How to choose between creation and evolution.

[tas8831]

You asserted they caused problems in all humans.

Wow - can't even be honest when the original post is a scroll-up away...


"the wisdom teeth of humans, which more often then not need to be pulled because our mouth is too small to accomodate them"

 

[Brightmoon]

Show me where the human branched from the common ancestor of all mammals. Show me where all mammals branched from the common ancestor that started it.

Primates are the ancestor of humans

Synapsids are the ancestors of mammals and the fossils show step by step how that “ reptilian” jaw structure evolved into a mammal jaw and middle ear

 

[tas8831]

Why Do Men Have Nipples?

Did you even read that link?

It provides a very non-creationary explanation.

 

[tas8831]

From the link:

Why men have nipples is a fascinating conundrum. The short answer to the question of "why?" is that all fetuses begin as female, and develop certain female characteristics. The long answer involves testosterone, natural selection, and body chemistry.

Funny how you keep posting links that support evolution.

We have a regular Google (non)genius in our midst!

At least he isn't spouting Scripture and referring to YEC websites... Yet...

 

[Brightmoon]

So what was a cat before it was a cat? Are you saying that cats and spiders do not have a common ancestor?

Cats feliform Carnivora ( and dogs- caniform Carnivora) evolved from the extinct Miacids
Chordate and arthropods had a common ancestry in the Precambrian

 

[Brightmoon]

I found something on Pinterest I’m having problems getting it to show here

This is how arthropods are related to chordates . I don’t know if it will show up and it’s in German but it’s close enough to English that it’s not hard to understand. Die evolution der tiere Go into Pinterest and search for it

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Oh no, another assumption. What did the LUCA evolve into first? How do you know it happened?

Ah yes, that word you and other creationists love: 'assumption'.
We don't know what it evolved in to first, but the fact that all genetic marks in the world's animals point to LUCA being the likeliest, if not THE, common ancestor.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

so a watch that were evolved naturally isnt a watch by that definition. right?

By that definition: yes.

 

[Brightmoon]

Luca the Last Universal Common Ancestor was a unicellular thermophilic anaerobe. What did it evolve into first ? Another unicellular thermophilic anaerobe. Scientists can do gene phylogenies, ya know! And it wasn’t just for animals . It was for the bacterial kingdoms and other eucaryotes like plants, algae,the Protista, and fungi

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm sure you laugh about it. You seem to laugh at lots of things you don't get.

My wisdom teeth were impacted and had to come out, as were my daughters. I still laugh about it.

That is, I still laugh when people present anecdotes as proof of something.

Er, you just did. You really should read the links I post that support my positions instead of ignoring them.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Still no explanations, as usual.

By the way - 'ad hom' is not a "punctuation."

Also by the way - you, like practically every creationist I have ever encountered, does not seem to know what an "ad hom" is.

I.....I just don't know how to respond.

You 'punctuated' your comment (a parting shot) with a derisive remark (ad hom) aimed at me personally that had nothing to do with the topic. I get this so often that I actually expect it from you guys.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

We have a regular Google (non)genius in our midst!

At least he isn't spouting Scripture and referring to YEC websites... Yet...

Google good.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Going on ignore. Bye.

Cowabunga!

If ya' can't beat em', ignore em'.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Google good.

Not if you just copy and paste webpages without taking the time to read what they're talking about.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Wow - can't even be honest when the original post is a scroll-up away...


"the wisdom teeth of humans, which more often then not need to be pulled because our mouth is too small to accomodate them"

But that's not supported by the studies I posted.
Evidence Is Mounting That Routine Wisdom Teeth Removal Is a Waste of Time

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Not if you just copy and paste webpages without taking the time to read what they're talking about.

I read every one fully. They contain evidence that supports my position on the topic, mentions of evolution notwithstanding.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I read every one fully. They contain evidence that supports my position on the topic, mentions of evolution notwithstanding.

'Mentions of evolution notwithstanding'? So you're committing intellectual fraud then.

 

[Speedwell]

I.....I just don't know how to respond.

It's easy:

"Speedwell's argument is no good because it is illogical." is a criticism, not an ad hominem.

"Speedwell's argument is no good because it is illogical and he is a Bible-hating commie." is a criticism followed by an insult, not an ad hominem.

"Speedwell's argument is no good because he is a Bible-hating commie." is an ad hominem

 

[OldWiseGuy]

'Mentions of evolution notwithstanding'? So you're committing intellectual fraud then.

I'm harvesting what I need to support my position. I don't care where the research comes from. That's not a tacit acceptance of evolution in any case.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'm harvesting what I need to support my position. I don't care where the research comes from. That's not a tacit acceptance of evolution in any case.

No, but it shows that you don't actually care about the information at any rate. Even if the article clearly and tacitly says "This is all due to evolution", you'll still proclaim that it's evidence of design, even though the article goes completely against your viewpoint.