Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
evolution&dogs, book 2
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Key" data-source="post: 34769683" data-attributes="member: 32065"><p>I am still waiting to be impressed.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Are you talking about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Diagram_of_eye_evolution.jpg" target="_blank">THIS</a>?</p><p></p><p>Now, see, there are not "steps" in case you missed this, these are Punctured Equilibrium jumps, which might be an issue for you, depending on what "Theory" you cling to when you seek to discuss Evolution, are you in the Gradual group, the Catastrophic, there are many "Theories" and many different views on evolution, sadly, many of them are incompatible, such a Pity that.</p><p></p><p>Tell you what, when you learn what you are discussing, and when you can tell me, which method you subscribe to, then we can talk.</p><p></p><p>Right now, all I see is people saying "You don't understand evolution" and getting incorrect definitions, and on top of that, I see people spouting incompatible methodology.</p><p></p><p>So tell me, what insight do you possess, what hidden knowledge do you gain as a "believer" in evolution that I do not have open to me? Is this a little private cult of yours, maybe, Hummmm?</p><p></p><p>See this is really when you come off as having no grasp of what you are talking about, because see, if it is Scientific, then it is open to everyone, it is not a "private" thing. Unless your trying to make it into one. If that is case, I hope you do enjoy your new religion.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Read that.. and That... and as far as I see for this "Evidence" it is nothing more then Adaptation, and a lot of speculation.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I have read them, in case you did not know, after all, unlike many people here, I have studied this bunk.</p><p></p><p>But that is not the issue, I guess you can cling to what ever you want. So tell me, what method of evolution do you cling to?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The eye is fully functional, IE: it is not a progression of nor is it mid step in it's design, it is functional as an eye.</p><p></p><p>For example, a Near-sighted person has a fully functional eye, it may not be perfect, but it functions fully. It does not function "Half Way".</p><p></p><p>Progression would place the development of this as a "gradual" method, where the eye, would be in mid process to becoming a functional aspect of the life forms. We do not have that, we have functional, and non-functional.</p><p></p><p>Maybe the problem is your failing to grasp the process of "gradual" as opposed to what you have been told the answer is.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ahh joy an argument by outrage, how lovely. And completely missing my point.</p><p></p><p>Did I expect any less... not really... </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Really? we have "Gradual Bones" and "Gradual" skin, and Gradual Scales, and Gradual Hair, and gradual aspects of all our components. Wow, I never knew that. Seems that all these levels of gradual development must exist, like half functional skin, and partially functional bones, or maybe marrow and no bones, or bones with no marrow, or maybe, you have no idea what you are talking about.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That is why it is a definition and not the Theory as a Whole.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>All I can say, is that the more you study, and the more you look at all the sources, the more things become clear.</p><p></p><p>If you want evolutuon to be true, you will only look at what you want to see to support yoru beliefs.</p><p></p><p>I challenge you to look at the other side objectively.</p><p></p><p>I really don't think you can.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The Nautilus has fully functional eyes, so, I do not see your point.</p><p></p><p>Are you thinking that there was a requirement for a Lens? </p><p></p><p>Have you never looked at an insects eyes? Notice that the eye is compound, and right after the lens is a crystalline cone, not some ball of jelly like a mammal eye. Did you really think it was the components that I was talking about?</p><p></p><p>Maybe even a lobsters eyes, notice how it has a completely different make up from our own eyes, the lens functions in a different manner, and even it's composition of the lens being around the eye, as opposed to being in the eye, I mean, really, you will have to do better then this in the future.</p><p></p><p>The Lack of a Lens would not make the eye "Half Functional" anymore then the fact that humans only have a limited lens would make our eye less functional, or the fact that an insect has a crystalline cone and a human does not, would make a difference.</p><p></p><p>Please, do you all not grasp the concept of gradual evolution?</p><p></p><p>Anyway, it has been fun.</p><p></p><p>Let me know when you have something good to put on the table, something beyond the PAX6 just came to be, and lo and behold, there was sight.</p><p></p><p>God Bless</p><p></p><p>Key</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Key, post: 34769683, member: 32065"] I am still waiting to be impressed. Are you talking about [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Diagram_of_eye_evolution.jpg"]THIS[/URL]? Now, see, there are not "steps" in case you missed this, these are Punctured Equilibrium jumps, which might be an issue for you, depending on what "Theory" you cling to when you seek to discuss Evolution, are you in the Gradual group, the Catastrophic, there are many "Theories" and many different views on evolution, sadly, many of them are incompatible, such a Pity that. Tell you what, when you learn what you are discussing, and when you can tell me, which method you subscribe to, then we can talk. Right now, all I see is people saying "You don't understand evolution" and getting incorrect definitions, and on top of that, I see people spouting incompatible methodology. So tell me, what insight do you possess, what hidden knowledge do you gain as a "believer" in evolution that I do not have open to me? Is this a little private cult of yours, maybe, Hummmm? See this is really when you come off as having no grasp of what you are talking about, because see, if it is Scientific, then it is open to everyone, it is not a "private" thing. Unless your trying to make it into one. If that is case, I hope you do enjoy your new religion. Read that.. and That... and as far as I see for this "Evidence" it is nothing more then Adaptation, and a lot of speculation. I have read them, in case you did not know, after all, unlike many people here, I have studied this bunk. But that is not the issue, I guess you can cling to what ever you want. So tell me, what method of evolution do you cling to? The eye is fully functional, IE: it is not a progression of nor is it mid step in it's design, it is functional as an eye. For example, a Near-sighted person has a fully functional eye, it may not be perfect, but it functions fully. It does not function "Half Way". Progression would place the development of this as a "gradual" method, where the eye, would be in mid process to becoming a functional aspect of the life forms. We do not have that, we have functional, and non-functional. Maybe the problem is your failing to grasp the process of "gradual" as opposed to what you have been told the answer is. Ahh joy an argument by outrage, how lovely. And completely missing my point. Did I expect any less... not really... Really? we have "Gradual Bones" and "Gradual" skin, and Gradual Scales, and Gradual Hair, and gradual aspects of all our components. Wow, I never knew that. Seems that all these levels of gradual development must exist, like half functional skin, and partially functional bones, or maybe marrow and no bones, or bones with no marrow, or maybe, you have no idea what you are talking about. That is why it is a definition and not the Theory as a Whole. All I can say, is that the more you study, and the more you look at all the sources, the more things become clear. If you want evolutuon to be true, you will only look at what you want to see to support yoru beliefs. I challenge you to look at the other side objectively. I really don't think you can. The Nautilus has fully functional eyes, so, I do not see your point. Are you thinking that there was a requirement for a Lens? Have you never looked at an insects eyes? Notice that the eye is compound, and right after the lens is a crystalline cone, not some ball of jelly like a mammal eye. Did you really think it was the components that I was talking about? Maybe even a lobsters eyes, notice how it has a completely different make up from our own eyes, the lens functions in a different manner, and even it's composition of the lens being around the eye, as opposed to being in the eye, I mean, really, you will have to do better then this in the future. The Lack of a Lens would not make the eye "Half Functional" anymore then the fact that humans only have a limited lens would make our eye less functional, or the fact that an insect has a crystalline cone and a human does not, would make a difference. Please, do you all not grasp the concept of gradual evolution? Anyway, it has been fun. Let me know when you have something good to put on the table, something beyond the PAX6 just came to be, and lo and behold, there was sight. God Bless Key [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
evolution&dogs, book 2
Top
Bottom