"What's in a name? That which we call a felid
By any other name would still be a miacid." [with apologies to Shakespeare]
Although I thought it was canids that evolved from miacids, but I'm no expert.
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.
"What's in a name? That which we call a felidYes ,acter all, felids ( cat ancestors) evolved from miacids
Oh good grief - that's not a reiteration, at best it's a single indirect reference.It's the old Exodus 20:11 argument.
EXODUS 20Interesting - which commandments talk of the creation?
Nowhere that I know of does the Bible date the Garden of Eden, but whatever date is correct, I don't see God having a problem with putting a diversity of genes in His re-creation.But it doesn't do anything for the evidence of living creatures and humans. Our genes are too diverse to be descended from a single couple around 10 thousand years ago. There are too many developed civilisations that predate most ideas about the date of the Garden of Eden.
I don't know why it would be necessary to deny any well-evidenced evolution up to a Gap, as long as it is considered put in place by God.Not completely, no. But you do have to ignore a whole lot.
Similar pre-Gap species could have been re-created in post-Gap, even though Adamic man was a totally different re-creation. This is "out there" I know, but so is the belief that shrew-like mammals morphed into every kind of known animal, and eventually humans over time.I suspect to justify the lack of genetic evidence for the re-creation of Gap theory, you end up having to invoke most of the YEC hand waves and miracles anyway.
Then why not teach ID in schools?The existance or non-existance of god(s) is outside the realm of science.
Except you have mostly fully evolved creatures in the fossil records.The only people redifining what "theory" means in science, are creationists and cdesign proponentsists. Take Michael Behe for example on the Dover trial... One of the ID heroes, being an actual PhD guy. He redefined "scientific theory" in such a way that he could call ID to be such a "theory". The punchline being that under that new definition - astrology ALSO qualifies as a "scientific theory". You know, astrology.... horoscopes and such.
Go figure.
Evolution theory on the other hand, doesn't require any redefining of the word "theory" in scientific context.
Evolution and abiogenesis are two different subject. They're even seperate scientific fields.
Evolution theory doesn't address the origins of life itself.
Even if you wish to say that God seeded life on this planet, evolution is perfectly compatible with that (as long as the claim isn't that he created evolved creatures from scratch, which off course is not compatible with the facts of genetics).
Both felid and canid branches of the Carnivora evolved from miacids. In English- dogs and cats share a common ancestry"What's in a name? That which we call a felid
By any other name would still be a miacid." [with apologies to Shakespeare]
Although I thought it was canids that evolved from miacids, but I'm no expert.
. Because ID is not science nor is it scientific. It is artificially inflating an unverifiable religious belief and calling it a fact . Science only deals with natural phenomena and cannot and does not deal with supernatural causation. I’m a Christian not an atheist, I just happen to be scientifically literateThen why not teach ID in schools?
This is "out there" I know, but so is the belief that shrew-like mammals morphed into every kind of known animal, and eventually humans over time.
Thanks for the science lesson, but I hope that wasn't your only take from my post.I’m assuming that that was a typo. shrew like( but not shrews) mammals evolved into modern mammals. Not all animals . Something that you would probably call a worm evolved into all of the bilaterians. The wormlike organism turned upside down so that the nerve cord ran along the ventral side . The gut ran along the dorsal side. and these “worms” eventually evolved into the arthropods . On our side of the family tree the “worm” ancestor stayed right side up
-_- for the same reason we don't teach kids about the possibility that ghosts exists, or evil sentient clouds, etc. Lack of evidence for it.Then why not teach ID in schools?
OK; thanks.EXODUS 20
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger thatis within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Then why not teach ID in schools?
The only thing I get from your posts is that you’re trying to make the fact that you’re not literate in science mean that we should believe unverified religious stories as if they are a verified historyThanks for the science lesson, but I hope that wasn't your only take from my post.
What would be taught? ID has no evidence in its support. What do you envision? Maybe something like this:
Teacher: "This is the fossil record showing a transition between X and Y. Now, ID claims that as since nobody was there to see it, this didn't happen, plus they claim they have math,"
Student: "Teacher? What is the evidence that supports ID?"
Teacher: "Analogies."
Student: "So... Nothing, then?"
What would be taught? ID has no evidence in its support. What do you envision? Maybe something like this:
Teacher: "This is the fossil record showing a transition between X and Y. Now, ID claims that as since nobody was there to see it, this didn't happen, plus they claim they have math,"
Student: "Teacher? What is the evidence that supports ID?"
Teacher: "Analogies."
Student: "So... Nothing, then?"
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?