Dinosaur Duck Discovered!!

[USincognito]

Four billion years, eight million living species, 8.2 million scientists, and NOT ONE even expects any of these 8 million species to speciate,

Actually any speices could speciate. Some will just plug along without much change. Some, as I mentioned, will undergo geographic isolation (see the London Underground mosquitos) or the Italian Wall Lizard or Hawthorn flies ), some will undergo sexual selection, some will adjust to environmental changes (see Darwin's finches), etc.

evolve into something better,

Evolution is not about "better". Evolution is only about most adapted to one's environment. Most humans would consider Great Cats to be "better" than rodents, but most great cat populations are in decline while there are several hundred million rats and mice.

or a different species like man supposedly evolved from gorillas.

For the last time, humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor with gorillas about 7-10 million years ago. No one claims that humans evolved directly from gorillas so I'd suggest not repeating that any more.

But when asked: "What species is that drawing you have of "Lucy"?
The answer, .. it's a human. So Lucy the human evolved into a human, wow, mind boggling science we have here. Let me tell my children: "Look kids, Lucy was a human, we don't need God anymore, .. Yaay!

1. "Lucy" is not a species.
2. We have several thousand specimens of Au. afarensis representing at least a hundred individuals.
3. Au. afarensis is not the only Australopithecine species we have fossils for.
4. Au. afarensis are not H. sapiens and thus are not "human".
5. Evolution specifically nor science in general does not address religion period, much less Christianity.

Yes, Google, debating sites, and YouTube is where I got the evidence that evolution never happened.

I'd recommend checking actual scientific sources instead.

 

[Astrophile]

Dawkins points to a 'T' which he calls a "Common Ancestor"
What species is that "Common Ancestor"?

According to Chimpanzee–human last common ancestor - Wikipedia , it was perhaps something like Orrorin tugenensis and Sahelanthropus tchadensis.

 

[Arius]

I think I understand your issue, what you are saying is that science has been unable to point to a moment when one species changed into another. The exact point!

And you are correct, because that is not how evolutions works.

The easiest way to explain how evolution works is this tried and tested comparison:

A person has a photo taken of him every day from the day he was born to the day he is 60 years old. They are placed in a folder in time order. If someone took out 2 photos one of the person at 5 years old and another of the person at 20. You would be able to say one picture is of a child and another is of a Man. But try as you may would you be able to go back and find two photographs that are the next day to each other and state that this day he was a child and then the next day a man.

Same thing with evolution, small change after small changes over generation after generation and eventually you get a different species.

I know you made yourself believe this explains evolution for you, like I said, I used to be a member of the Christian Religion and viewed the Bible from the Christian Religion's perspective, just like you with this evolution story.
You cannot see the forest if your nose is up against one tree/idea, the same way you cannot view evolution from the Evolution Religion perspective. You will have to step back, .. waaay back, and take another look. I did, you could too.

I wish you guys would read the other responses I made to others too, so you could get a different perspective of the same answer of mine to the problem with this so called Evolution-theory.

Take you example above, the baby, to the age of 20, .. it is still a human. Human baby and human 20 year old adult, the ONLY place this baby becomes another species is your last statement: "Same thing with evolution, small change after small changes over generation after generation and eventually you get a different species"

Here is an example of your "proof of evolution":

So I ask you, what if that last picture of that girl was this;

That is what a different species means, no longer human, .. or no longer gorilla, but one day, either that one species morphed into another species, or she gave birth to another species.

Look, ask Dawkins (The Pope of Evolution): "Sir, in the 4.2 billion years that you have been observing evolution, .. going all the way back to amoeba, and tracking this process up 4 billion years later to us humans, has ANY species of one type ever evolve/change/morph/give birth to another species? Or has a gorilla ever, from the time there were gorillas, has one, or an entire population of them turn into a human?"

The answer continues to be a big "NO! Gorillas don't evolve/speciate into humans, that's stupid, that would actually prove evolution wrong! But what gorillas did evolve/speciate/change into is a mysterious non-existent creature we call 'Common Ancestor'"

But sir, what species is that Common Ancestor?

