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.
No, it's just proof that it was created by an intelligence. Besides, stones are not a biological system. Wrong/false analogy.
Besides, stones are not a biological system. Wrong/false analogy.
Watches aren't a biological system, either, but that never stopped a creationist from trotting out the watchmaker argument.
Apply the same to a biological system
That's because it is a teleological argument. A watch was designed by an intelligence. An arch (in the picture posted here) was designed by an intelligence. Apply the same to a biological system and it has the same appearance.
It's not about removing a piece. It's about the pieces.
Yes, anyone can see that biological systems and inanimate objects are fundamentally different.I agree. Anyone can see it plainly.
The mammalian middle ear is irreducibly complex, and yet we have the step by step evolution of that IC complex. Without all three bones (hammer, anvil, stapes) we can't hear, and yet reptiles only have a single middle ear. ID supporters would like you to believe that this would require deaf intermediates while the IC middle ear is built, but is this true? Nope. It was functional throughout each step.
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 1
There is even a transitional stage where the mammal-like reptiles had a two jointed jaw as one of the bones served as both a middle ear bone and a jaw bone.
ID supporters claim that IC systems can not evolve. Well, they can and we have the fossils to prove it.
first of all wikipedia has been known to be wrong
secondly, there are no scholarly research linked.
which of course seems to make it look like an opinion.
opinions don't hold up well here.
here is an argument from your side that may hold more water...
Evolution, as in Mutation and Selection, Has Been Demonstrated in ATP Synthase - Evolution News & Views
interesting quotes from scholarly secular articles from 2007, 2011 show some intersting questions regarding your hypothesis...
paper published in Nature 2007
"The situation is not as clear-cut as it seems. The evolutionary relationships of the fossil suggest that either the "modern" middle ear evolved twice, independently or that it evolved and was then lost in at least one ancient lineage." - See more at: On the Evolution of the Mammalian Middle Ear - Evolution News & Views
Here's another one; hexagonal lava columns:This is a naturally occuring stone archway.
Geologists claim that the rocks making up that arch was once mud, and there is no way that mud could support that span. Therefore, the entire archway had to appear as is from solid stone, right? Wrong. When you figure out how this arch could form you will have taken your first steps to understanding how IC systems evolve.
This is a naturally occuring stone archway.
Geologists claim that the rocks making up that arch was once mud, and there is no way that mud could support that span. Therefore, the entire archway had to appear as is from solid stone, right? Wrong. When you figure out how this arch could form you will have taken your first steps to understanding how IC systems evolve.
Just as with my arch of many individual stones!
So the one with individual stones was not man made? Please demonstrate this.
So the one with individual stones was not man made? Please demonstrate this.
I notice you made no comments on a step by step evolution of an IC system.
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?