(March 25, 2014 at 1:28 am)Thunder Cunt Wrote: Well we don't need the Internet or Space ships that fly to the moon. Yet we invent them regardless of not needing them. Apes could prolong their lives and enhance the quality of life if they would start inventing new things.

One might suggest that the inventive drive and intellect that produced those things is what allowed us to become the dominant species on the planet, and that technically apes did invent those things: humans are apes too, you know.

Quote:I don't deny that there is evidence in favor of what you say. However, If Credible scientific studies have come to the opposite Conclusion...I can't say for sure who is right and who is wrong.

Credible scientific studies have not determined that evolution is not factual. Ninety seven percent of scientists accept evolution as it is defined by biology, and that includes species-to-species transitions over time.

If, after almost two centuries of digging beneath all the world's continents, no previous ancestor of this first hard-bodied creature has been found, how then did the ubiquitous trilobite evolve? There should be some previous ancestor if evolution were true.

It's like finding an exquisite watch on the seashore and yet never finding any previous primitive models of the watch on earth. THere probably is no watchmaker at all, maintaining that time, water, sand, minerals and actions of the elements are sufficient to producing a fully functional watch that runs.

Further important evidence from the fossil record is the absence of transitional forms between species. Darwin was concerned that the thousands of intermediate stages between creatures needed to prove his theory were not in evidence, but he expected they would eventually be found. Yet those thousands of missing transitional forms are still missing!

Another reference explains: "If throughout past ages life was actually drifting over in one continual stream from one form to another, it is to be expected that as many samples of the intermediate stages between species should be discovered in fossil condition as of the species themselves …

All should be in a state of flux. But these missing links are wanting. There are no fossils of creatures whose scales were changing into feathers or whose feet were changing into wings, no fossils of fish getting legs or of reptiles getting hair.

The real task of the geological evolutionist is not to find 'the' missing link, as if there were only one. The task is to find those thousands upon thousands of missing links that connect the many fossil species with one another" (Byron Nelson, After Its Kind , 1970, pp. 60-62).

The absence of transitional forms is an insurmountable hurdle for theistic evolutionists as well.

---

Are humans Gorrillas?

Quote: Are humans Gorrillas?

No. BUT both gorillas and humans are primates.

(March 25, 2014 at 1:38 am)tor Wrote:

Quote: Are humans Gorrillas?

No. BUT both gorillas and humans are primates.

Now that I know to be true! ...And believe it with certainty

So do you agree that there were hominid species which divided into apes and humans? Yes or No.

I think it might be because the change is very very, gradual, where as dogs and horses are nowhere as slow, like not millions of years ?.

(March 25, 2014 at 1:42 am)tor Wrote: So do you agree that there were hominid species which divided into apes and humans? Yes or No.

Break it down and describe it as you would in terms that a person without a Degree could understand and I'll get back to you.

As of now, I don't know. YOu gave me some links. Was I there? Is that proof? Do I know who these people are or the contents of the studies? Were the people involved in the studies the ones that created the website? Can people altar fossils and create frawds?

Now, I'm not saying there is reason to believe that. But I'm saying I can't say with certainty just because you give me a LInk, or Book, or movie. THese things take time before one can say, "with 100% certainty I know this to be true".

And so it would be foolish of me to say Yes, because the links you gave me say so.

---

(March 25, 2014 at 1:34 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(March 25, 2014 at 1:28 am)Thunder Cunt Wrote: Well we don't need the Internet or Space ships that fly to the moon. Yet we invent them regardless of not needing them. Apes could prolong their lives and enhance the quality of life if they would start inventing new things.

One might suggest that the inventive drive and intellect that produced those things is what allowed us to become the dominant species on the planet, and that technically apes did invent those things: humans are apes too, you know.

Quote:I don't deny that there is evidence in favor of what you say. However, If Credible scientific studies have come to the opposite Conclusion...I can't say for sure who is right and who is wrong.

Credible scientific studies have not determined that evolution is not factual. Ninety seven percent of scientists accept evolution as it is defined by biology, and that includes species-to-species transitions over time.

Very clever!

The DNA evidence alone is enough to confirm common ancestor of all living things on earth.
Now do you believe that there were hominid species which divided into apes and humans? Yes or No.

(March 25, 2014 at 1:47 am)tor Wrote: The DNA evidence alone is enough to confirm common ancestor of all living things on earth.
Now do you believe that there were hominid species which divided into apes and humans? Yes or No.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were hominid species which divided into apes and humans. Do I know that to be true? Absolutely fucking not!

(March 25, 2014 at 1:34 am)Thunder Cunt Wrote: If, after almost two centuries of digging beneath all the world's continents, no previous ancestor of this first hard-bodied creature has been found, how then did the ubiquitous trilobite evolve? There should be some previous ancestor if evolution were true.

You mean like these guys? Took me about four seconds on google.

More importantly, you do realize that the formation of fossils is an incredibly rare and lucky thing that happens, right? Not every organism gets perfectly preserved, or even preserved at all, but the ones that we are lucky enough to find do point to evolution not only in terms of cladistics, but also in terms of the geologic layers they're found in. No organism has ever been found in a layer other than the one evolutionary theory predicts we would find them in. We've even discovered specific transitional forms- like Tiktaalik- just by digging down to the layer we'd expect them to exist at if evolution were true.

Quote:It's like finding an exquisite watch on the seashore and yet never finding any previous primitive models of the watch on earth. If you reasoned as an evolutionist, you would deny there was a need for a watchmaker at all, maintaining that time, water, sand, minerals and actions of the elements are sufficient to producing a fully functional watch that runs. This is part of the reason it takes more faith to believe in evolution than in a Creator!

Rebuttal of the watchmaker argument, since I can't be bothered typing it all out again.

Quote:Further important evidence from the fossil record is the absence of transitional forms between species. Darwin was concerned that the thousands of intermediate stages between creatures needed to prove his theory were not in evidence, but he expected they would eventually be found. Yet those thousands of missing transitional forms are still missing!

No, they aren't.

Quote:All should be in a state of flux. But these missing links are wanting. There are no fossils of creatures whose scales were changing into feathers or whose feet were changing into wings, no fossils of fish getting legs or of reptiles getting hair.

In order: Microraptor, Tiktaalik, Synapsids.

We have all of those fossils. This guy is talking out of his ass.

Are we done here?