(March 25, 2018 at 6:50 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 25, 2018 at 6:38 pm)chimp3 Wrote: A distinction is a difference or contrast between similar things. Some mammals have canine teeth, some flat grinding molars for eating coarse vegetation. All mammals have hair, feed their young by milk. They have distinctions. They are similar to one another. Biology is that cool!

You're contradicting yourself dude.

(March 17, 2018 at 8:37 pm)chimp3 Wrote: Distinct? They all have fur and mammary glands. Birds and reptiles do not! No mammals lay eggs. So, they are not distinct. They share similarities. Read a high school biology book before you comment on this subject!

(March 25, 2018 at 6:38 pm)chimp3 Wrote: All mammals have hair, feed their young by milk. They have distinctions. They are similar to one another. Biology is that cool!

Similar does not mean identical, "not distinct" however does make that implication, so which is it?

I know this is difficult for you! Can I recommend a few books?

(March 25, 2018 at 6:53 pm)..Grandizer Wrote:

(March 25, 2018 at 6:43 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Really? Please explain how "not distinct" doesn't mean not distinct.

"not distinct" does mean "not distinct". But the question is whether he was using the same sense of "distinct" as you wish he was using. He was clearly saying that they aren't as distinct as you make them out to be, and that they are very similar to each other in many ways. I mean, the context is there and clear to understand, regardless of whether you take issue with his word usage or not. And you know what he meant. You just want to find some fault in other people's posts just to have a go at them for not agreeing with you.

Let me explain the context to you.

We were discussing the definition of 'Species' and under that definition it stated "a DISTINCT sort or kind".

Quote:

(March 17, 2018 at 5:17 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: You act as if I defined the word, if you want to argue with the dictionary be my guest...

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/species

Quote:species
1. a class of individuals having some common characteristics or qualities; distinct sort or kind.

(March 17, 2018 at 7:39 pm)chimp3 Wrote: So, chimps, humans, raccoons, horses, pigs, and rabbits have fur, live birth, feed their young with milk. Does this make them a "kind"?

Pigs and rabbits are distinctly different, hence they belong to different kinds...

Are you going to still maintain that Chimp was taken out of context?

(March 25, 2018 at 7:11 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 25, 2018 at 6:53 pm)..Grandizer Wrote: "not distinct" does mean "not distinct". But the question is whether he was using the same sense of "distinct" as you wish he was using. He was clearly saying that they aren't as distinct as you make them out to be, and that they are very similar to each other in many ways. I mean, the context is there and clear to understand, regardless of whether you take issue with his word usage or not. And you know what he meant. You just want to find some fault in other people's posts just to have a go at them for not agreeing with you.

Let me explain the context to you.

We were discussing the definition of 'Species' and under that definition it stated "a DISTINCT sort or kind".




Pigs and rabbits are distinctly different, hence they belong to different kinds...

Are you going to still maintain that Chimp was taken out of context?

This is why I call Creationists/ Intelligent Design perpetuators " I.D.iots"

(March 25, 2018 at 7:16 pm)chimp3 Wrote:

(March 25, 2018 at 7:11 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Let me explain the context to you.

We were discussing the definition of 'Species' and under that definition it stated "a DISTINCT sort or kind".




Pigs and rabbits are distinctly different, hence they belong to different kinds...

Are you going to still maintain that Chimp was taken out of context?

This is why I call Creationists/ Intelligent Design perpetuators " I.D.iots"

(March 17, 2018 at 8:37 pm)chimp3 Wrote: No mammals lay eggs.

Indeed..

Testicles.

Because an old fashioned way to remember the order when crossing yourself was, "spectacles, testicles, wallet and watch".

(March 25, 2018 at 7:27 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 25, 2018 at 7:16 pm)chimp3 Wrote: This is why I call Creationists/ Intelligent Design perpetuators " I.D.iots"

(March 17, 2018 at 8:37 pm)chimp3 Wrote: No mammals lay eggs.

Indeed..

Ah yes, monotremes! Takes me back, way back! Back to our reptilian mammal days!

Pigs and Rabbits!

Similarities:

Live birth of young.

Feed young milk from tits. From mammaries

Placentas.

Warm blooded.

Hair/ fur.

Single boned lower jaw.

Three boned inner ear.

Four chambered heart in (kinship with birds).

More efficient diaphragms than reptiles.

Incestual birth defects?

(March 25, 2018 at 9:00 am)chimp3 Wrote:

(March 25, 2018 at 2:17 am)Godscreated Wrote:

---

You might try reading the Bible before showing what a big dummy you are.

GC

I have read the babble and was not impressed. We know the babble says god walked in the garden, so legs? We know the babble says god loves the smell of burning animals, so a nose or at least olfactory organs? How do you know what body parts god has and does not?

God the Son walked in the garden, smelling the burning animals is a metaphor for God being pleased His people were repenting of their sin. God says He is Spirit and not a physical being like we are. I can see why you are not impressed with the Bible, you can't use common sense and or logic to understand what you have read. You also listen to those who know little about the scriptures and are drawn into their lack of understanding and then Christians see you as dumb as the ones you listen to and why shouldn't we.

GC

---

(March 25, 2018 at 9:10 am)mh.brewer Wrote:

(March 25, 2018 at 2:17 am)Godscreated Wrote: You might try reading the Bible before showing what a big dummy you are.

GC

We have, but with a skeptical eye and clear mind, not the delusional one you use.

I read with an open mind seeking truth through the revelation of the Holy Spirit. You and the rest look for anything you think you can use to condemn the Bible, how in the world do you expect to learn anything with that attitude. It shows you haven't learned anything.

GC

---

(March 25, 2018 at 9:24 am)vorlon13 Wrote: [

(March 25, 2018 at 2:17 am)Godscreated Wrote:  No He isn't we know that He is Spirit and is not flesh, get with the program and read the Bible before you condemn what it says.

GC

---

 You must be reading things in your dreams because as far as I know all the Christians here believe the Holy Spirit is fully God.

GC

---

You might try reading the Bible before showing what a big dummy you are.

GC

(bolding mine)  

And vice versa all around so it's OK to say it all 3 ways.

Seems you are the only one who got the message, do something with the info.

GC

---

(March 25, 2018 at 9:28 am)rskovride Wrote:

Godscreated Wrote:  You must be reading things in your dreams because as far as I know all the Christians here believe the Holy Spirit is fully God.

You do not hold the trinity dogma?

How do you come to such a conclusion from what I posted, all three are fully God.

GC

GC, open mind does not include preconceived notions.