"Duck billed platypus" creationists STILL use this?

[SkyWriting]

Gosh, no way to tell them apart.

No one has ever claimed they were the same.
They look like variations on the same idea.
They both look like bills and perform the same function of capturing food from mud without teeth. Functionally they work the same. Your point is lost.

Platypus | National Geographic

 

[SkyWriting]

By that logic a human and chimp skulls are also just "slight variations".

Sure...ok. They function identically. Most skulls do all perform the same.

 

[pitabread]

Delete

 

[SkyWriting]

Alright then.

I have no follow up.

It's good when you corner someone with the right question.

 

[loveofourlord]

They look like variations on the same idea.

not even close, one is made of keratin, while the duck billed platypus's bill is made of leathery skin thats sensative to electricity and such not even remotly the same thing.

 

[SkyWriting]

not even close, one is made of keratin, while the duck billed platypus's bill is made of leathery skin thats sensitive to electricity and such not even remotely the same thing.

They perform the same function and look alike. Sorry.
I guess I don't have the same capacity to hate as others.

 

[loveofourlord]

And in person:

ABOUT THE PLATYPUS

The platypus is among nature's most unlikely animals. In fact, the first scientists to examine a specimen believed they were the victims of a hoax. The animal is best described as a hodgepodge of more familiar species: the duck (bill and webbed feet), beaver (tail), and otter (body and fur). Males are also venomous. They have sharp stingers on the heels of their rear feet and can use them to deliver a strong toxic blow to any foe.

Platypus | National Geographic

yes and already responded to that, funny you ignored it.

the patypus fits between mamals and reptiles hence it has fur, but produces leathery eggs. The duck bill like I said is nothing even remotly close, one is hard keratin, other is leathery cells and actually it's snout. The beaver tail is also structually different, look simular, but not at all related.

 

[loveofourlord]

It's good when you corner someone with the right question.

what corner? what you said is correct with evolution, african and north american vultures look very simular, but are in no way related, just as the platypus isn't related to a duck because of simularities, superficial simularities mean nothing.

 

[loveofourlord]

They perform the same function and look alike. Sorry.
I guess I don't have the same capacity to hate as others.

really? Didn't know ducks could sense electricity with their bills something new every day.

 

[loveofourlord]

They perform the same function and look alike. Sorry.
I guess I don't have the same capacity to hate as others.

....I really have no clue what your talking whose hating anyone, this is just a silly argument creationist make without even looking at it, they like to tote the paltypus as the evidence against evolution when even a cursorey glances shows otherwise.

 

[SLP]

It looks like a slight variation. Your point is lost.

If your point is that creationist are naive and superficial and ignorant of anatomy, I'll grant you that.

Only fools, liars, or creationists confuse the two.

 

[SLP]

No one has ever claimed they were the same.
They look like variations on the same idea.
They both look like bills and perform the same function of capturing food from mud without teeth. Functionally they work the same. Your point is lost.

Platypus | National Geographic

Your point is lost.
Only simpletons think they are the same.
Did you not read the OP? Are you not aware that many creationists actually think a platypus has the bill of a duck and consider it a chimera?

Your "arguments" are repetitive and moot.

 

[SLP]

It's good when you corner someone with the right question.

You must be so proud of yourself.

My question is what motivates some creationists to still claim that the platypus is chimeric?

chi·me·ra
/kīˈmirə,kəˈmirə/
noun
noun: chimera; plural noun: chimeras; noun: chimaera; plural noun: chimaeras

1. (in Greek mythology) a fire-breathing female monster with a lion's head, a goat's body, and a serpent's tail.
   • any mythical animal with parts taken from various animals.
2. a thing that is hoped or wished for but in fact is illusory or impossible to achieve.
   "the economic sovereignty you claim to defend is a chimera"
   
   
3. BIOLOGY
   an organism containing a mixture of genetically different tissues, formed by processes such as fusion of early embryos, grafting, or mutation.
   "the sheeplike goat chimera"
   • a DNA molecule with sequences derived from two or more different organisms, formed by laboratory manipulation.
4. a cartilaginous marine fish with a long tail, an erect spine before the first dorsal fin, and typically a forward projection from the snout.

Are they desperate to make an argument and don't know any better?
Are they just mendacious?
Malicious?
Just plain stupid?