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.
realy? so where is the limit that we can push back the first tetrapod?. give me a number.
no. you clearly said that you agree that if we will find 12354 instead of 12345 you will admit that evolution is false. so we do find such a case. why you ingore it?
if so your claim that series of fossils like 12345 is evidence against evolution is incorrect. since in any such case we can give an explanation.Because, as has been explained to you already, there is an explanation.
why you didnt answer the question? where is the limit that we can push back the first tetrapod? give me a number. what about 450my tetrapod fossil?You don't know?
Why are you presenting yourself as some kind of expert on evolution, if you don't even realise why it would be a problem for evolution to find a tetrapod in pre-devonian rock?
Here's a hint: if you find mammals before amphibians show up, evolution is in trouble.
If you find amphibians that show up before mammals, then evolution is standing tall.
if so your claim that series of fossils like 12345 is evidence against evolution is incorrect.
We'll only know that, once you become honest enough to define your terms before using them.since in any such case we can give an explanation.
why you didnt answer the question? where is the limit that we can push back the first tetrapod? give me a number. what about 450my tetrapod fossil?
if so your claim that series of fossils like 12345 is evidence against evolution is incorrect. since in any such case we can give an explanation.
No, its you who dont understand. The fossils support evolution, there has never been one that dis-proves the theory.
Only if one is so vague about what "12345" represents that one can change what they represent in the blink of an eye, to make anything support anything. Like you do.
I asked you at least 7 times to properly define what the numbers represent. The best I got out of you was "fossils". And I do mean ONLY that word.
It's too ridiculous to even pay any attention to.
We'll only know that, once you become honest enough to define your terms before using them.
Have you not figured out why ToE is scientific, yet?its simple: if numbers represent fossils then the right order should look like this: 12345. but out of order fossil should look like 12354. so now fossil number 5 predate its ancestor (or something close to). this is why my tetrapod example is out of place.
of course. since any fossil according to evolution is ok with the theory. this is why its isnt scientific.
its simple: if numbers represent fossils then the right order should look like this: 12345. but out of order fossil should look like 12354
so now fossil number 5 predate its ancestor (or something close to). this is why my tetrapod example is out of place.
if so your claim that series of fossils like 12345 is evidence against evolution is incorrect. since in any such case we can give an explanation.
if so your claim that series of fossils like 12345 is evidence against evolution is incorrect. since in any such case we can give an explanation.
Which means what? Finches becoming ummm finches?????
its also true for creationism. so creationism is now science?As you have been told so many times, if finches produce anything other then finches, then evolution is falsified.
No.its also true for creationism. so creationism is now science?
Really? So what does your tetrapod example predate that it shouldn't predate?
So basically, new tetrapod evidence predates the oldest tetrapod evidence we had previously, but doesn't predate its own ancestors, being fish.all the allegedly "missing links" between fishes and tetrapods.
so if we will find a bear fossil that is about 200 my old evolution will be false?Of course, there are many conceivable situations that would NOT be explainable. A bird in precambrian rocks. A fossil bear in the Triassic.
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?