Not sure what you mean by descent with modification.
I should clarify that I have no issue with micro-evolution (variation within species). The question has to do with macro-evolution (evolution between species).
Upvote
0
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.
Descent with modification.
Just ignore it, it's just history repeating itself.After a thrashing like that, I sure could use a hug.
You asked the question, I answered it. Evolution is simply defined as descent with modification. I am not sure what you mean by "evolution between species", but if you think evolution cannot produce different looking organisms, just take a look at different dog breeds.
Fossil record and genetics. Simple. To many different species involved that are extinct today dfor them all to have been extant at once. Also, ring species.I understand what evolution is and the process. I just have never seen convincing evidence. Give me the reader's digest version.
Think of micro evolution as a walk down the street, think of macro evolution as a walk across the country. Same principal, just different time scale.I know what evolution is. As I stated, I dont have an issue with micro-evolution, which is variation within species. I do have an issue with macro-evolution, which involves a change from one species to another, as from apes to humans.
I know what evolution is. As I stated, I dont have an issue with micro-evolution, which is variation within species. I do have an issue with macro-evolution, which involves a change from one species to another, as from apes to humans.
I agree with Mr. Hovind.Fossil record and genetics. Simple. To many different species involved that are extinct today dfor them all to have been extant at once. Also, ring species.
Fossil record and genetics. Simple. To many different species involved that are extinct today dfor them all to have been extant at once. Also, ring species.
shall I post the rules again?I agree with Mr. Hovind.
There's no such thing as a 'fossil record.'
All it is, is bones in the ground -- period.
So how do you think dog breeds came about? Keep in mind that if you put Chihuahuas and Saint Bernards together they will not breed, as it is physically impossible for them to breed.
Only at one point in that trek across the country, you reach the Grand Canyon and can't go on.Think of micro evolution as a walk down the street, think of macro evolution as a walk across the country. Same principal, just different time scale.
shall I post the rules again?
Lets stick to fossils for now, if I link you to several examples of transirtional fossils, will you be interested in learning? Or just automatically try to argue against them?Actually, the fossil record is evidence against evolution as there is an absence of transitional fossils. The fossil record is also evidence for a worldwide flood.
How is genetics evidence for evolution? Genetics is evidence for information and design. Only intelligence produces information and design.
No, thanks.shall I post the rules again?
Isn't micro-evolution as contrary to genesis as macro-evolution? I can link you to several ewxamples of speciation, i,e. dog+dog=cat.When you breed two dogs, you always get a dog, never a cat.
For the third time, I do not have an issue with micro-evolution. This is an example of micro-evolution.
I requested evidence for macro-evolution. How do you go from single celled organisms all the way to humans, not to mention the whole everything from nothing and life from non-life, and the whole evolution of reproductive organs in the first generation dilemmas.
Lets stick to fossils for now, if I link you to several examples of transirtional fossils, will you be interested in learning? Or just automatically try to argue against them?
ANY fossil is a 'transition' fossil, according to the philosophy of evolution, is it not?Lets stick to fossils for now, if I link you to several examples of transirtional fossils, will you be interested in learning? Or just automatically try to argue against them?
If you don't want to play by the rules, thats cool, but why insist on playing the game?No, thanks.
Like I always say, you guys make the rules and expect us to abide by them; but where God is concerned, science can take a hike, and your rules mean NOTHING.
Actually, the fossil record is evidence against evolution as there is an absence of transitional fossils. The fossil record is also evidence for a worldwide flood.
How is genetics evidence for evolution? Genetics is evidence for information and design. Only intelligence produces information and design.
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?