Why are there no cows in the Devonian?

[CabVet]

Ok, dogs are dogs, humans are humans, frogs are frogs, fish are fish, birds are birds.

Dogs are canines, humans are apes, frogs are amphibians, fish are teleosts and birds are aves.

So did apes breed themselves through natural selection to make us and then after give us intelligence?

No. Are you interested in learning what evolution is or are you just trolling? Here is a basic debate hint: knowing what the opposing argument is about will at least help you make coherent remarks.

 

[Delphiki]

Such LIES are bringing Armageddon closer and closer.

You mean, that isn't what you want? I guess I won't say you're welcome.

 

[Loudmouth]

Lol, dogs are poodles..

And humans have been humans since a while now, lol. Actually since the 6th day of creation!

We have been primates for a while, too. We have also been mammals, amniotes, and vertebrates.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

A critical faculty and what kind of answer is that? I asked you what promises does 'the stuff' give me.

You want '"promises"? It's not a deal or barter. It is about education.

I think I'd have huge trouble writing down the evidence supporting evolution because nothing is observed in the past and the scientific method is not used properly.

Then it would be to your benefit to take the trouble to find out why it is that evolution is regarded as one of the most substantiated and rock soild theories in all of science. You claim to be reading both sides of the issue and yet you admit you wouldn't be able to write down the evidence supporting the theory. This would indicate that you have not been reading both sides at all, but merely browsing creationist websites and looking for bits that you like. That is not research. That would merely be recreation and about as useful as reading about poltergeists and big foot.

I can however write a huge paper on everythingI'v learned so far in January on evolution and creationism

But you have admitted you are unable to write about the evidence supporting evolution, so your 'paper' (cough) would just be regurgitated stuff from creationist websites. If that is the height of your ambition then great, go for it. But I would have thought you would want to know why the evidence for evolution is considered so compelling by real scientists.

 

[Delphiki]

Ok, dogs are dogs, humans are humans, frogs are frogs, fish are fish, birds are birds.

So did apes breed themselves through artificial selection to make us and then after give us intelligence?

Ouch. No. How do you even function with such incohesive logic?

 

[Black Akuma]

I think I'd have huge trouble writing down the evidence supporting evolution because nothing is observed in the past and the scientific method is not used properly.

Can you explain how the scientific method isn't used properly for evolution, but why that same method is used properly when applied to something you do accept - let's say atomic theory?

 

[Aman777]

Originally Posted by Aman777

Such LIES are bringing Armageddon closer and closer.
​

You mean, that isn't what you want? I guess I won't say you're welcome.

Dear Delphiki, I want for the last sinner, to be saved, to be given the opportunity to be saved from the awful future of those who THINK they are doing the right thing today. For me personally, it doesn't matter since I'll be there when it happens. That's because Jesus told me that I would NEVER die, Jhn 11:26 and I believest Him. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

 

[juvenissun]

Wrong, juve. You can say every student WHO WENT ON THE TRIP. or, you can say all the students who went one the trip. But you cannot say every student FROM THE CLASS went on the trip, because that is not true. Nor can you say all the students went on the trip.

Every and all are interchangeable in your scenario, just as in every (all) scenario, because they mean the same thing. The only difference is that every refers to each individual in the group, singularly, and all refers to the population, with plurality. But they both refer to the full set, without exclusion.

No. Every is a subset of All.

I said this to CabVet and he does not understand. I hope you would understand.

 

[juvenissun]

Juve, how many times are you going to avoid addressing the fact that regardless of the discrete or continuous nature of creation, the order in which animals are created in the bible does not fit with the fossil record. Birds show up after land animals, not with the fish. End of story. I know you are busily trying to create a distinction between "every" and "all", but maybe you should take a shot at explaining how saying "every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind" was created on the same day actually means that birds were created on an entirely different day. You aren't interpreting scripture here; you're making it up.

How do you know that?

 

[Queller]

All right. I explain it to you in plain English:

If I have 30 students in a class and I take 20 of them out for a trip. I can refer to the group in traveling by "every students". But this will not include those did not go. In order to include them, I will say "all students".

This is quite possibly the dumbest statement I have ever read. And I hang out on CARM a lot.

