• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

A Question for Creationists

Status
Not open for further replies.

biggles53

Junior Member
Mar 5, 2008
2,819
63
72
Pottsville, NSW, Australia
✟25,841.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
AU-Greens
Well there was never a fossil found of that particular evolution. Meaning if giraffes came from alligators or whatever it is, there was never a fossil found of half giraffe and half alligator.

Hello...?........Kirk Cameron...?..........is that you....?
 
Upvote 0
F

frogman2x

Guest
Yeah, but why 10? I'm just trying to figure out your reasoning.

I told you wlhy, but it isn't importaqnqt in the disussion unless you think there are less then 10 steps for an species to evolve into a different species. I didn't count them but in your whale chart there was about 10 steps from hippo to whale.

Yes, it did. It had numerous similarities that show progression - the obvious ones, like the skull and the feet, as well as the tail and the inner ear region.

You showed them in different species on the chart. You did not show them on each suceeding species.

You could have just typed 'whale' in your find bar, and it would have stared you in the face.

It would not show how what is claimed is BIOLOGICALLY possible. Prove me wrong.

Regardless, sometimes it DOES happen. Occasionally, whales and dolphins are born with these limbs to varying degrees, like here.


Mutation.


They were already aquatic when they lost their legs. They spent a great deal of time in the water and were proficient and frequent swimmers. Losing their legs made them BETTER swimmers.

No the wern't.


That's not all I said, now was it?

No. You are very good a saying, your record on porvidient the evidence for what you say is lacking.

Yes, I do. I presented this evidence. That you find unsatisfactory does not negate its existence.

You sayng itg is evidence does not make it evidence. You have yet to produce any BIOLOGICAL evidence to show how indohyus and pakicetus lost their legs. To say lack of use is absurd and it certainly is not a BIOILOGICAL explanation. Not only can you not explaain HOW, you have no eplanation as to WHY this should happen. The ones with legs were surviving quite well because they had legs.

Another thing you can't explain is why did the hippo and the whale survive but everything inbetween did not?

Not if they're in an environment where legs slow them down. Like the water.

You have no evidence they ever were. That is a necessary conclusion or evolution is exposed for the scientific fraud it is. Land, dog-like animals need their legs to survive.

I'm not making anything up.







Bactrian camels.

Wild Bactrian camel videos, photos and facts - Camelus ferus - ARKive

Sea Lions. Seals.


No you are not making us things. You are accepting by faith alone what others have made up. It is necessary for evolution to survive to have an explanation as to how whales came into existence. There really is no
BIOLOGICAL explanation but a link is critical, all the evos have jumped on the Gingrich bandwagon, patted him on the back and thannked him for saving the theory.


Of course some sea mammals might be able to drink sea water but I doubt that any of them that do not live in the water most of the time(sea turtles for example)would survive doing it for an extended time. There is no evidence that pakicetus spent much time in the sea and it is very unlikely it would ever drink sea water and live.

I don't recall saying that drinking saltwater would cause that.

I don't either. If I accused you of that, I ws in error.


Yes, there is. It all deals with biology, so by definition it's biological evidence.

None of it is biological.

I'm sure a great many things are puzzling to you.

You are right, but how an offspring receives the traits it has is not one of them. That seems to be someting you are confused about





Your pictures do not explain how packicetus lost its nose. You can't blame that one on lack of use. Also the 3 pictures of the blowhole in different postions on the skull is better explained by saying they are different species that were created that way.[/quote][/quote]
 
Upvote 0
F

frogman2x

Guest

You included a DOG-LIKE animal, and I think that is the term Gringrich used, in your hippo to whale chart. This DOG-LIKE creature, according to yoou did evolve into a whale-like creature.

Let me make my position clear. Nothing ever evolved into a whale. They were created that way and ALWAYS produce after their kind. That can be proved.
 
Upvote 0
F

frogman2x

Guest
I know that I have explained this before, but not lately, and not since discovering that you are willing to acknowledge the creation of new alleles for old genes.

I don't remember acknowedging that.


It doesn't matter when it happens. It can only happen to a gene the parent were givng to their child.


You seem to be beating around the bush. If a genes is destgroyed, the trait will not be passed on. The new gene must also have originated in one or both parents. What evidene do you have as to what characteristic this new gene caused? Do you have a source I can check for info on this new gene?
 
Upvote 0
F

frogman2x

Guest
 
Upvote 0
F

frogman2x

Guest
 
Upvote 0
F

frogman2x

Guest
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,098
52,636
Guam
✟5,146,606.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0
F

frogman2x

Guest
Mutation.
You and I and everybody has 50-150 differences in our DNA that were not present in either parent.
Recombination.
You may have a phenotypic trait which is due to a recessive gene carried by your parents which neither of them expressed.

I am not talking about DNA. I am talking about how traits are gotten by the offspring.

While our DNA is different, tells us that we are not related biologically but we are related by species---homo sapian.
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Since matter cannot create itself out of nothing, it must have a Creator.

What is your explanation of how the moon came to be.

Creators can't come out of nothing either, at least not in my experience of any being that has ever "created" anything.
 
Upvote 0

OllieFranz

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
5,328
351
✟31,048.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I don't remember acknowedging that.

Not in those words, but you do akmowledge that a mutation in a gene {which is the same as the creation of a new allele for that gene) can produce a new trait, like albinism or hemophilia, and that this new trait can be heritable.

It doesn't matter when it happens. It can only happen to a gene the parent were givng to their child.

But if a mutation destroys a gene and replaces it with a new, completely different gene, then although he inherited the new gene from his parent, his parent does not have the gene -- or more specifically the parent only has the gene in one cell, the seminal cell that mutated, and in the gametes (sperm or eggs) that that cell creates. At the same time, he does not inherit the old gene which was destroyed in the seminal cell. At least not from that parent.

You seem to be beating around the bush. If a genes is destgroyed, the trait will not be passed on.

He will inherit the corresponding gene from the other parent, but it will be unpaired. Likewise, the new gene will not have a pair-mate. Unpaired genes can still express themselves in traits, but are more susceptible to damage, because there is not as much redundancy.

The new gene must also have originated in one or both parents.

As I explained above.

What evidene do you have as to what characteristic this new gene caused? Do you have a source I can check for info on this new gene?

Lets start with the Wikipedia article, and if you read and understand that, we can look at more scholarly works.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,098
52,636
Guam
✟5,146,606.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
"What can be said without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens

"God said it, that settles it." - Christian Motto
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.