- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,221
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes, in this case. You can arrange them in different stalls if you want, but it’s still a barn full of horses.
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.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Evolution's Brick Wall
- Thread starter inquiring mind
- Start date
- Status
Yes, in this case. You can arrange them in different stalls if you want, but it’s still a barn full of horses.
Job 33:6
Well-Known Member
- Jun 15, 2017
- 10,037
- 3,430
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Eohippus has toes rather than hooves and stood perhaps a couple feet tall.
Zebras are far more similar to modern horses than eohippus.
@inquiring mind do you believe zebras are of the horse kind as well?
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,852
- 52,890
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,221
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
You brought up the horses... but I guess you're not that familiar with barns, stalls and such.
Upvote
0
pitabread
Well-Known Member
- Jan 29, 2017
- 12,920
- 13,373
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
The question is how to define "kind" in terms of real biology and nobody here appears to have any idea.
I often joke about asking a dozen creationists and getting 13 different answers, but this is exactly what is happening here.
Upvote
0
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,221
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
I said they're still in the horse barn. Do you really not understand that?
Upvote
0
pitabread
Well-Known Member
- Jan 29, 2017
- 12,920
- 13,373
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
I'm asking you to define "kind". So far you appear to subscribe to three different definitions.
The whole point is that if I gave you a bunch of different organisms, how would you group them in "kinds"? And forget about familiar animals like horses. What about more esoteric life forms like sea squirts or tube worms or slime molds?
If you had to group them how would you do it? What is the criteria you would use?
Upvote
0
Judge for yourself
This is a fossil found of one single site in Burgos, Spain. Does this fit in a shoe box?
The hominid fossils of another single excavation site, this time Krapina in Croatia. Does this fit in a shoebox? Do both fit together in a shoebox?
This is an exhibition (of replicas) of hominid skulls? Ad all these to the shoebox.
Apparantly the pictures don't show. If you use the reply function, they show. I don't know what I do wrong, but I'm very sorry for the inconvenience.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
You speak as if you are Elite in specifying the variations within Species.
On each side of the end horses you illustrate, show me the morphological details of continuation to another different creature.
Yes, you cannot present such two different creatures, only variations with Kinds, in this case horses.
Why do evolutionists not have the detailed morphological changes between two different creatures showing morphological changes of one lifeform changing from one different creature into another clearly different creatures - i.e. the sequences of fossils between two different lifeforms?
There lies the dilemma evolutionists are in.
Evolution has hit a brick wall of evidence that through scientific enquiry has not shown evolution between two different creatures ever happened. The scientific produced evidence shows only Kinds-Species.
Evolutionists are getting desperate - stretching what evidence they have to state "proof".
Come on, show the fossils between two distinct creatures that shows morphologically detailed change over time of one creature changing into another different lifeform.
Lets see the evidence. Have you not been asked dozens of times. It is because the evidence does not exist. Scientific enquiry does not show evolution ever happened.
Your bad for striving to prove with missing data.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