"Well, since all we have is skull & bones dug up from graves, some archeologists say it is human, and others, that it is a gorilla, no evolutionist scientist dares to pinpoint what the "Common Ancestor" is!
Q. Why?
My answer, which is the unspoken Evolutionists answer: "Because then you'll have a wise Godly man who is not tied down with one of our millions of Religions we invented to keep people from finding God, asking: "how did that gorilla evolve/speciate/morph or give birth to a human?"

Why all this Evolutionist diversion?

Because they know that speciation/evolution of one species, into a completely different species NEVER happened, and will never happen. Just like your example, the human baby became a human adult, just as the eight million species we have living today will remain the species they were created to be. Now yes, because God loves variety, as we see in nature from every tree to the leafs on trees to every snowflake, and every human being different.

But here is how evolution really happened:
1. They, the white skinned TPTB started to call all Negroes, and people of darker skin color "apes", but to do that they had to take them from being created in Gods image as human/man, and put them in the animal category, and start treating them like animals.

2. Call this process "science".

3. Now man believes he is an animal of the ape family, and human is just another kind of ape species. No other proof needed, the "programming/indoctrination has been done. Your Religious faith, which is 'blind faith' has sealed your fate in their hands, this is what you now believe that you, a 'human' are, an animal of the ape family.
The rest is just insult upon insult, spewing hate for God, for the Bible and for those who believe in God and His creation, but worst of all, this is hate on the Evolutionists themselves. Satan hates them too!

If you keep calling a child stupid, ugly, worthless rotten dog, and then treat him like a dog like; give him the left over bones to eat from his siblings plate, keep him out of school, beat him to the inch of his life 'regularly', poison him, starve him and I guarantee that child will certainly believe he is just that, a dumb, stupid, good for nothing, worthless rotten dog, who just don't want to die no matter how many times we poison it, (I know).

The same here, where here are millions of people who been called "animal, an ape, who descended from rats" for hundreds of years, and even treated like animals .. I mean what would you expect?

Don't you see that you gave an example of a human baby, growing, evolving both physically and in wisdom, .. and then at 20 you think he is of another species!? Have you even gave it another thought before you told me this?
No, I bet you didn't, it just came out as naturally as anything else that you are completely indoctrinated to believe. I was there, I was blind too, but now I see and I know the truth, and I reveal it to you free.

 

[USincognito]

Are you now suggesting that Dawkins admits that evolution/speciation of one species into a different species (like the gorilla into a human) happens?

No. Speedwell is saying, "And nothing to do with anything we posted or with anything Dawkins ever said."

Again,
1. Extant species do not evolve into other extant or extinct species. If that happened, then evolution would be falsified.
2. When populations speciate, they never stop being what their ancestors were. That's why Neil Shubin had three chapters to his television version of Your Inner Fish - Your Inner Fish, Your Inner Reptile, and Your Inner Monkey.
3. For the hundredth time, humans (and chimpanzees) share a common ancestor with gorillas. No one is claiming we evolved directly from gorillas.

We had Coco the gorilla who could sign language,

Koko and her male companion Michael were taught sign language by Dr. Patterson. They have nothing to do with evolution.

...how much more time do we need to witness a species make that "Giant Leap to mankind"?

We would never expect any other hominid species to become humans. If we ever observed such a thing it would falsify evolution.

 

[Arius]

The are amazing because the represent the end of a Species, so a Species is separation is where one species is no longer able to mate with another one to produce an offspring. They are genetically different enough that mating is impossible.

The Tiger and Lion are only just the same species, and as both the liger and tigon are unable to produce offspring so tigers and lions are only able to produce 1 generation of offspring.

As I said this is one snap shot of the evolutionary process.

