juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
There are many other reasons for one to reject evolution. It is not proven in sciences.
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.
Why is it laughable? I've certainly never heard any other reason to reject it.
You can not answer a question with another question.
Nothing is proven in Science, not even the electrical transistor gated logic device you used to communicate with people all over the world instantaneously just now... but it's because of science you have that.There are many other reasons for one to reject evolution. It is not proven in sciences.
Unless you wish to actually answer the question and explain how a "transitional fossil" is to be distinguished from a "non-transitional fossil", then you should simply not reply.
Nothing is proven in Science, not even the electrical transistor gated logic device you used to communicate with people all over the world instantaneously just now... but it's because of science you have that.
There are many other reasons for one to reject evolution. It is not proven in sciences.
are you asking a question? Not sure, english isn't proper doesn't sensible here.Good. Evolution is a model in science. So you know what does it mean.
We do not know how did human rise.Like what? The evidence is overwhelming.
Do you see a question mark in the sentence?are you asking a question? Not sure, english isn't proper doesn't sensible here.
Nope, but it reads like a question - hence the confusion. perhaps clarify what it is you're attempting to say?Do you see a question mark in the sentence?
We do not know how did human rise.
No, it doesn't. It is based on (as I thought we agreed) undefined or not clearly defined terms, so the OP is in and of itself unclear.Yes, the point in the OP stands.
I'd suggest that we have a pretty good understanding - not to mention evidence of common ancestry.
No, it doesn't. It is based on (as I thought we agreed) undefined or not clearly defined terms, so the OP is in and of itself unclear.
If he wants to define his terms then present evidence for his thesis, sure we can discuss, but until then, there isn't an argument to respond to.
Of course I can. You need to learn that. It is an answer with double weight.
Do you know what is the essence of taphonomy? The idea is critical to fossil preservation. (so it is critical to understand the meaning of "transitional")
Nope, but it reads like a question - hence the confusion. perhaps clarify what it is you're attempting to say?
@Heissonear said that there are "no transitionals".
I asked him to define what he means by "transtionals" and what criteria distinguish a "transitional" from a "non-transitional".
Either answer to question or don't reply.
If so, what is the origin of human? Use words that you do understand.
I am trying to help you to understand the term
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?