You would not refer to the students as "every students". Aside from the misplaced plural, you would refer to them as "every student TRAVELING" or "all students ON THE TRIP".

And you wouldn't include them by saying "all students" unless you were talking about something OTHER THAN THE TRIP. You would refer to them as the students who came on the trip and the students who didn't.

Look, I'm sorry that you don't want to use common English definitions but that doesn't mean everyone else has to agree with your non-standard usage.

God creates 100 fish kinds today, but that is not all fishes we see today. Because God creates another 100 fish kinds tomorrow. So, today, God see "every" fish He created is good. After the creation is over, then we can say that God created ALL fishes.

Except for the fact that there is no Biblical foundation whatsoever for the idea that God created some fishes on one day and more fishes on another day. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

 

[46AND2]

No. Every is a subset of All.

I said this to CabVet and he does not understand. I hope you would understand.

I understand what you are TRYING to say...you're just wrong. The only example you have given only differs because you tried using a different qualifier for each. When you use the same numerical set, the words are interchangeable.

 

[Queller]

The fossil record is not the record of creation. The only reason we have fossils is that an extinction event (the flood) deposited them there thousands of years after creation.

For which there is no evidence whatsover and is in fact, contradicted by ALL the available evidence.

There was light from God. He created it on day one.

How many times does it need to be said or answered?

One would be a good start. So far you haven't done that.

 

[juvenissun]

That still doesn't address the order problem. Fruit trees were some of the first organisms created according to the Bible, yet they only show up very late in the fossil record. Not to mention that the sun came after the plants in the Bible.

I am not sure. Assume it is true, it does not mean the fruit tree did not show up very early in other planets. How did the earth get its fruit trees?

(Some ignorant questions: what is a fruit tree? Is there a tree gives no fruit? If no fruit, then where would the seeds come from? I guess EVERY plant has "fruit")

 

[Queller]

Either way the fossil record isn't very reliable, we weren't back in history to see what happened.

Do you believe forensic science is reliable? Why or why not?

 

[Mr Strawberry]

No. Every is a subset of All.

I said this to CabVet and he does not understand. I hope you would understand.

I think we understand that you have serious problems if you think it is the English language that is at fault and not you.

 

[juvenissun]

This is quite possibly the dumbest statement I have ever read. And I hang out on CARM a lot.

You would not refer to the students as "every students". Aside from the misplaced plural, you would refer to them as "every student TRAVELING" or "all students ON THE TRIP".

And you wouldn't include them by saying "all students" unless you were talking about something OTHER THAN THE TRIP. You would refer to them as the students who came on the trip and the students who didn't.

Look, I'm sorry that you don't want to use common English definitions but that doesn't mean everyone else has to agree with your non-standard usage.

Except for the fact that there is no Biblical foundation whatsoever for the idea that God created some fishes on one day and more fishes on another day. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

How can you be sure on that? What would go wrong if God does?

 

[Loudmouth]

I am not sure. Assume it is true, it does not mean the fruit tree did not show up very early in other planets. How did the earth get its fruit trees?

(Some ignorant questions: what is a fruit tree? Is there a tree gives no fruit? If no fruit, then where would the seeds come from? I guess EVERY plant has "fruit")

The only thing that you are demonstrating is that no matter what the fossil record actually is you will claim that it matches Genesis. You have proven one thing: creationism is dogma.

 

[juvenissun]

I understand what you are TRYING to say...you're just wrong. The only example you have given only differs because you tried using a different qualifier for each. When you use the same numerical set, the words are interchangeable.

Exactly. We do not see the qualifier in Genesis 1. So, the subset could be equal to the set, or could be smaller than the set.

 

[juvenissun]

The only thing that you are demonstrating is that no matter what the fossil record actually is you will claim that it matches Genesis. You have proven one thing: creationism is dogma.

Evolutionist (YOU) can only give this kind of useless comment. Shame on you.

 

[Queller]

How can you be sure on that? What would go wrong if God does?

If God does what?

Before we leave this "every" vs. "all" tangent, let me ask you one last question.

I say two sentences:

"Every number between 1 and 100"

and

"All numbers between 1 and 100"

What is the difference between my two statements as far as the numbers between 1 and 100 are concerned?