Oh no, don't get me wrong, this makes perfect sense, and if you, or any Evolutionist would show me how in nature this hapopens, I would believe, and leave the idea that some Infinite and Eternal creator intelligently designed and created us, like us men in His image, .. as small creators and intelligent designers, .. I mean how stupid is that, right?

Q. So tell me, what species is the ligor or that tigon?

You are talking Intelligent Design as in I.D. in genetic mutilation, which proves the opposite of evolution; it proves the death of that specie, not the evolution of it.

Yes, genital mutilation does the same thing, and these special species of men are called "eunuchs", they can no longer reproduce. Nevertheless, they are still human.

Now please, .. tell me what "Species is the Common Ancestor" that Dawkins is pointing to, that 'T' in the video?

Thank you.

 

[Rivga]

ake you example above, the baby, to the age of 20, .. it is still a human. Human baby and human 20 year old adult, the ONLY place this baby becomes another species is your last statement: "Same thing with evolution, small change after small changes over generation after generation and eventually you get a different species"

Your interpretation of what I said
"was that when a human turn 20 they change species?" hahahahahaha

It is obvious you are trying to build a strawman,

For those people who are not Arius - You have a human baby and 20 years later a 20 year old adult - Can you name the day that human baby stopped being a baby and became an adult? Would you be able to take a photo out of the daily photo collection and say this photo is the last day Lotte was a baby and the next day she is a toddler?

No - Over the space of 6 months maybe Lotte would have both the traits of a baby and a toddler at the same time.

Evolution acts in the same way, you are unable to define what the exact moment one species stops and becomes another, that moment does not exist.

A simplified way of looking at it:-

QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKLZXCVBNM

Above each letter represents an animal and to its right that animal after it has evolved.
So Q can mate with R to get an offspring, but Q is unable to mate with T to produce an offspring, but R is able to mate with T to get an offspring.

Therefore Q is the same species as W, E and R but not T onwards.
But T is able to mate with E,R,other T, Y, U, I and O, so are the same species.

To be fair species has become a strange concept, and there exists 20+ ways to view species. It is clear though that Arius concept of species is causing issues with how he understands evolution.

 

[Arius]

Of course Dawkins believes that animals evolve.

He does not believe that when he wakes up it is nighttime...nighttime...nighttime...noon! Rather, he expects a gradual dawn will be in the middle.

Likewise he does not believe it was ancestor...same ancestor...same ancestor...same ancestor...Einstein! In between there was a long period of "dawn"'

Dawn turns into day, and you need light to have a dawn. Two different species is like dark and day, the 7 billion people on earth are all day, in the shades of dawn. They all have the 'light' in them.

We went through this with the shades between two colors, and you guys never answered my question: "What species do those shades of colors represent?"
Is blue gorilla, and red human, and the shades between the two individual species of unknown origin?

 

[Speedwell]

Oh no, don't get me wrong, this makes perfect sense, and if you, or any Evolutionist would show me how in nature this hapopens, I would believe, and leave the idea that some Infinite and Eternal creator intelligently designed and created us, like us men in His image.

Why? The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Arius]

The only qualification that you need is to understand what is being said. Alas, you obviously do not possess that qualification.

Uh, yes sir, .. I'sa just a dumb Believer in the truth shown from evidence with substance. I am a heretic when it comes to Religions, that could be the reason you get frustrated with me. You don't deal with non Religious Truthers much do you?

 

[Rivga]

But here is how evolution really happened:
1. They, the white skinned TPTB started to call all Negroes, and people of darker skin color "apes", but to do that they had to take them from being created in Gods image as human/man, and put them in the animal category, and start treating them like animals.

Hate to bring facts into this but Slavery starts of Africans to the Americans 1619 and 1859: Darwin Published On the Origin of Species, Proposing Continual Evolution of Species.

The bible has a lot to answer for with slavery though additionally what religion were the slave owners?
I can safely say most Slaver owners hated the thought of evolution as much as you do.

Leviticus 25:44-46
"'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.

Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ,

Exodus 21:20-21
“When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

Exodus 21:7
“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do.

