PsychoSarah
Chaotic Neutral
My counter to that argument is basically, who ever said the "parent species" had to go extinct to give rise to a new one?
Upvote
0
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.
Yeah I know. A version of the "why are there still monkeys" argument. But that is all I will say about that. Biology is not my area of interest, even though I am certified to teach it. Is it yours?
So will the honorable poster admit, then, that these 'flatworms' that you say look quite a bit like them that are the ancestors in your belief system, had sex? Would you further admit that the resut of this reproduction was you?
I mean the article called the ancestor flatworms. If you have another name for these flatworms, we can use that! Tomato--tomatoe.
The fossil record of soft bodied creatures is minimal.
"Platyhelminthes classes as well as the phylum may be paraphyletic. Fossil records of Platyhelminthes are minimal."
http://science.kennesaw.edu/~jdirnber/InvertZoo/LecPlatyhel/Platyhel.html
You may not be in a position to know if there were varieties of flatworms living back in the day when Granny Flatworm and Grandpa Flatworm we busy making you!! (in your religion)
I submit that believing animals and man came about as a result of sex between creatures like these is an affront to intelligence and dignity.
You have no way of knowing how or if the varieties of flatworms that lived in Noah's day changed a lot or not! You point seems to be 'gee if there were millions of imaginary years, things golly gee must have changed a lot'Well, the overall structure if flatworms hasn't changed a whole lot, but species just don't continue unchanged for hundreds of millions of years enough to be the same before and after.
So? I could find monkeys or tigers in different places now that are not the same species!!!!Even coelacanths, while very much resembling very old fossils, are not the same species.
Yeah I know. A version of the "why are there still monkeys" argument.
Why do you find that so disturbing.?
False, nothing supports your flatworm to man religion.All you have given is an argument from ignorance.
Yes, our perhaps billion year ancestors may have looked very much like modern flatworms.
Remember we have evidence that supports our beliefs
and all you have is a book written by uneducated shepherds.
I find it pathetic that people can be so deluded as to think that mankind was not a creation of the Almighty, but something so absurd as flatworms having sex. False, nothing supports your flatworm to man religion.
So you don't know. We get that! But hey, it was a good excuse to throw in some reference to 'billion year' belief. Such a strange fanatical cult are those so called science pulpit pounders.
Evidence that flatworms having sex resulted in mankind!!!?? Do not pretend here. You don't even know what the flatworms looked like!!! Pathetic.
I understand that a part of the modern education system programming includes an automatic reaction and response to badmouth the bible. What we can observe from the educated here and elsewhere is an automatic reflex response that displays a distinct dark, desperate, and deliberate, deep delirious denial.
Many of the words of the New Testament came down from Christ. He was the Good Shepherd, and had all the wisdom of God.
There IS NO area of expertise in science that involves more than the present state fishbowl!
Why should there NOT be monkeys or flatworms??
Forget that 'area of expertise' business also. There IS NO area of expertise in science that involves more than the present state fishbowl!
You have no way of knowing how or if the varieties of flatworms that lived in Noah's day changed a lot or not! You point seems to be 'gee if there were millions of imaginary years, things golly gee must have changed a lot'
So? I could find monkeys or tigers in different places now that are not the same species!!!!
No, I am spearing the claims of so called science on creation so they can't flop around...just flop period.In other words you are just flopping around.
My parents were not flatworms. What a theory!!!Yet your very life depends upon this "fishbowl". Aren't you being a bit of a hypocrite by using the science that you deny?
Show us a fossil of the flatworm that the article claimed was the oldest living ancestor to man???No, we do have some fossils of past life forms you know, I can look at them and see the difference.
Not understanding exactly what incited this second comment.
My parents were not flatworms. What a theory!!!
Show us a fossil of the flatworm that the article claimed was the oldest living ancestor to man???
Behold the theory, lurkers!!!!!!!!!!!!! They are for real in believing this stuff.
Now what could be behind the inspiration that man came from some belly crawler??
Ge 3:14 -The Lord God said to the serpent,"Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life.
Behold the inspiration!
Show us a fossil of the flatworm that the article claimed was the oldest living ancestor to man???
Behold the theory, lurkers!!!!!!!!!!!!! They are for real in believing this stuff.
Now what could be behind the inspiration that man came from some belly crawler??
Ge 3:14 -The Lord God said to the serpent,"Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life.
Behold the inspiration!
I take it you admit having descended from flatworms then. God disagree with you.If we go back enough generations they were.
...
That would convince me that back in the time and different nature when a lot of the things that could fossilize did so, the creature you call Tiktalik was among them. It sure doesn't convince me flatworms having sex resulted in mankind!There are countless fossils in between. What good would one fossil do for you? We could show you that of Tiktallik. Would that convince you?
Exactly! You have no clue yest you believe! Not by evidence or by sight, but by faith alone.dad, how the heck would I be able to tell exactly which flatworm was the one we last shared ancestry with?
So never then. No possible way. We get it. By pure faith alone. Flatwomsexdunnit.The only way to pin point which exact one that was with that kind of accuracy is if we had the DNA of both humans and all the possible flatworms at that time.
No. That can't tell you man was a product of worms. That is religion misusing DNA.With only human and modern flatworm DNA, the best we can do is tell it was flatworms.
No proof whatsoever then. OK. Hallelujah.That particular flatworm which we last shared ancestry with might not have even left behind fossils.
That would convince me that back in the time and different nature when a lot of the things that could fossilize did so, the creature you call Tiktalik was among them. It sure doesn't convince me flatworms having sex resulted in mankind!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?