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.
warispeace said:It really doesn't matter what kind of evidence there is for evolution, it's never going to be enough. If we could see a mouse turning into a "non-mouse," creationists would say, "Well, you never see a dog turn into a pine cone!"
There is no such thing as macro-evolution. It is an invisible boundary that only exists in the minds of creationists. Evolution either exists, or it doesn't.
Split Rock said:I guess you agree now? (at least for the mouse example)
Dale Martin said:Your problem is that you will not see a mouse turning into a "non-mouse," It will NOT Happen Because that would be Macro evolution. Only in your mind does "MACRO" evolution not exist. If you do not know the difference in the two that is only of your own ignorance. That is like saying there is no difference between growing a watermelon and making a car. . .
Indeed, mice will always give birth to mice. Just as dinosaurs always give birth to dinosaurs. You see them flying around everyday.Dale Martin said:Your problem is that you will not see a mouse turning into a "non-mouse," It will NOT Happen Because that would be Macro evolution. Only in your mind does "MACRO" evolution not exist. If you do not know the difference in the two that is only of your own ignorance. That is like saying there is no difference between growing a watermelon and making a car. . .
Who says we evolved from them? Evolution doesn't. It says we evolved from common ancestors of them. Your source is bad.Carico said:Exactly. Evolutionists are so busy trying to analyze the trees that they miss the forest completely. Apes are still around today and so are cats & horses. So how did we 'evolve" from them if they are still around today?
First off. Please don't use the 'if humans evolved from apes, why are there still apes?'-argument. It is the stupidest ever. Did your parents stop existing directly after you were born, ofcourse not. Neither would apes suddenly stop existing after the human lineage split off. It is clear that the only thing which contradicts basic reproductive principles is your post.Carico said:Exactly. Evolutionists are so busy trying to analyze the trees that they miss the forest completely. Apes are still around today and so are cats & horses. So how did we 'evolve" from them if they are still around today? The theory of evolution, of course, contradicts basic reproductive principles. But in the imagination ANYTHING'S possible.
Carico said:Exactly. Evolutionists are so busy trying to analyze the trees that they miss the forest completely. Apes are still around today and so are cats & horses. So how did we 'evolve" from them if they are still around today? The theory of evolution, of course, contradicts basic reproductive principles. But in the imagination ANYTHING'S possible.
Carico said:Exactly. Evolutionists are so busy trying to analyze the trees that they miss the forest completely.
Apes are still around today and so are cats & horses.
So how did we 'evolve" from them if they are still around today?
The theory of evolution, of course, contradicts basic reproductive principles.
But in the imagination ANYTHING'S possible.
we did not evolve from a plant so try another one.Split Rock said:I gave an example of a beneficial mutation that confers resistance to a herbicide in the weed, yellow starthistle here: http://www.christianforums.com/t1177661-evolution-mutations-equalibrium-and-adaptation.html&page=12. The mutation is only useful if the herbicide is present, however, it confers no known detriment in the absence of the herbicide.
So you're going to play the 'running goalpost'-game?william jay schroeder said:we did not evolve from a plant so try another one.
Do you agree that plants evolve then? Is it just human evolution that you object to?william jay schroeder said:we did not evolve from a plant so try another one.
william jay schroeder said:we did not evolve from a plant so try another one.
Loudmouth said:Arguments aside, I got a little chuckle out of this quip.
So? How is this a problem for the theory of evolution?
What requires one species to die off if another species changes?
How?
Of course, why do you think people still believe in a young earth?
Actually, none of these species are around today. The horse and cat families are still around, but the species that existed millions of years ago are long gone.Carico said:Because you miss the basic differences between horses, cats, & humans today. Because you miss that these species have not died out but are alive & well & STILL breed their own species today!
Of course horses come from horses and cats come from cats, etc. What a horse or cat is, however, has changed over time. The fossil record shows us that cats and horses were very different in the past. Where are the sabre-tooth cats today? Where are the three-toed horses? They are all extinct, and have been replaced over time. Evolutionary theory explains how.Carico said:No one has yet seen anything but a horse come from a horse, or anything but an ape come from ana ape or anything but a cat come from a cat. Yet your assertion that men came from apes is based on what?
Again, this is just silly. No scientist claims that apes give birth to humans. Every new birth is different from its parents. Every population changes in response to its environment. Apes have changed the same way over millions of years.Carico said:Evolution contradicts the basic fact that an egg & sperm of of a species is what produces offspring. So what sperm & egg produced a human being from an ape? Or is this the ONLY instance where the principles of biology don't apply? If so, why?
What would a "super human" look like? remember, human evolution has to work within the physical constraints of the vertebrate body. We may well destroy ourselves and render the human species extinct. But guess what? Extinction has been the ultimate end to the vast majority of species on this planet.Carico said:And one of the underlying theories of evolution is the survival of the fittest. In that case, how have human beings not bred super humans? And how is man any more fit today than he has been in thousands of years in recorded history when he now has the capacity to destroy more people in an instant than ever before?
Carico said:Because you miss the basic differences between horses, cats, & humans today. Because you miss that these species have not died out but are alive & well & STILL breed their own species today!
No one has yet seen anything but a horse come from a horse, or anything but an ape come from ana ape or anything but a cat come from a cat. Yet your assertion that men came from apes is based on what?
Evolution contradicts the basic fact that an egg & sperm of of a species is what produces offspring.
So what sperm & egg produced a human being from an ape?
Or is this the ONLY instance where the principles of biology don't apply? If so, why?
And one of the underlying theories of evolution is the survival of the fittest. In that case, how have human beings not bred super humans?
And how is man any more fit today than he has been in thousands of years in recorded history when he now has the capacity to destroy more people in an instant than ever before?
Carico said:Because you miss the basic differences between horses, cats, & humans today. Because you miss that these species have not died out but are alive & well & STILL breed their own species today! No one has yet seen anything but a horse come from a horse, or anything but an ape come from ana ape or anything but a cat come from a cat. Yet your assertion that men came from apes is based on what?
Evolution contradicts the basic fact that an egg & sperm of of a species is what produces offspring. So what sperm & egg produced a human being from an ape? Or is this the ONLY instance where the principles of biology don't apply? If so, why? And one of the underlying theories of evolution is the survival of the fittest. In that case, how have human beings not bred super humans? And how is man any more fit today than he has been in thousands of years in recorded history when he now has the capacity to destroy more people in an instant than ever before?
I find it funny that you think the sink holes are apparently the target area of cosmic warmongers hurling meteors at us.notto said:I find it funny to see a defender of the 'craters are sinkholes' theory make such a statement.
you have a name for everthing dont you. do you all get a manual to use agaisnt creationist. If you cant really answer the question do this tactic. He did not answer my question but gave something not even related to it. We did not evolve from plants did we. I have never seen your tree of evolution from a comman ancestor involve plants. Plants you say went one way while animals went another and im dealing with animals not plants. so who is doing what. My post #167 in 17 i think.Tomk80 said:So you're going to play the 'running goalpost'-game?
william jay schroeder said:you have a name for everthing dont you. do you all get a manual to use agaisnt creationist.
If you cant really answer the question do this tactic.
He did not answer my question but gave something not even related to it. We did not evolve from plants did we. I have never seen your tree of evolution from a comman ancestor involve plants. Plants you say went one way while animals went another and im dealing with animals not plants. so who is doing what.
Tomk80 said:I'm not sure what you mean by this. He is indeed right. A dinosaur is not a species of fish. Both are species of invertebrates, however. Same with protozoa. Protozoa and fishes split off from each other earlier. Both are eukaryotes, but fishes are not classified as protozoa. But maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say.
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?