I come from a major city in the slave triangle and when you visit the homes of people who got rich from Slavery they have bible passages, carved into the wood as decorations and sometimes the above passages.

They had no doubts that what they were doing was fine with God, and the churches they went to backed them up all the way.

 

[Arius]

This is kind of a great example. Simple observations fall into the scientific "law" area of scientific propositions, but it's a bit off. A potential falsifying observation would not be "H2O" being "CO", but that water could be a different chemical composition than H2O and we have been wrong about it all along. As the linked article points out, it's not the likelihood of the potential falsification that is required, but it's mere existence.

I understand mistakes, but are you saying calling H2O CO is science?

Since humans didn't evolve from gorillas the question is a non-sequitur. Humans and chimpanzees evolved from a population that shared common ancestry with our gorilla cousins. Based on the current evidence (that's what a fact means in science) the gorilla/homininae population split occurred about 12-15 million years ago.

Again, .. "What species was that 'Common Ancestor'?"

1. No science advocate here, or any where claims that humans evolved from gorillas.
2. Major speciation events for derived mammals do no occur in, say, 200 years or less.

Exactly, from Evolutionists own mouth: "Evolution/speciation of one species into another species do not occur, .. EVER!"

 

[doubtingmerle]

Dawn turns into day, and you need light to have a dawn. Two different species is like dark and day, the 7 billion people on earth are all day, in the shades of dawn. They all have the 'light' in them.

Were you free associating words here, or trying to actually express a concept?

 

[Rivga]

"What species was that 'Common Ancestor'?"

Again your concept of species is wrong, they exist in a continuum.

Exactly, from Evolutionists own mouth: "Evolution/speciation of one species into another species do not occur, .. EVER!"

Yes because they exist on a Continuum!

A mother does not have a child that is a different species, the same way you don't go to sleep as a baby and wake up the next day as a toddler.

Again try this A very simplified way of looking at it:-

QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKLZXCVBNM

Above each letter represents an animal and to its right that animal after it has evolved.
So Q can mate with R to get an offspring, but Q is unable to mate with T to produce an offspring, but R is able to mate with T to get an offspring.

Therefore Q is the same species as W, E and R but not T onwards.
But T is able to mate with E,R,other T, Y, U, I and O, so are the same species.

 

[Arius]

Evolutionists say all humans are "animals, evolving apes", because the genetic makeup of all human populations is evolving and we are all animals and we are all apes.

Sure, .., but deep down they know who exactly they're calling animals and apes. Look, I shown you from history, and I can show you dozens of videos of Dawkins going around to even Christian Churches calling good, kind down to earth people; animals and apes, and offending them greatly.

God created man from the dust of the earth, the same way he created all the animals, which he created for Adam to have as companions, as pets. Noit to have sex with, that is an abomination to God!

There are still some doctors, scientists, lawyers and even judges alive today that can tell the difference between animal and human. A judge will not sentence you to death for putting down your unwanted crazy pet, but kill your crazy uncle and see what happens!

I bet even you can tell that difference, have you ever disregarded a sign on a grocery store door that said: "Warning: No animals allowed!" ,, and just walk right in ignoring the warning?

Even babies can tell the difference between an animal and a human.

 

[Rivga]

Sure, .., but deep down they know who exactly they're calling animals and apes. Look, I shown you from history, and I can show you dozens of videos of Dawkins going around to even Christian Churches calling good, kind down to earth people; animals and apes, and offending them greatly.

What the guy who invited Dawkins into his church to discuss Evolution, then takes offense when Dawkins explains evolution, yeah Dawkins is so evil!

In the middle east at the moment there is a load of people who take offense at people stating Jesus is the son of God. As it offends them greatly, should the Christians in those parts just stop saying it in Muslim cities?

 

[Arius]

I think it has been explained to you many times. The process is slow and gradual over millions of years.

Just like night becomes day. It is not nighttime...nighttime...nighttime...noon! Rather there is a long stretch of dawn leading up to full daylight.

