Chimp and human species look nothing alike

[TheQuietRiot]

Yes, I have seen it several times as it is one of my favourite films, especially the 1969 version. One thing I did notice is that the animals in the film were not animals, they were cartoons, produced by man for our entertainment so there is no comparison at all. Unless of course you consider mankind are cartoons. Mid you sometimes I think that atheists are a joke so you might be right on that one.

Good catch, it was a joke.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Either that or your classification system is skewed, blued and tattooed. God could have made fish that could also traverse land. The rapid evolving in the former times would allow a fish to adapt to land fast.... you have no way of knowing.

It actually took millions of years. It sounds like you're using a 6000 year old earth model, which is incorrect. Tiktaalik is a 375 million year old fossil. The earth is 4.54 billion years old. This is demonstrated in radiometric dating.

 

[Loudmouth]

Everything that is written is man's word except the bible as the writers of it wrote as the Spirit gave it to them.

So writes a human.

 

[Loudmouth]

Who cares why?

I do. Why would DNA work differently in the past?

 

[Strathos]

You know, I was just wondering something. We have a specific creation and evolution forum, but it seems that 50% of the threads in the main P&LS forum are about creation/evolution. So what's the point of even having separate forums?

 

[dad]

It actually took millions of years. It sounds like you're using a 6000 year old earth model, which is incorrect. Tiktaalik is a 375 million year old fossil. The earth is 4.54 billion years old. This is demonstrated in radiometric dating.

The earth is 6000 years old,creation took 6 days, and evolving after that was very fast. Now, prove your ages, or zip it.

 

[dad]

I do. Why would DNA work differently in the past?

DNA obeys laws, and as atoms go...so goes dna. Amazing how you don't know much about most dna

 

[dad]

You know, I was just wondering something. We have a specific creation and evolution forum, but it seems that 50% of the threads in the main P&LS forum are about creation/evolution. So what's the point of even having separate forums?

Physical science touches on creation issues. They inevitably come up.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

The earth is 6000 years old,creation took 6 days, and evolving after that was very fast. Now, prove your ages, or zip it.

Easily. The earth is 4.54 billion years old.
Here is how the research is conducted to determine the age of the earth. The evidence is abundant and conclusive.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dalrymple/scientific_age_earth.html

Dating method used: Radiometric

"Spontaneous breakdown or decay of atomic nuclei, termed radioactive decay, is the basis for all radiometric dating methods."
http://geomaps.wr.usgs.gov/parks/gtime/ageofearth.html

Geology is pretty cool.

 

[The Barbarian]

Sometimes, not knowing when you've been whipped is admirable.

Sometimes, though...

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

They don't know what this non coding DNA really does or how. They know a few things about some of the things they think it may do They are just starting to realize it does something after all!! Hilarious.

Why hilarious?

They know that some of it is functional (regulatory rather than coding). They know that large portions of it are not necessary for normal function (mice live normally with large chunks of non-coding DNA removed), but that it is also a potent source of new genes through mutation.

There's still a lot unknown about it, but we know a lot more with each passing year - the technology is new, there's a lot of non-coding DNA, and these studies take time.

 

[As I was saying]

So writes a human.

As he was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

 

[As I was saying]

Good catch, it was a joke.

Yes, I am good at catching that is why I was playing cricket for a long time.

 

[dad]

Easily. The earth is 4.54 billion years old.
Here is how the research is conducted to determine the age of the earth. The evidence is abundant and conclusive.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dalrymple/scientific_age_earth.html

Dating method used: Radiometric

"Spontaneous breakdown or decay of atomic nuclei, termed radioactive decay, is the basis for all radiometric dating methods."
http://geomaps.wr.usgs.gov/parks/gtime/ageofearth.html

Geology is pretty cool.

Except that who says deacy existed in Noah's day? You? Let's see you prove that our laws existed, or your dates are garbage. See my signature picture to see a bible based time that decay possible started.

 

[dad]

Why hilarious?

They know that some of it is functional (regulatory rather than coding). They know that large portions of it are not necessary for normal function (mice live normally with large chunks of non-coding DNA removed), but that it is also a potent source of new genes through mutation.

There's still a lot unknown about it, but we know a lot more with each passing year - the technology is new, there's a lot of non-coding DNA, and these studies take time.

No, it would take more than time. Science keeps making the same mistakes, time won't help. It is hilarious that big mouth science claims no creation by God as scripture teaches, and that Genesis is basically all a lie. Yet the foundation they base things on is unknown shifting sand beneath their feet. they do not know much about most dna! Yet they claim wonders about dna in the far past, that they don't know existed..orthat it existed and worked like present day dna! They don't even know how most present day dna works! How could one get more ignorant??

 

[As I was saying]

Not true. This is the most tiring argument ever. Every single fossil we find IS A TRANSITIONAL.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

Want to see the transitional fossil from fish to amphibian? We have it. It's name is Tiktaalik You should stop using this argument. It's incredibly dishonest.

I thought I would humour you and read the article which is from Wikipedia, the atheist bible and can be contributed to by anyone, even you for the purpose of promoting a fanciful ideology. I have taken three quotes from it and as you can see from the bold, it is all speculation.

They are thought to be close to the origins of spiders.

This hypothesis was based on the supposed presence of unique spider features such as silk-producing spinnerets and the opening of a venom gland on the fang of the chelicera.

Attercopus fimbriunguis is not a spider, but it is probably close to the type of animals which did give rise to modern spiders today.

Tiktaalik has a possibility of being a representative of the evolutionary transition from fish to amphibians. Not please note, probability, but possibility which means that it also means that it is possible that it is NOT WHAT THE STATEMENT CLAIMS.

Face up to it Jon, you have been sold a pup which you have fallen for hook, line and sinker.

When I read stuff like this, I am amazed that atheists have got a problem with the bible.

“Scientism is not the same thing as science. Science is a blessing, but scientism is a curse. Science, I mean what practicing scientists actually do, is acutely and admirably aware of its limits, and humbly admits to the provisional character of its conclusions; but scientism is dogmatic, and peddles certainties. It is always at the ready with the solution to every problem, because it believes that the solution to every problem is a scientific one, and so it gives scientific answers to non-scientific questions. Owing to its preference for totalistic explanation, scientism transforms science into an ideology, which is of course a betrayal of the experimental and empirical spirit.”

Leon Wieseltier, Perhaps Culture is Now the Counterculture: A Defense of the Humanities, 19 May 2013; www.newrepublic.com/article/113299/leon-wieseltier-commencement-speech-brandeis-university-2013 [Wieseltier self-describes as a humanist.]

 

[TheQuietRiot]

Yes, I am good at catching that is why I was playing cricket for a long time.

You must have the patience of a saint

 

[As I was saying]

You must have the patience of a saint

When you have two children and nine grandchildren, patience is one of the first requirements.

 

[durangodawood]

Except that who says deacy existed in Noah's day? You? Let's see you prove that our laws existed, or your dates are garbage. See my signature picture to see a bible based time that decay possible started.

The continuity of physical laws and constants has been observed ever since observation started. You'd need a good reason to think things were otherwise at some point. There is no good reason.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Except that who says deacy existed in Noah's day? You? Let's see you prove that our laws existed, or your dates are garbage. See my signature picture to see a bible based time that decay possible started.

What reason do you have to think that physical laws were different at certain points? You don't. You timeline is a claim. Can you demonstrate it's accurate without circular reasoning and using scripture?? The mental gymnastics you do is astonishing.
It's not even worth debating since you have demonstrated you have no idea what evolution is or how it works. I could throw all the evidence in the world in front of you and you'll just resort to cognitive dissonance and move the goal posts. H