I consider that a cop out answer. The mutation that produced the change would have been random.
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.
Through a non-random process called selection.
Europeans never became Americans. Europeans and Americans exist at the same time.
Catholics never became Protestants. Catholics and Protestants exist at the same time.
Wolves never became Chihuahuas. Wolves and Chihuahuas exist at the same time.
Oh, wait . . .
Primates never became humans....humans and primates exist at the same time.
I consider that a cop out answer. The mutation that produced the change would have been random.
I consider that a cop out answer. The mutation that produced the change would have been random.
Primates never became humans....humans and primates exist at the same time.
Birds are dinosaurs? Please clarify. Were all dinosaurs birds or just some. Of some which ones? Was T-rex a bird? How about the pterodactyl? Which ones were reptiles and which were birds.?Sometimes I am not sure why I bother getting up in the morning.
Joshua had made this comment "Dinosaurs never turned into birds, birds existed at the same time they did."
Now that is an incorrect statement and we know this to be the case. Birds are, cladistically, dinosaurs. My challenge to Joshua was to mimic the argument used by YECs and the like when we talk of most geological evidence. It was a gentle mocking, or - if you think I have some hidden agenda - a snide, patronising mocking.
So what if a bird is also considered a dinosaur? Doesn't prove evolution is real anymore than a lion being an animal proves evolution. Or a goldfish being a fish proves evolution. There were all kinds of dinosaurs. Some reptiles some birds some fish. None of that makes evolution real.I recognized the quotation marks and understood it as you describe it. However, I could not let it be hanging in the air.My comment was not directed towards you but for any YEC reading it.
Regarding Joshua's comment that birds existed at the same time as dinosaurs, I believe I made a comment about this; it is a logical necessity birds existed with dinosaurs since birds are dinosaurs.
On thew other hand, I think I know what it is Joshua is fishing for with his comment, and if so, then in his definition of bird he must include dinosaurs with teeth, tail and clawed fingers as "birds" - but only then to make what he think is a "bird" even more dinosaurs-like.
Creatonists seams not to understand or refuse to accept what classification is about. It seams like they somehow reason there is a particular instance of a special species named "bird" and "dinosaurs", and that the this special "dinosaur" somehow stopped being a dinosaur and then changed into something else called "bird". But this is not how evolution works. YEC also acknowledge that this is not how evolution works when they say "dogs only make more dogs". I agree, and mammals only make more mammals. Dogs is one particular variety of mammals to make more mammals. In the same way birds is one particular variety of dinosaurs to make more dinosaurs.
Put in other words, all birds make more dinosaurs, but not all dinosaurs makes more birds - in particular the extinct dinosaurs. That means you are all the modification what you ancestor ever been and you can never escape that. There is no such things as evolving from one kind to another kind. Everything is a modification of the same kind. Everything is the same kind.
It is a puzzle to me how people can accept whales, rabbits, and bats all being mammals but not birds being dinosaurs. Maybe it is because YEC invested so much prestige in denying that birds are dinosaurs they simply cannot admit it anymore without losing that prestige. It seams to me they reason is like this; if YEC admit birds are dinosaurs then they must accept the nesting as evidence for common decent which then will have a domino effect and imply that all mammals also have a common ancestor (implying humans and chimpanzees also shares a common ancestor). And for religious doctrine reasons this cannot simply be accepted. If this is the case, then in a sense religion makes you dumb.
What was our common ancestor?Assuming you meant genera instead of genres, there are thousands of genera of Amphibians and reptiles. Chances are, two reptile species are not in the same genus.
At the same time, reptiles and amphibians are in the same clade, along with all other terrestrial tetrapods like humans.
http://tolweb.org/Terrestrial_Vertebrates/14952
Reptiles, amphibians, and humans are still tetrapods, as was our common ancestor.
So?
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Birds are a sub-set of dinosaurs. Therefore, only some dinosaurs are birds. T-Rex was assuredly not a bird. Pterodactyls are not dinosaurs. As wikipedia notes, "The evolution of birds began in the Jurassic Period, with the earliest birds derived from a clade of theropoda dinosaurs named Paraves." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_birds). They (non-avian dinosaurs and birds) are all reptiles.Birds are dinosaurs? Please clarify. Were all dinosaurs birds or just some. Of some which ones? Was T-rex a bird? How about the pterodactyl? Which ones were reptiles and which were birds.?
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Birds are dinosaurs? Please clarify. Were all dinosaurs birds or just some. Of some which ones? Was T-rex a bird? How about the pterodactyl? Which ones were reptiles and which were birds.?
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Birds are a sub-set of dinosaurs. Therefore, only some dinosaurs are birds. T-Rex was assuredly not a bird. Pterodactyls are not dinosaurs. As wikipedia notes, "The evolution of birds began in the Jurassic Period, with the earliest birds derived from a clade of theropoda dinosaurs named Paraves." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_birds). They (non-avian dinosaurs and birds) are all reptiles.
What I am getting at is often the phrase "humans are primates" is used to promote the idea that we and monkeys have a common ancestor. My point is so what if we classified ourselves as primates. That doesn't mean we have a common ancestor anymore than classifying us as animals means we have a common ancestor with a dog.... what are you getting at? As Loudmouth pointed out, humans are primates, just as we are mammals, amniotes, tetrapods, vertebrates, and eukaryotes.
What I am getting at is often the phrase "humans are primates" is used to promote the idea that we and monkeys have a common ancestor. My point is so what if we classified ourselves as primates. That doesn't mean we have a common ancestor anymore than classifying us as animals means we have a common ancestor with a dog.
What I am getting at is often the phrase "humans are primates" is used to promote the idea that we and monkeys have a common ancestor. My point is so what if we classified ourselves as primates. That doesn't mean we have a common ancestor anymore than classifying us as animals means we have a common ancestor with a dog.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Being an evolutionist requires faith just like being a creationist. Because there is no proof that something can evolve into something else. Evolution has never been proven to be a fact. No matter how hard evolutionists try they cannot duplicate it or test it. All things are what they are and no matter what science does they can't make them into something else. And they cannot present any proof that they ever were something else. No one observed evolution and it cannot be observed or tested today. Evolution is based presumptive and assumptive evidence. Its a belief system.Reasoning with creationists is like trying to teach a dog to boil an egg, it may be the simplest thing to do but they just can't follow what you're saying, plus they have been told that their denial of the evidence will somehow get them into heaven.
Yes of course it does, except when it doesn't.Being an evolutionist requires faith just like being a creationist.
None what so ever, unless you look at the evidence.Because there is no proof that something can evolve into something else.
Not once, but millions of times.Evolution has never been proven to be a fact.
That would seem to be oh so true, but it's not.No matter how hard evolutionists try they cannot duplicate it or test it.
Never a truer word was spoken, unless we count the dogs that can't inter breed.All things are what they are and no matter what science does they can't make them into something else.
Absolutely none, unless again you look at the evidence.And they cannot present any proof that they ever were something else.
Never have and never will, except that it can and has been.No one observed evolution and it cannot be observed or tested today.
Tens of thousands of scientists all over the world have been hoodwinked into accepting nonsense, but have they?Evolution is based presumptive and assumptive evidence.
Not quite, to clarify, people don't believe in evolution they accept it as being the best explanation.Its a belief system.
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?