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.
Sharks and dolphins. Therefore evolution is false.You know, there's stuff inside the things, too. Two organisms can look very similar, but be very different in their underlying structure. A sugar glider looks a lot like a squirrel, and if you just compared pictures, you would assume it was that...but it's not. It's not even close to being a squirrel.
What do you do, then?
Loss of species and variation isn't a positive thing for evolution.
It isn't a problem for speciation with the survivors however, which acts on characteristics already programmed in.
I like how you are trying to twist it around and muddle things. There is no such thing as a transitional between an antelope and an antelope. Or a wolf and a dog. Or a crow and a pigeon. Just variation within the species.
That doesn't even make sense. Evolution does not have feelings or goals.
Prove that organisms have characteristics already programmed in.
A dog is a Canis lupus familiaris. A wolf is a Canis lupus. That is your scientists classification of those animals. So there you have it.So you are saying that one day a wolf just gave birth to a chihuahua? Really?
I think you have just proven that you have no business talking about biology.
Also, how do you determine if an individual organism is a wolf or not? Tell us how you do it?
Well, science says "We don't know yet". Here is my answer:
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
A dog is a Canis lupus familiaris. A wolf is a Canis lupus. That is your scientists classification of those animals. So there you have it.
But according to you everything is in a nested hierarchy and shares a common ancestry so it really doesn't matter if we can tell them apart or not.
Personally I would go with the bible and say that fish are one kind of animal, cattle are another, dinosaurs are another, humans are another, birds are another, insects are another, etc. Which exhibited some speciation along the way.
Well, science says "We don't know yet". Here is my answer:
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
A dog is a Canis lupus familiaris. A wolf is a Canis lupus. That is your scientists classification of those animals. So there you have it.
But according to you everything is in a nested hierarchy and shares a common ancestry so it really doesn't matter if we can tell them apart or not.
Personally I would go with the bible and say that fish are one kind of animal, cattle are another, dinosaurs are another, humans are another, birds are another, insects are another, etc. Which exhibited some speciation along the way.
Evidence that any of this is true?
How do you determine if a dead animal belongs to Canis lupus or not? Remember, you can't use similarities.
Huh? You have separate species in nested hierarchies.
How do you decide if a dead organism belongs to any of those categories without using similarities?
What assumptions?
The ones you asked about in your previous post. Is this like
Groundhog Day where you keep asking me the same questions?
Personally I would go with the bible and say that fish are one kind of animal
Personally I would go with the bible and say that fish are one kind of animal, cattle are another, dinosaurs are another, humans are another, birds are another, insects are another, etc.
But the bible counts whales as a fish, which they aren't.
Please bear in mind that Linnaeus had not yet completed his work on the classification of species when the old testament was written.
Doesn't excuse all the biology fails in the bible.
I'm sorry, Sarah, but in this instance I have to agree with the other side. Linnaean taxonomy is only one man-made way of organizing lots of unrelated facts about lots of unrelated traits in lots of unrelated (or so distantly related as to be functionally meaningless) organisms. It is already being replaced by the nested hierarchies of Cladism.
In the case of whales, and bats, the classification system used in the Bible is not recorded in full, but it is clear that the category names are not the simple "fish" or "birds" that translate them, but rather something more along the lines "sea creatures," or "flying things."
There are passages that do call into question their compatibility with science, but these are not them.
I was actually agreeing that categories aren't a flaw in the bible as far as biology goes. Although, I guess I could have made that more clear. I should have said "that the bible doesn't categorize life as we do today might not be an issue, but it doesn't excuse the many other biology fails in the bible".
Well, we can go along with that, after all, grasshoppers do have six legs instead of four.
Well, we can go along with that, after all, grasshoppers do have six legs instead of four.
They do only have four legs for moving. And two specialized limbs for jumping. The bible is quite accurate. Your statement above in incorrect.
"Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing, that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; (including) the locust . . . the beetle . . . and the grasshopper after his kind" (Leviticus 11:21,22).
They do only have four legs for moving. And two specialized limbs for jumping. The bible is quite accurate. Your statement above in incorrect.
"Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing, that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; (including) the locust . . . the beetle . . . and the grasshopper after his kind" (Leviticus 11:21,22).
Doesn't excuse all the biology fails in the bible.
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?