Why are there no cows in the Devonian?

Queller · Jan 23, 2014

anyathesword said:
Well actually this thread isn't on this topic, but I just would like to mention that hell is located there, it is a physical place, and its hard to breath!!

No I don't think its a good place to live lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Queller · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
Which word did I add to the Bible?

Right here.

juvenissun said:
Since God is going to create more fish on Day 6

HitchSlap · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
Hang yourself.

Whatever do you mean?

Queller · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
You do not know that. There were a lot of grass.

If there were plants, there were fruit trees. Grass is a type of fruit tree.

Queller · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
Many. For example, king Solomon.

If many have wisdom, that directly contradicts what you said here:

juvenissun said:
Man does not have wisdom (except one).

One does not mean many in any dictionary in the world (well except maybe YOUR dictionary).

anyathesword · Jan 23, 2014

Queller said:

I don't appreciate being made fun of but whatever.

Black Akuma · Jan 23, 2014

anyathesword said:
I don't appreciate being made fun of but whatever.

You've been doing it since you came to this forum. How many posts have you responded to with 'LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' or something akin to it? It's okay for you to poke fun at other people and say you're laughing at them, but when some of that gets flung back your way, suddenly we've gone too far?

Delphiki · Jan 23, 2014

anyathesword said:
I'm talking about the Origin of Life, the Theory of Evolution. How is it using the scientific method?

The Theory of Evolution explains the diversity of life, not the origin. Abiogenesis is the study of the origin of life.

Oafman · Jan 23, 2014

Delphiki said:
The Theory of Evolution explains the diversity of life, not the origin. Abiogenesis is the study of the origin of life.

Creationists will often accuse evolution of trying to explain the origin of the universe, so the origin of life is an improvement! Kind of.

46AND2 · Jan 23, 2014

anyathesword said:
I don't appreciate being made fun of but whatever.

And we don't appreciate you playing the victim when you've demonstrated a condescending attitude ever since you got here.

You've said evolution is funny to you. The idea of hell in the center of the earth is funny to us.

Two way street, anya.

Queller · Jan 23, 2014

anyathesword said:
I don't appreciate being made fun of but whatever.

I don't appreciate your constantly accusing scientists of lying but whatever.

PsychoSarah · Jan 23, 2014

Delphiki said:
The Theory of Evolution explains the diversity of life, not the origin. Abiogenesis is the study of the origin of life.

There was a very interesting experiment performed where a scientist made a model of a possible early earth, complete with what chemicals the land and water could have possibly contained. Then, he sent electricity through it, imitating a lightning strike. To his surprise, amino acids, the proteins that make up DNA, began to form circular, almost bacteria-like structures. Now, this was far from creating life, but it does present some interesting possibilities.

bhsmte · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
I read it differently from you do.
Yours can not answer the fossil record. Mine can.

How? It is beyond the wisdom of man.

bhsmte · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
It is the same situation. You need to know how to read to get the useful thing out.

No, not quite. You have to learn how to ignore as much about reality as possible, to believe it.

bhsmte · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
Yes, I can. I am doing that.

Your not doing it any favors.

bhsmte · Jan 23, 2014

juvenissun said:
Common, that is what wisdom is. It does not need understanding.

This one may take the cake boys and girls.

PsychoSarah · Jan 23, 2014

Wisdom doesn't need understanding? Really, because that is what I have always viewed to be a quality of wisdom.

ExistenceUnknown · Jan 23, 2014

anyathesword said:
No no no, it doesn't work like this for the origin of life. Yes Darwin observed finches and their adaptability, and we have been able to see animals adapt. But finches are still finches. Yes animals adapt to their environment, but they stay the same! Frog, mouse, goat, bird.

As already stated, Evolution has nothing to say on the origin of life, it only seeks to explain the diversity that we see. You accuse science of making "assumptions" but what you fail to see is that the "assumptions" of science are based on evidence. The evidence leads us to believe that animals evolve. Your assumption which is based on absolutely 0 fact is that they don't evolve.

We know that there is a change in allele frequency because we can directly observe this in the lab. That evidence along with the multitude of other evidence (genetics, fossils, etc.) leads us to the educated "assumption" that evolution occurs.

Your challenge (as for it is for all creationists) is to provide some mechanism by which the change in allele frequency CANNOT lead to drastic changes in species. I dare say you will not accomplish this feat, because there is no known mechanism that says many small genetic changes can't lead to a drastic change.

anyathesword said:
This is a hypothesis for Darwin's finches, not a hypothesis to say we came from apes for example, or that one celled organisms Evolved into fish and into land animals.

Darwin's finches laid the groundwork for what would be called the Theory of Evolution, so to reference it as the starting point is 100% relevant.

anyathesword said:
Where is the test to see something evolve into something else? Where are the experiments? The earth's age has nothing to do with finches.

An often quoted example is that of Flavobacterium which can digest nylon. This is a direct measurement of evolution whether you dismiss it or not. What you are asking for "something evolve into something else" by your definition is not possible due to the vast amount of time required for these changes. In fact, if we woke up tomorrow to find that chimpanzees drastically changed overnight into an entirely different species that would be a huge hurdle for the Theory of Evolution.

PsychoSarah · Jan 23, 2014

You guys do realize that humans are a kind of ape right?

Loudmouth · Jan 23, 2014

PsychoSarah said:
You guys do realize that humans are a kind of ape right?

Yes and no. Ape is a colloquial term, not really a scientific one. In scientific terms, if you exclude humans from the ape group then apes should be referred to as a paraphyletic group instead of a monophyletic group.

Why are there no cows in the Devonian?

I'm where?

I'm where?

PROUDLY PRIMATE

I'm where?

I'm where?

Veteran

Shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die...

Well-Known Member

Try telling that to these bog brained murphys

Forty six and two are just ahead of me...

I'm where?

Chaotic Neutral

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Chaotic Neutral

Newbie

Chaotic Neutral

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency