Reply With Quote
Man, Avante is so lost when he can't make lists of black people.
the origin of DNA is a separate discussion than evolution. evolution is species changing over time. the start of life and DNA is abiogenesis. abiogenesis and evolution are different topics with different discussions
Man, Avante is so lost when he can't make lists of black people.
So we could have a MasterDesiner behind DNA, but He'd have nothing at all to do with evolution, right?
The evolution of the American white female sprinter.
She reminds me of Usain Bolt because of her build and stride. Tall with a long stride, that covers alot of ground.
Its been a looooooong time since Ive seen a white woman win the 100m dash.
Congrats to her!!!!
that's exactly opposite of what he is saying, dumbass.
I had an Uncle who told me fossils were God's way of testing our faith.
At the time, I had been upset about dinosaur omission in a picture with Adam and Eve, just today's favorite mammals were present in this picture. I expressed my disappointment in a CCD class my Uncle taught. I had no time Frame for the different types of animals and plants dominating in particular time periods.
Avante is at my 7 year old level, except I had a dinosaur list. And I had plastic dinosaurs figures instead of pro rassln bobble head collections. So there's that...
Oh, and the Catholic Church has a very clear stance on evolution established well before the current Pope. Evolution occurred, it is the interjection of the soul that makes us special. Science cannot answer questions concerning souls. This stance is perfectly legit and shows the Catholic Church's willingness to separate science from the super natural. The Vatican has an extensive science advisory group. Currently, the Pope expressing views on climate change shows the willingness of Catholics to use science as a legitimate source of information.
This is interesting because it further separates Catholics from many conservative Protestant groups (and some conservative Catholics) The two Christian groups can always fall back on abortion for common ground however.
I find all this very interesting.
Sure. If you have an absent creator who just started things off and left, allowed things to progress naturally. There are mountains of evidence which led to the theory of evolution
Abiogenesis has less concrete evidence, but still has merits (urey Miller experiment)
If ya had even have a brain my little buddy you'd see where I was going with this.
I've seen where you've gone for a hundred pages and it's re ed.
The last great white American female sprinter was Helen Stephens in 1936. She won the Olympics, she was 6 feet tall, and the story goes Hitler made a pass at her.
You're going full re . Now about my being in your thread.
I guarantee you will.
Watch.
I'm at the same level as the vast majority of people, I beleve in a Supreme Something responsible for all this. Are you saying that isn't true?
We have todays pig ok? Give me the name of the first creature that was going to end up todays pig. That is the problem with the theory. Where are all those stages of evolution?
I will say this little buddy, nobody knows re ed like you do.
You didn't look at any of the links to transitional fossils.
You choose to remain ignorant.
no one can help you with that.
So much of this.....
Fossils of a wide variety of flying and crawling insects appear without any transitions. Dragonflies, for example, appear suddenly in the fossil record. The highly complex systems that enable the dragonfly's aerodynamic abilities have no ancestors in the fossil record.
****In the entire fossil record, there is not a single unequivocal transition form proving a causal relationship between any two species.*********** From the billions of fossils we have discovered, there should be thousands of clear examples if they existed.
The lack of transitions between species in the fossil record is what would be expected if life was created.
Why did the designer design dinosaurs to become extinct?
Seems like a re ed waste of time.
Yeah, there's a lot of ignorant info out there. And you're slurping it all up instead of going to a university where real scientists do real work.
There is no end to this....
So – the big questions are: does variety show that life-forms are changing from one kind into another? Or does variety have a limit?
There are only two ways to find out!
- First, do we see Evolution happening today or do we see that life-forms have limits in their variety?
- Second, if Evolution is true, the fossil record of the past should show millions of examples of transitional fossils.
On the other hand, if Evolution is not true, the fossil record should show that life-forms in the past had limits to their variety also.
This means a REAL transitional form would not be a “variety”. Instead, these life-forms should show a major structure that is clearly changing.
In other words – if rodents became bats we should see some strange rodent with super long fingers. Why? Because bats have fingers longer than their bodies that they use as wings.
The truth is the only possible transitional fossils Evolutionists bring up are not convincing – even to other Evolutionists. There are some interesting mosaic creatures like the platypus and the walrus in the world. But the platypus and the walrus are complete within their own kind. They are not transitional forms. If Creation is what really happened in the past, this is what we would expect to find in the fossil record. (3)
I could post something talking about the HUGE/MASSIVE holes in the theory of evolution every single day. So many holes.
lol understanding-creationism.com
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
