Tiktaalik ha ha

[Black Akuma]

There is one person I am ignoring. I sometimes miss posts as I am
gone from the computer and at work.

Yeah, see, that would be a point...if I hadn't quoted Loudmouth in my own post. I don't see how you could miss it.

Or I just choose not to respond.

You must realize how annoying that is, to make a post to someone, only to have them completely ignore it for some arbitrary, unexplained reason. Why do you choose to ignore certain points?

 

[Black Akuma]

They are still birds.

Completely missing/ignoring the point.

You said, in that topic, that birds are of two kinds - flightless and flying.

In this topic, you're saying that flightless birds came from flying birds after leaving the Ark.

So, by the standard you set, that would be an example of one 'kind' changing into another 'kind'. Do you deny this?

 

[Black Akuma]

Just to make sure you see it, I'll repost it, too.

They are still not found in Devonian strata. How do you explain that?

Also, I'd thank you to respond to the other points in my post that you cut out. And maybe that post from the topic about mountain movement I made, too. And the one in the topic about figs. And...

 

[Atheos canadensis]

There is one person I am ignoring. I sometimes miss posts as I am
gone from the computer and at work. Or I just choose not to respond.

And it just so happens that you choose not to respond to all the points for which you have no rebuttal. Funny how that works.

 

[EternalDragon]

Completely missing/ignoring the point.

You said, in that topic, that birds are of two kinds - flightless and flying.

In this topic, you're saying that flightless birds came from flying birds after leaving the Ark.

So, by the standard you set, that would be an example of one 'kind' changing into another 'kind'. Do you deny this?

I'm not saying anything. I showed some research that "some" birds lost the flying ability when they had it before.

The only example that shows, to me, is that some birds lost the ability to fly. Nothing got better. The bird is still a bird.

But yes, creatures did change and produced variety within their species and quite rapidly.

 

[Atheos canadensis]

I'm not saying anything. I showed some research that "some" birds lost the flying ability when they had it before.

The only example that shows, to me, is that some birds lost the ability to fly. Nothing got better. The bird is still a bird.

But yes, creatures did change and produced variety within their species and quite rapidly.

You seem to have forgotten once again to address the issue of the organization of the fossil record. You may remember that you ran away from your Fig Wasp thread when challenged by this organization. Are you ready to deal with it yet?

 

[Black Akuma]

I showed some research that "some" birds lost the flying ability when they had it before.

Actually, no, you didn't. You posted two news articles, one of which you couldn't have possibly read unless you have an account with Nat Geo, which I strongly doubt you do. That's not research. Scientists do research, not journalists, and they print their research in scientific journals, neither of which you posted. So.

The only example that shows, to me, is that some birds lost the ability to fly. Nothing got better

How do you figure that? By what standard is, say, a hummingbird better than an ostrich? Or an eagle better than a penguin? Or a vulture better than a roadrunner? Are chickens better than emus just because they can come closer to flying than emus can?

Did it ever occur to you that there might actually be an advantage to losing flight? A reason why it would evolve that way?

But yes, creatures did change and produced variety within their species and quite rapidly.

Your evidence for this is...what, exactly? And you're still ignoring my questions about the distribution of these species, as well as others.

 

[Black Akuma]

The only example that shows, to me, is that some birds lost the ability to fly

Also, it doesn't matter if it got better or not.

Once again.

You said that flying and non-flying birds are two 'kinds'.

Now you're saying that, after leaving the Ark, flying birds lost their ability to fly.

By your own standard, the one that you set up, this is an example of one kind giving rise to another kind...which most creationists say is impossible. Do you disagree?

 

[biggles53]

"Kinds" can take a hike.....

Ring species..........game over....

 

[dad]

Then how do you explain the lack of dolphins,

OK, so let's look at your details. Dolphins would not have been able to fossilize one would think. Therefore they would not be in the record.

whales, flowering trees, grasses, mammals, reptiles, birds,

...Would not have been able to fossilize one would think. Therefore they would not be in the record.

and dinosaurs in Devonian strata?

Dinos may have been created, or maybe (my opinion thus far) evolved from birds and reptiles. So they would probably not have evolved yet in the Devonian!

