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.
i dont think so. the felidae family contain about 40 species of cats. but as you can see in this figure, most of them can interbreed with othehr species:
this is why "kind" is more close to the family level rather than the species one. (taken fron my other discussion)
Parrots and humans do not both have wings.so if both parrot and human were also shared the same genes in this trait you will say that evolution is false?
So you accept that all sorts of evolution occurs, just with arbitrary - sorry, Scripture-based - constraints?what are you talking about?
If they were identical in parrots and humans but different in other primates and birds, then yes that wouldn't be possible in evolution.so if both parrot and human were also shared the same genes in this trait you will say that evolution is false?
Hey look! It's a made up story from a religious person... and another made up story from a religious person!Does this look familiar?
Evolution is paganism with a scientific explanation.
You don't see the connection?Hey look! It's a made up story from a religious person... and another made up story from a religious person!
I can see it, but given that one is a caricature/strawman from an evolution opponent it renders the "clever" comparison useless.You don't see the connection?
If they were identical in parrots and humans but different in other primates and birds, then yes that wouldn't be possible in evolution.
Just false.not realy. we can claim in this case for convergent evolution at the genetic level or we can claim that other primates loss their ability to speak. no problem for evolution here.
not realy. we can claim in this case for convergent evolution at the genetic level or we can claim that other primates loss their ability to speak. no problem for evolution here.
1) There are many thousands of differences between the genetic structures that generate feathers, reptile scales, fish scales and mammal hair.so give me your calculation please. thanks.
again: where do you see any problem? here is a similar case:1) There are many thousands of differences between the genetic structures that generate feathers, reptile scales, fish scales and mammal hair.
2) There are merely dozens of mutations per reproduction.
3) This means to get a specific genetic structure a significant number of random mutations must happen in a similar order to get the same phenotype and genotype.
Or just ignoring scientific definitions post hoc....Post hoc rationalizations are just awesome.
Or convergent design during creation????again: where do you see any problem? here is a similar case:
Convergent evolution seen in hundreds of genes
“These results imply that convergent molecular evolution is much more widespread than previously recognized,”
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?