Just like a baby becomes an adult. Just like an acorn becomes a tree. Just like an eohippus evolved into a horse.

.. and how a gorilla becomes a human, .. I get it. Now show me this "gradient" between gorilla and human, please, ... I am begging you?
I don't mean skulls, but the gradient you guys keep showing me between each different living species that you guys claim have been evolving from the same amoeba for the past 4.2 billion years..

Take your pick from the 8 million today, line them up for me, duck to crocodile, gorilla to human, .. short beaked finches from half an inch beak and the hundreds of lengths between that and the long beaked finch? Show me this "gradient", especially the millions of gradient between red and blue, or black and white where it counts, with the living animals, and that will be considered science!?

What you guys fail to see, or just refuse to admit is that the two species are distinct, like black is to white, the shades between them are just humans, and there is not that many. Each human is easily distinguishable from an animal, even a baby can do it.

And also, we did not come from gorillas. We came from a common ancestor of chimps, gorillas and humans. This ancestor was most likely quite similar to modern apes. It was probably quite gorilla like.

.. most likely, probably, we guess, could of been, might have been, scientists are split on this since it could be either or, .. doesn't sound very scientific.
What was the species of that "Common Ancestor, gorilla or human?" If you don't know, pick one so we can go on to the next question.

In England there are two completely different gulls, the herring gull and the black back gull. If you track the herring gull west you find they can continuously mate as though the same species all around to Asia. If you track the black backs east, you can also follow a string of mating birds back to Asia. And guess what you find in Asia? Both strings mate together as though they are the same species. So you have a continuous string around the globe, with two completely different gulls where the two ends meet.

This is how evolution works. One can easily see that these all descended from a single parent species, but as they spread out, began to evolve in different ways. Should the gulls in North America get wiped out, the ring would be broken, and we would end up with distinct species.

You would end up with gulls.

The same thing could have happened to our ancestor. Different members started to get more chimplike and others more homo-like. Eventually the two lines divided, and went their seperate ways.

Yeah, like across the stream in the next neighborhood, and wha-la, all of a sudden these gorillas started to loose their hair, started to move into caves at night praying for the sun to come up, .. I know, I know, all this going on while just across from them their gorilla cousins are wondering what's happening to the Joneses? "Ugg is loosing his hair, and is wearing a jacket made out of the skin of the food they ate last night?"

Oh please, even after 4 billion years of theatrics like meteor showers, tectonic plates floating away, we have two distinctly different species; humans and gorillas, and chimps and bonobos, crocks and ducks living side by side on the same continent.

Remember from your own words Evolutionists: "Evolution/speciation NEVER happens!"

 

[Arius]

It's not sudden. No generation looks particularly different from the previous.

If the split happened two million years ago, then the two populations of very similar creatures have more then 80000 generations of different random tiny changes and different environmental pressures to lead to two quite different looking primates.


For a human directed example, these two animals have a common ancestor some time after the invention of writing:

Now the pressure and selection are man made, but the random mutations that led to their different shapes come from nature. You'll notice that the shepard looks a lot more like the wolf ancestor then the pug, despite the same number of generations.

Yes, evolving from the primordial soup as amoeba, and after 4.2 Billion years of evolution and they are still dogs. Chimps are still chimps, gorillas are still gorillas, .. and yes, we humans are still humans, except that some white people think they are better than their fellow dark skinned neuighbors and call them names.

Let's get back to the beginning: "What species was the "Common Ancestor" that Dawkins is pointing at in that YouTube video I shown a half a dozen times?

Time 0:21

Thank you

 

[Rivga]

What you guys fail to see, or just refuse to admit is that the two species are distinct, like black is to white, the shades between them are just humans, and there is not that many. Each human is easily distinguishable from an animal, even a baby can do it.

Yeah except DNA studies says you're wrong,

You can spot species due to the fact you are looking at animals that are far apart on the continuum. As I and several others have stated, the closer you get on that continuum the harder it is to identify species.

