BAMM...they appear as the evos put it...in an advanced state of evolution....with no transitional fossils or linage leading up to there complex forms..
Quite a problem that you claimed has been overcome.
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.
Except that isn't true. (As has been discussed in this thread already).
The Cambrian animals are the earliest with developed shells and skeletons, but they are still have massively simple body plans compared to later animals. There are less fossils from Precambrian, but there are a few, leaving the evolution of Cambrian life as mysterious, but not inexplicable using normal evolutionary systems that scientists have demonstrated at length.
The biologists and paleontologists compared the fossil skeletons of ancient Coelacanths and compared them to the two modern species of Coelacanth and they were significantly different enough to warrant a change in genus.
Answer came there none.Do you give peer reviewed science sources credibility?
So, you are labeling Cambrian animals as advanced? And there aren't none, just few and there's a perfectly logical reason why. Soft bodied animals don't leave many fossils.BAMM...they appear as the evos put it...in an advanced state of evolution....with no transitional fossils or linage leading up to there complex forms..
Quite a problem that you claimed has been overcome.
I do. I'm curious why you care, you clearly have no respect for science.I'm sure you have a peer reviewed sourse to support that claim.
Do you think the fossil animals of the Cambrian micro-evolved/adapted into modern animals?
No. That would be impossible.
Okay, so if you don't even believe the Cambrian happened, why do you try use it as evidence against evolution?No. That would be impossible.
It is impossible for mutations to add up and form new body part, organs or appendages.Why? Apart from the fact that you don't want to believe it, that is.
Okay, so if you don't even believe the Cambrian happened, why do you try use it as evidence against evolution?
DNA is a string of proteins that cause other proteins to develop. A mutation is a change in the DNA.It is impossible for mutations to add up and form new body part, organs or appendages.
Perhaps you can show me wrong an explain how it is possible .
Again that isn't true.Because it is not what evolutionism predicts.
My OP still stands.
DNA is a string of proteins that cause other proteins to develop. A mutation is a change in the DNA.
It can be a letter added in, it can be letter taken out, it can be a section of letters repeated twice. All these changes will created small or large changes in the organism.
This can lead to new attributes which can be benificial to the animal. If so, the animal is statistically more likely to breed and thus pass of the new traits.
That's the normal mutation and natural selection that we've seen again and again. Over a longer period of time and with more environmental niches open larger scale changes are possible.
You made a positive claim that it is impossible on a larger scale, do you have any evidence to back that up?
It doesn't happen in a single step. Dolphins had good hearing before they went into the water, echo location is many tiny steps over many thousands of generations.How is it possible for a random mutation to occur in just the right place at just the right time in a species progeny to the point that it creates a system such as the echo-location system in a dolphin?
It doesn't happen in a single step. Dolphins had good hearing before they went into the water, echo location is many tiny steps over many thousands of generations.
Mutations happen constantly in the population, but the good ones will spread because the animals with them have an edge over their competition.
We've already been through this on the Theistic Evolution forum. The dolphin's echo-location system is largely based on existing mammalian structures. Echo-location works even without any of the dolphin's specific adaptation, and there are plausible paths for it to have evolved by small steps.How is it possible for a random mutation to occur in just the right place at just the right time in a species progeny to the point that it creates a system such as the echo-location system in a dolphin?
Like I said, several seconds ago. It doesn't happen.Why do you keep providing me with the coloring book version?
Show me how extremely rare so-called beneficial random mutations can effect the DNA to the point that an echo-location system is derived.
We've already been through this on the Theistic Evolution forum. The dolphin's echo-location system is largely based on existing mammalian structures. Echo-location works even without any of the dolphin's specific adaptation, and there are plausible paths for it to have evolved by small steps.
Like I said, several seconds ago. It doesn't happen.
Echo location is just a specialised variation on hearing. Mammals area quite good at hearing and dolphins have a bunch of extra things like skill shape and nose position that help.
Ancient dolphins without echo location would have got along fine, but the ones with slightly better ears would have got more fish, and thus more milk for their calves.
Those traits will improve the echo location, precision hearing and sonic clicks world still be useful without those attributes.Yes, and your post were thoroughly refuted. Or perhaps you can demonstrate how the accustic lens/oil in the forehead already existed in existing mammalian structures.
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?