Is evolution a fact or theory?

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:

Are you asking what those are? I believe those are can be characterized, in layman's terms, as animals of the horse kind.

Dan

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
Im giving you material to response do, and you appear to be ignoring it all.

Okay, I am responding now. Those are nice pictures.

Dan

yeshuaslavejeff · May 19, 2018

Why the title question? Everyone knows that there has never been proof of the evolution THEORY..... as all Scripture and all history shows, there never will be until the anti-christ is in power enough to present A FAKE PROOF..... which people are already droooling for ! (they really serve the enemy and seek his help! )

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
prove what is a whale? Pakicetus? Its not a whale, its a mammal with whale features. So is ambulocetus and rodhocetus. They arent whales like modern day species. They are transitionals that lead to the first whales ever observed.

Prove it.

Dan

yeshuaslavejeff · May 19, 2018

Bible Research Tools said:
Okay, I am responding now. Those are nice pictures.

Dan

hmmmm... really think so ? You're not just ' HORSING ' around ? ! haha good day !

Job 33:6 · May 19, 2018

Check this out

Squalodon - Wikipedia

Squalodon, a prehistoric whale.

Same long snout, same triangular teeth as we see in pakicetus, ambulocetus, rodhocetus and that whole collection.

But wait,

Squalodontidae or the shark-toothed dolphins is an extinct family of large toothed whales who had long narrow jaws.[2]Squalodontids are known from all continents except Antarctica, from the Oligocene to the Neogene, but they had a maximal diversity and global distribution during the Late Oligocene and Early to Middle Miocene (28 to 15 mya).[2][1]

With their cosmopolitan Miocene distribution and heterodont dentition, squalodontids are the most common and basal platanistoids. They are relatively large odontocetes, comparable in size to extant mesoplodont whales. The premaxillae on their elongated rostrumhave large and slightly convex fossae for the air sacs associated with the presence of a melon, indicating the ability for echolocation.[3]

They are proposed as the first whales to have possessed melons, or air sacs associated with the presence of such.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is that, its a succession, a gradation.

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
A basilosaurus isnt a modern day whale.

You keep saying things like this, like saying pakicetus doesnt have a blow hole. Well of course it doesnt, it isnt a modern day whale.

Then how do you prove they are transitional forms of the modern whale?

Dan

Job 33:6 · May 19, 2018

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

yeshuaslavejeff said:
hmmmm... really think so ? You're not just ' HORSING ' around ? ! haha good day !

LOL! You too.

Dan

yeshuaslavejeff · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:

The proper term for this kind of activity shown on this forum by so many, and by others in the news, etc ,
Biblically,
I think, is rebellion against the Creator of Life,
and
idolatry.
And worse, "causing the little ones to stumble...." woe to them who do this ....

Job 33:6 · May 19, 2018

Bible Research Tools said:
Then how do you prove they are transitional forms of the modern whale?

Dan

First, you have to acknowledge the presence of a visible, morphological transition in the fossils. This is what makes a transitional fossil, a transitional fossil.

Think of it like a family tree. You have your great grand parents, they have your grand parents, the grandparents have the parents, and the parents have you. This is what we are seeing.

Now, it is possible that say...one might be an uncle or aunt rather than a parent. And another might be a cousin. But we are still getting a rough idea of what the families are going through.

Its like taking photographs of family dinners over the span of many generations. Yes, we might see a cousin or an uncle or aunt in the crowd, but we still see the family as a collective unit, changing through time.

Job 33:6 · May 19, 2018

Its a matter of morphological cladistics. As you approach modern day life, you find fossils more and more like them.

In modern day times we have whales, and it follows that through time we find fossils more and more like them through geologic time.

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
Check this out

Squalodon - Wikipedia

Squalodon, a prehistoric whale.

There were no prehistoric animals. History began before animals were created.

Same long snout, same triangular teeth as we see in pakicetus, ambulocetus, rodhocetus and that whole collection.

The saltwater Sheepshead (a delicious fish) has human-like teeth:

But wait, Squalodontidae or the shark-toothed dolphins is an extinct family of large toothed whales who had long narrow jaws.[2]Squalodontids are known from all continents except Antarctica, from the Oligocene to the Neogene, but they had a maximal diversity and global distribution during the Late Oligocene and Early to Middle Miocene (28 to 15 mya).[2][1]

With their cosmopolitan Miocene distribution and heterodont dentition, squalodontids are the most common and basal platanistoids. They are relatively large odontocetes, comparable in size to extant mesoplodont whales. The premaxillae on their elongated rostrumhave large and slightly convex fossae for the air sacs associated with the presence of a melon, indicating the ability for echolocation.[3]

They are proposed as the first whales to have possessed melons, or air sacs associated with the presence of such.

Cool. But don't believe for a minute the "28 to 15 mya" foolishness. The world is, at most, about 7500 years old:

Septuagint Biblical Timeline - Bible Research Tools

Dan

Job 33:6 · May 19, 2018

This isnt a real response^. This is just denial. And i dont know any human who has teeth like that. It looks like it has 3 or 4 rows of teeth in that mouth.

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
First, you have to acknowledge the presence of a visible, morphological transition in the fossils. This is what makes a transitional fossil, a transitional fossil.

I have not seen any morphological transitions in the photos you have presented. I have seen some gigantic leaps of faith in your narratives, but no transitions in the photos.

Any rationally-minded person would require the evidence of thousands of transitions -- each with a minute morphological change (internal and/or external) from the previous transition -- to believe in the possibility of such a lame-brain scheme as macroevolution.

In the meantime were are stuck with "One Nation Under Darwin":

God help us escape this madness.

Dan

Job 33:6 · May 19, 2018

Bible Research Tools said:
I have not seen any morphological transitions in the photos you have presented. I have seen some gigantic leaps of faith in your narratives, but no transitions in the photos.

Dan

So you do not admit to the fact that tiktaalik has both fins and scales...but also a flat head and an unfused neck?

If this is true, and you deny this, then I would say that you are in denial.

Regarding...say, rodhocetus, and basilosaurus, did you not see the conical head and traiagular teeth?

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
This isnt a real response^. This is just denial. And i dont know any human who has teeth like that. It looks like it has 3 or 4 rows of teeth in that mouth.

This is another view:

The front row of teeth are clearly human-like. Therefore, from a morphological perspective, man evolved from a sheepshead, or vice versa.

Dan

Job 33:6 · May 19, 2018

You already showed the inner dentition of the fish, it has multiple rows of at teeth. Even if you look closely at that photo there, you can see some bizarre dentition.

Morphology involves looking at a plethora of traits as well. With whales, we examined not just the teeth of several species, but we also saw the size and shapes of their bodies, their conical head shapes, the position of their nostrils, the shortening of their limbs, and...their locality and temporal location in the rocks.

You cant grab a random fish with a few flat teeth and say "here looks like a human".

You have to follow cladistics.

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
So you do not admit to the fact that tiktaalik has both fins and scales...but also a flat head and an unfused neck?

Is this some kind of prosecutorial trick question? I have never seen the tiktaalik fossils -- not even pictures of them. Do you want me to confess, or compose?

Dan

Bible Research Tools · May 19, 2018

KomatiiteBIF said:
You already showed the inner dentition of the fish, it has multiple rows of at teeth. Even if you look closely at that photo there, you can see some bizarre dentition.

I noticed you were easily confused, so I was trying to make it easier on you by presenting the frontal view.

Dan

Is evolution a fact or theory?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Well-Known Member

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency