Are there any creationists willing to debate?

[goat37]

so peter, let me get this straight. you are telling me that because two animals have similar toes and similar teeth, that one obviously evolved into another. this makes tons of sense.

let me guess what your next point will be....whales have fins, and birds have wings. they look kind of similar, wings and fins do. also, whales have eyes, and so do birds, therefore whales must have evolved into birds.

its the only logical explanation for two species to be so similar.

Actually, fossil records show that Whales had four-legged ancestors.
It is listed in one of the topics in this article : http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&catID=2

And also, 250 million years ago, mammals and birds did not exist. So therefore, mammals must have come from non-mammals and birds came from non-birds. (archeopteryx, anyone?)

Also, next time you feel the need to take a vacation, try going to the Galapagos Islands... and tell me how many of the creatures over there got the way they are.

 

[Uvas]

I wonder if there is such thing as an acceptable transitional fossil...

 

[lucaspa]

I wonder if there is such thing as an acceptable transitional fossil...

Of course there is. See the transitional series in the picture below.

Now, if you want to deny evidence, you can always do that. For creationISTS, there is no fossil that would be acceptable to THEM. But this is a personal problem, not a problem with the transitional.

 

[JohnR7]

Actually, fossil records show that Whales had four-legged ancestors.

Oh, here is another gem I can add to my list of "evolutionists say the funnyest things".

 

[pudmuddle]

(No, I'm not Jewish, I do believe he has provided the saviour, however, at the time it was written Jesus hadn't been born yet- wblastyn )

" In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made throught Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made."
John 1:1-3

The word order in Greek shows that the Word was "God" not "a god". This is a straightforward declaration of Christ's deity, since John uses Word to refer to Jesus. The Word was of the very quality of God, while still retaining His personal distinction from the Father.

Jesus was in the picture from the beginning.

 

[goat37]

Oh, here is another gem I can add to my list of "evolutionists say the funnyest things".

Whales had four-legged ancestors that walked on land, and creatures known as Ambulocetus and Rodhocetus helped to make that transition [see "The Mammals That Conquered the Seas," by Kate Wong; Scientific American, May].

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=5&catID=2

I am glad you found it amusing John, but it is true... unlike your theory of a young earth.

 

[LOVEequalsLXIX]

how come the intermediate stage animals didnt survive?
probly they got upset when people made fun of their retarded names like ambulocetus. who names someone walking whale?

 

[Pete Harcoff]

I am glad you found it amusing John, but it is true... unlike your theory of a young earth.

Just FYI, John's not a YEC.

 

[goat37]

Just FYI, John's not a YEC.

well in that case... substitute "young earth" for... theory of creation.

 

[Aaron11]

Whales had four-legged ancestors that walked on land, and creatures known as Ambulocetus and Rodhocetus helped to make that transition [see "The Mammals That Conquered the Seas," by Kate Wong; Scientific American, May].

"Wong" means "completely incorrect" in caveman language. Coincidence that this Kate lady's name is Wong? I don't think so. It almost seems prophetic.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

edited: forget it

 

[Aaron11]

I'm not racist, I love cavemen.

 

[troodon]

"Wong" means "completely incorrect" in caveman language. Coincidence that this Kate lady's name is Wong? I don't think so. It almost seems prophetic.

You know, making fun of an author's name might make their evidence disappear in your mind but the rest of us try and use legitimate criteria in our thought processes.

If you want to have a constructive conversation, pointing out why the skeletal features of ambulocetus and rodhocetus are not transitional between land mammals and whales might be a good start.

Or you can continue to pretend that transitional species do not exist despite evidence being shown right to your face. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

If you want to have a constructive conversation, pointing out why the skeletal features of ambulocetus and rodhocetus are not transitional between land mammals and whales might be a good start.

I predict that will not happen. Which is ironic, given the reason I started this thread in the first place.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

If you want to have a constructive conversation, pointing out why the skeletal features of ambulocetus and rodhocetus are not transitional between land mammals and whales might be a good start.

i find it rather amusing that your "evidence" is merely a magazine article saying that these two species are transitional species. i laugh at your pathetic excuse for evidence. hahahahahahaha!!!!!!

 

[LOVEequalsLXIX]

ive never even seen a real dinosaur.

 

[JohnR7]

well in that case... substitute "young earth" for... theory of creation.

The church I attend believes in the GAP theory. It does not get discussed much on here. Actually, the OEC does not get talked about much either.

 

[ifriit]

I think we've got our evidence of humanity's descent from primates--all I see from the creationists here is poo-flinging.

 

[Nathan Poe]

The church I attend believes in the GAP theory. It does not get discussed much on here. Actually, the OEC does not get talked about much either.

Well, in the few cases when I've seen OEC get discussed, it usually gets bashed by YECs for its "heresy." That tends to scare off the OECs

And your GAP theory, at least as much as you've explained here, doesn't seem to have a leg to stand on with either the Bible or science. So nobody's going to discuss it except you.

 

[Megachihuahua]

I think we've got our evidence of humanity's descent from primates--all I see from the creationists here is poo-flinging.

The only argument from evolutionists:
The evidence is there!
That evidence is obviously fake.
You're an idiot.
It is quite obvious that god (if he exists) used evolution
Are there any evos willing to debate?(without name-calling?)