Ach wrote:
Are you even remotely familiar with the evidence? There is genetic evidence, anatomical evidence, tons of transitional fossils, and more. Most of all, to claim otherwise is to claim that God is a deceptive and incompetent designer. It's much more than similarities, as anyone even remotely familiar with the field knows. Do you understand the scent pseudogenes in whales, and the embryological limb and tooth development in whales, just a name a few, which aren't even fossils?
Darklite wrote:
I agree that it looks like Ach needs to read up quite a bit on this (especially due to his "similarities" and "philosophy" comments).
However, I give him a pass for the "antelopes" line. After all, antelopes are arteriodactyls, as are the ancestors of whales. Though the mesonychid anscestors of whales didn't look like antelopes (I've never seen an antelope try to catch and eat another animal, for instance), they did look a little more like antelopes than they looked like modern whales. I also agree with creationists who say that evolution claims we evolved from apes. The australopithicenes were pretty similar to chimps in basic appearance, and had anscestors that were even more chimp like. I prefer they say "evolution claims we evolved from ancient apes", as it's a little more clear.
His main point with that line was that it is a large amount of change from a land animal to a whale. I agree with that point - it certainly is a lot of change - that's why it took millions of years.
Papias
Are you even remotely familiar with the evidence? There is genetic evidence, anatomical evidence, tons of transitional fossils, and more. Most of all, to claim otherwise is to claim that God is a deceptive and incompetent designer. It's much more than similarities, as anyone even remotely familiar with the field knows. Do you understand the scent pseudogenes in whales, and the embryological limb and tooth development in whales, just a name a few, which aren't even fossils?
Darklite wrote:
I agree that it looks like Ach needs to read up quite a bit on this (especially due to his "similarities" and "philosophy" comments).
However, I give him a pass for the "antelopes" line. After all, antelopes are arteriodactyls, as are the ancestors of whales. Though the mesonychid anscestors of whales didn't look like antelopes (I've never seen an antelope try to catch and eat another animal, for instance), they did look a little more like antelopes than they looked like modern whales. I also agree with creationists who say that evolution claims we evolved from apes. The australopithicenes were pretty similar to chimps in basic appearance, and had anscestors that were even more chimp like. I prefer they say "evolution claims we evolved from ancient apes", as it's a little more clear.
His main point with that line was that it is a large amount of change from a land animal to a whale. I agree with that point - it certainly is a lot of change - that's why it took millions of years.
Papias
Upvote
0
