Warden_of_the_Storm
Well-Known Member
- Oct 16, 2015
- 15,334
- 7,529
- 31
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
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.
Meanwhile - the data is doctored and posed.
That blue plaster just grow there on its own, did it?No it isn't.
That blue plaster just grow there on its own, did it?
And did all those skulls just happen to get together to pose for one picture?
Do you know what God can do with those bobbleheads of evolution?You're tilting a windmill, mate.
Do you know what God can do with those bobbleheads of evolution?
Dry Bones
Of course, with there being 206 bones in an adult human, and assuming those bobbleheads are adults, I'd say your bobblehead display is missing about 2870 bones.
Par for the course for evolution, which runs on just segments of incomplete evidence, and more missing links than a chain link fence surrounding a Swiss cheese factory.
Ohhhhh ... the OP!What you just said has absolutely no bearing on the OP topic.
Ohhhhh ... the OP!
Sorry!
I thought we were dealing with your bobblehead display.
My bad!
You go ahead and go back to the OP.
I'll hang around and see if anyone else wants to address this fake display of evolution garbage that grave robbers dug up out of the ground and monkeyed with.
Such is why every "common ancestor" is missing in every evolutionary tree.Do you know what God can do with those bobbleheads of evolution?
Dry Bones
Of course, with there being 206 bones in an adult human, and assuming those bobbleheads are adults, I'd say your bobblehead display is missing about 2870 bones.
Par for the course for evolution, which runs on just segments of incomplete evidence, and more missing links than a chain link fence surrounding a Swiss cheese factory.
But ... but they're right there on paper!Such is why every "common ancestor" is missing in every evolutionary tree.
Good grief, you're like a broken record. I have never identified any 'infraspecific taxa' in the fossil record nor have I ever classified any species.
My first post to you was...
"Is there anything that might convince you that you're mistaken or will you cling to these weird ideas no matter what?"
As my signature says: if one closes their eyes.... but until one opens their eyes.....But ... but they're right there on paper!
Sure it does. It easily shows the gradual change of several chimp-like features gradually to human features, over dozens of fossils, in chronological order. You could do the same with with many wolf to mastiff fossils, if you had them and had the correct dates from 50,000 years ago until now. If you'd like to do that as well, feel free.
Here's the data again:
Also, Radook - I haven't seen a response to my posts to you, #s 40 and 47. Did you see them? Does that make sense now?
In Christ-
Papias
Ohhhhh ... the OP!
Sorry!
I thought we were dealing with your bobblehead display.
My bad!
You go ahead and go back to the OP.
I'll hang around and see if anyone else wants to address this fake display of evolution garbage that grave robbers dug up out of the ground and monkeyed with.
Then you disagree with their classifications? If you don't disagree you support them, but go ahead and obfuscate.
And I know you have never identified any infraspecific taxa in the fossil record, because they have them listed incorrectly as separate species. This is the entire root of the problem which you keep trying to avoid.
I notice you all want to use the data they identify to back your claims, then when challenged on it it's suddenly not your data or your classifications. Lol, you people are something else, obfuscation after obfuscation.
Which was in response to my assertion the entire fossil record has been incorrectly classified. Which since you have not validated that it is correct, because you can't show me the infraspecific taxa we know exist in every species, I will indeed cling to my correct assertion.
And you will of course ignore all the infraspecific taxa we see in every species where none exist in the fossil record because they've were incorrectly classified as separate species.
You care nothing about how life is actually seen to propagate, nor do you care that the fossil record does not match reality. All you care about is upholding your false belief in evolution.
But why do you keep classifying the infraspecific taxa within a species as separate species.
This is why the ToE fails miserably, because the classification of the fossil record does not match the real world, in which many infraspecific taxa exists within every species.
Maybe I'm not so arrogant as to think that, with little education on the subject, I know better than the general scientific consensus? Does it never occur to you that you objections might be unfounded?
As for obfuscations, as I've said again and again, however "we" decide to classify species has little bearing on the evidence we see for common descent. I appreciate though that it must be difficult for you to come to terms with the fact that you've been barking up the wrong tree for years.
You've yet to demonstrate your assertions are correct with actual evidence, which particular fossils are you talking about anyway? I'll stick with the paleontolgists rather than you thanks.
Fantasies. I'll ask again which you keep avoiding. Show me the infraspecific taxa in the fossil record that must exist based upon observation of the world around us?The fossil record doesn't match reality? What does it match then?
Then show me the infraspecific taxa we know must exist in the fossil record by observation of the world around us?
Fantasies. I'll ask again which you keep avoiding. Show me the infraspecific taxa in the fossil record that must exist based upon observation of the world around us?
How do you determine what species a fossil belongs to? What are the criteria you use?
How do you determine if individuals separated by millions of years belong to the same species? What are the criteria that you use?
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?