanisms developed as the result of extremely long series of genetic accidents one after another in an endless sequence of convenient mistakes.

Also like ive said before if the theory of evolution were true, it would be necessary to find remnants of all the unsuccessful mutations and adaptations which failed to compete successfully and eventually died out. But fossil records have not detected evidence of all or even any of these many failed species and biological versions which would have to be there if the theory of natural selection were true. NONE are present in the fossil record, how come we have collected billions and billions of fossils and not a single one of the fossils belong to the intermediate species? where are all the missing links? the stages of evolution such as from a bird without wings to a bird with wings? where is the bird with a small stub of a wing? or a half developed wing? They don’t exist. this is true for every species and sub species. the absence of these life forms puts the entire theory into severe question. So how can the ideas be accurate? they can't!

 

[TecK NeeX]

im really beginning to believe that this theory is no different than any religion out there, people believe these theories just as they believe any thing else which has no real basis in fact, and in this way it takes on the color of a "religion" more than "science". faith is defined as "belief in things unseen or unproven by sense evidence". there is much more of this faith sort of thing in the believers of evolution and darwinism than anything approaching valid "scientific evidence"

 

[Jurhum]

my problem with evolution or natural selection is that it would have us believe that for example some long past creature developed wings so it could fly, escape enemies, and capture food. that horses developed long legs so they could run fast, and graze. that lizards lost their legs and became snakes so as to move faster in certain terrains, on and on and on. What underlying force or intelligence explains this? How would a wingless bird know how to grow wings? How would a short-legged horse know to grow larger legs to enable better mobility? How would any species "know" how to perfectly mutate the exact addition or alteration in body form which would give it the new capability?

The only scientific evidence available to explain this is NONE. all evolutionists could come up with to explain this phenomenon is that all genetic mutations were accidental, and that things such as physical organs, entire bodily systems, and organic mechanisms developed as the result of extremely long series of genetic accidents one after another in an endless sequence of convenient mistakes.

Also like ive said before if the theory of evolution were true, it would be necessary to find remnants of all the unsuccessful mutations and adaptations which failed to compete successfully and eventually died out. But fossil records have not detected evidence of all or even any of these many failed species and biological versions which would have to be there if the theory of natural selection were true. NONE are present in the fossil record, how come we have collected billions and billions of fossils and not a single one of the fossils belong to the intermediate species? where are all the missing links? the stages of evolution such as from a bird without wings to a bird with wings? where is the bird with a small stub of a wing? or a half developed wing? They don’t exist. this is true for every species and sub species. the absence of these life forms puts the entire theory into severe question. So how can the ideas be accurate? they can't!

Great post. :thumb:

 

[Jokerman]

my problem with evolution or natural selection is that it would have us believe that for example some long past creature developed wings so it could fly, escape enemies, and capture food. that horses developed long legs so they could run fast, and graze. that lizards lost their legs and became snakes so as to move faster in certain terrains, on and on and on. What underlying force or intelligence explains this? How would a wingless bird know how to grow wings? How would a short-legged horse know to grow larger legs to enable better mobility? How would any species "know" how to perfectly mutate the exact addition or alteration in body form which would give it the new capability?

The only scientific evidence available to explain this is NONE. all evolutionists could come up with to explain this phenomenon is that all genetic mutations were accidental, and that things such as physical organs, entire bodily systems, and organic mechanisms developed as the result of extremely long series of genetic accidents one after another in an endless sequence of convenient mistakes.

Also like ive said before if the theory of evolution were true, it would be necessary to find remnants of all the unsuccessful mutations and adaptations which failed to compete successfully and eventually died out. But fossil records have not detected evidence of all or even any of these many failed species and biological versions which would have to be there if the theory of natural selection were true. NONE are present in the fossil record, how come we have collected billions and billions of fossils and not a single one of the fossils belong to the intermediate species? where are all the missing links? the stages of evolution such as from a bird without wings to a bird with wings? where is the bird with a small stub of a wing? or a half developed wing? They don’t exist. this is true for every species and sub species. the absence of these life forms puts the entire theory into severe question. So how can the ideas be accurate? they can't!

Your lack of understanding evolutionary theory and the evidence for it is apparent in this entire post. Instead of reading religious websites that agree with your religious agenda and seem to be approaching the debate in a "scientific" way, by selectively lifting quotes by scientists that seem to agree with their agenda, why don't you read a few good books on evolutionary science by respected scientists in the field and then decide?

There's plenty of evidence in the fossil record but your favorite religious websites have distorted it or not understood it, and so come up with valid-sounding arguments (like the one you present) that really have no meaning to one informed on the subject.

I'm not going to write a paper here on this for someone who wouldn't even believe it if God Himself told him it was correct. Just read some books on it.