So again animal A can mate (therefore is a same species) as animal B, animal B can mate with animal C (same species) but animal A is not the same species as animal C.

Therefore we can identify animal A as 1 species and animal C as a species but where do you put animal B? That animal belongs to both species.

Archaeopteryx for instance has huge amount of bird features and huge amount of dinosaur features. The issue of thinking of species as distinct is that go far enough and you'll find a point where a creature fits both species.

Arius interprets the bible as stating there are defined species and therefore the evidence, that has met the scientific burden of proof again and again and again, screws with his belief.
So while no one says Arius is stupid but his faith (religious faith - belief without evidence) blinds him to all evidence that does not confirm what he already believes.

 

[doubtingmerle]

.. and how a gorilla becomes a human, .. I get it.

You get it? But that is not what we said. If you get it, why not echo back what we said?

Now show me this "gradient" between gorilla and human, please, ... I am begging you?



I don't mean skulls, but the gradient you guys keep showing me between each different living species that you guys claim have been evolving from the same amoeba for the past 4.2 billion years..

Take your pick from the 8 million today, line them up for me, duck to crocodile, gorilla to human, .. short beaked finches from half an inch beak and the hundreds of lengths between that and the long beaked finch?

I assume you are referring to the common ancestor between gorillas and humans. But what I find phenomenol is that you want us to choose one of the species alive today. The common ancestor is extinct. Nobody will ever be able to pick a living species and show it to you as the common ancestor.

But we can find bones from an extinct species long ago that is probably a close relative of the common ancestor.

 

[Arius]

Actually any speices could speciate. Some will just plug along without much change. Some, as I mentioned, will undergo geographic isolation (see the London Underground mosquitos) or the Italian Wall Lizard or Hawthorn flies ), some will undergo sexual selection, some will adjust to environmental changes (see Darwin's finches), etc.

Same continent, same amount of sun, same moon, same food source, same continental drifts, same air, same amount of oxygen, same everything including the amount of TIME each species evolved from the amoeba, yet look at all the different species!?

Evolution is not about "better". Evolution is only about most adapted to one's environment. Most humans would consider Great Cats to be "better" than rodents, but most great cat populations are in decline while there are several hundred million rats and mice.

Yes, take your loving dog and put him in the desert and he will adapt or die, and it would not take no millions and billions of years. Remember that Evolution/speciation never happens in the Evolution story!

For the last time, humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor with gorillas about 7-10 million years ago. No one claims that humans evolved directly from gorillas so I'd suggest not repeating that any more.

OK, so again you guys say that humans did not evolve/speciate from gorillas, ..

(I don't know where I got this crazy idea from anyways, .. since no evolutionist, or evolution documentaries, movies, papers, archeological finds of gorilla skeletons has EVER suggested such idiotic claim that I for some reason keep claiming. I should be whipped with 40 lashes like the Hunchback of Notre dame for his insolence!)

Then Please tell me what species that "common ancestor" was that eventually, over millions and billions and trillions of years changed into human, chimp and bonobo?"

1. "Lucy" is not a species.
2. We have several thousand specimens of Au. afarensis representing at least a hundred individuals.
3. Au. afarensis is not the only Australopithecine species we have fossils for.
4. Au. afarensis are not H. sapiens and thus are not "human".
5. Evolution specifically nor science in general does not address religion period, much less Christianity.

Lucy is not a species of animal? So what is it, just some bones found in a cave? So why all the big fuss over her?
So Evolution never mentioned how religion started, and why they think it evolved, what environmental, or diet effects caused these hallucinations on the brain??
You know what, someone is putting a bunch if misinformation out on Evolution, like this movie:

time 25:20 "What is Lucy", gorilla, chimp, human, bonobo, an alien, a Vulcan what? A non-species?

I'd recommend checking actual scientific sources instead.

I did and I do.
But what you really mean is: Don't ask anything that is not covered in the Evolution Religion, you are to stay within the box. Wondering outside of that box are considered enemies of science, and will be ridiculed.