Why do we find forests of simple ferns, but not a single forest of elms or oaks?

Seed bearing plants came later. It is possible that the method of reproduction for plants like oaks or flowers was not the same as today, so we may not have remains like we expect from that time!

Why can't we find a single grassland environment in the Devonian?

Same as above. The reproduction method would likely not have involved pollen, and etc. Therefore how would we know there was grass then!!??

 

[dad]

No one claimed anything different.

We are talking about Mustangs, F150s and Model Ts. None of those were around on the day of creation. So a four-year can tell what scene we are talking about.

Great, maybe find one to post your ideas clearly!

 

[dad]

What is the evidence for a different state past?

Past states do not have direct evidence. It is a way to view evidence we do have! You use the same state past belief in viewing.

 

[Loudmouth]

OK, so let's look at your details. Dolphins would not have been able to fossilize one would think.

Why would one think that? You are making stuff up.

Dinos may have been created, or maybe (my opinion thus far) evolved from birds and reptiles. So they would probably not have evolved yet in the Devonian!

The dinosaurs were not created until after the flood?

Seed bearing plants came later. It is possible that the method of reproduction for plants like oaks or flowers was not the same as today, so we may not have remains like we expect from that time!

Seriously? Are you insane? You are saying that tens of thousands of flowering plants all evolved after the flood?

Same as above. The reproduction method would likely not have involved pollen, and etc. Therefore how would we know there was grass then!!??

dad has officially been defeated.

 

[Loudmouth]

Past states do not have direct evidence. It is a way to view evidence we do have! You use the same state past belief in viewing.

That is all your make believe.

 

[dad]

Indeed. The vast amount of evidence against floodism is very compelling. I'm glad to hear you admit to that.

I did debate on EVC for quite awhile, and was barraged by things I wasn't aware of like the coconino sandstone etc etc. I gave em a run for their money, but the best I could hope for back then was a tie. Often it was a loss basically also. I needed better ammo, once I saw exactly what I was up against. It caused me many sleepless nights, and agonizing prayers.

 

[dad]

Define a lot. How many species of animals did we have then? How many humans were there in Noah's day?

I would assume billions. But we don't really know do we? We do know that there was maybe at least 1600 years from creation till the flood. If there were lions and men dying in that time, would you think the flood hid them all?

On the other hand.....

Millions of years of human evolution with populations of say 100,000 people would leave lots of fossil evidence. How many do we have today? A couple hundred? Maybe a bit more if you count the ones they say are part ape but are just humans. But not that much.

Not sure of your point. I agree there was no long age evolution.

Not sure where you are in terms of what is the correct view of the past.

I believe in a real creation a little over 6000 years ago, and a real worldwide flood 1600 or whatever years after that. I believe there were lots of fossils before the flood, and lots after.

 

[dad]

You can see evolution.

The End.

So? I can see birds too, and cars.

 

[dad]

care to back up your claim with peer reviewed material?

Angels agree that the bible is true, so did the apostles and Jesus, and the prophets and holy men of all ages. My peers all agree with creation and the flood.

 

[dad]

That is all your make believe.

No, your past state that you claim has no proof. It is just a belief you impose on evidence.

 

[dad]

Why would one think that? You are making stuff up.

I would think that because of the evidence. They are not fossilized yet I know that fish and animals and man was here right from the beginning. God did say man would return to dust. That seems to have been the norm.

The dinosaurs were not created until after the flood?

If they were created it would have been the same time as all animals. In that case, they would be what I call 'Eden's creatures'. Trilobites and the stuff in the fossil record early on were not that. So, man and Eden's creatures we might call them, could not fossilize until after the nature change, which was after the flood. Yes, some exceptions exist. The conditions on earth, and with evolving and adapting creatures may have allowed fossilization. But that is as I say the exception to the rule, and I don't want to go there in this thread.

I said my opinion is that dinos evolved from birds and maybe reptiles also. Rapid evolution could allow that. That might explain why they were not in the ark, if they were not the kind, but the birds were!!!!!!!!

Seriously? Are you insane? You are saying that tens of thousands of flowering plants all evolved after the flood?

I am saying that all flowering plants more or less are an adaptation of plants to this state! There were flowers and trees and grass before we see them in the record!