Search results

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/wiredscience/2010/02/dinosaur_feathers2-660x460.jpg Picture of the known colour of a dinosaurs feathers based on comparing the pigments and such found microscopicly on the feathers.

may have been mentioned already. But majority of snakes are venemous, and none/few are poisenous, there is a difference. recently been found out that majority of snakes are venemous, and ironicly so are a large chunk of the lizards that snakes are believed to have evolved from. So pretty neat...

Actually it's more specificly what do creationists call new information, I know what technically would be called new information, but you won't get many creationists agreeing with your definition, because that is so easily shown to be true. So I was trying to pinpoint a example of what they...

Wow your reading comprehension is very much wanting I'm sorry to say. If you read what I said and some how got random chance out of it, then sorry your dense. Learn something about chemistry and how things happen, and understand how abiogenesis works before you make a fool out of yourself any...

random chance is a strawman since if abiogenesis is possible, then it will be by chemical reactions and through events that can happen without chance. Is it chance that h2o forms? It's simple chemistry. If abiogensis can't be done through chemistry and physics, and requires chance, then your...

Well to be fair it's not impossible, I understand evolution and such without taking higher then grade 11 biology, and to be even farer, none of what I learnt about evolution came from there, I just spent 3 years studying everything I can about it. So it's not impossible, but people have to be...

*laughs* for some reason I thought you says, "Shows us." and was coming here to see if I could refute you :>

heh ouch :> you said better most of what I was trying to say with problems of the probability argument. Well said.

Your forgetting natural selection and nature, wich seems to be your largest failure here. Mutations are weeded out in higher life forms because we arn't dealing with a single specimen of a single species. We are dealing with all of nature. Sure a mutation might not effect the animals ability...

*chuckles* now thats irony :> I started this topic because I've heard people use the information argument and was trying to get a straight answer, like Skywriting many creationist and such like to information only degrades without undertstanding what they are talking about, so trying to get a...

Well again the problem here is A) information is a bad word, it doesn't explain anything, and is interchangable, I would really suggest using actual words pertenant to DNA. Genes, allele, base pairs. Information isn't something quantifiable or definable within DNA. It's a anology, and a...

Well thats really why information fails, and is just a catch phrase like kinds, it's a goal post shifting word that means what ever is convient to try to disprove evolution. Why the first definition I got from you was compatible with evolution, and the last one I got from you wich was...

I've been idly watching this since I said what I could at the time, but I think it's at this point pretty clear that I've made my point. The attempts to show that evolution doesn't make new information, always shoots itself in the foot, because they define new information in such a way, that...

I think a big problem is they don't know enough about what they are arguing for, like with this one about probability I think he just heard the argument on a webpage and is trying to translate what I'm saying and the argument is saying without actually understanding either.

Well no one knows what the posabilities are, but point is, if life arose from abiogenesis the chances of it happening here are 1 in 1, and if life didn't or couldn't it's 0 in 0. Those are the only two posabilities. Now the probabilities again no one, least of all you or any creationist knows...

A no scientist that accepts evolution thinks those are the only two posabilities, so your credability wich was already questionable were shot. But the problem here is probability again is meaningless without knowing all factors. The chances of the right chemicals combing in the right order...

Okay sorry I once again thought I was talking to someone that had a clue what they were talking about, should learn not to do that here. If every time a lightning bolt hits the surface for instance there is a chance the chemicals combine, then every single lightning bolt is a chance if 1000 hit...

Heh I mentioned elsewherethat my feeling of his excuse will be that he will use his Nineva speach to come up with a reason. As god gave nineva a chance after they repented, he gave us a chance here as our message going out saved enough people that for now the rapture is delayed, but only tempoarily

It is nosense, because your ignoring the sheer number of varialbles and chances. Even if it can't be done chemically and has to be sheer random combinations, you have to calculate some things. A) how many possible combinations can happen, not every atton/molecule will connect together the...

Actually I already caught his excuse. Notice he keeps bringing up Nineva, I suspect he's going to claim that enough people were converted and repented that Jesus held back his wrath and the world will not end.