Bible contradictions?

[YahwehIsTheWay]

I'm curious and no Creationist has ever answered this question: do you believe there's a conspiracy then?

This is an elaborate conspiracy. It's been going strong for 100 years now, it's taken over the scientific and academic fields. It's sabotaged the entire process of peer review. It has a strong hold across all national borders all over the world. That's an impressive conspiracy! Why?

What's the motive? Is there a lot of money to be made?

Hmmmm. Now who could possibly be behind such a conspiracy? Who is it that's always at work to blind people to the Word of God? Hm. Could it be... mmmmm... maybe... SATAN?

[chi pan]

One word: dogs.

Dogs, GC.

Dogs are a separate species from wolves.

Dogs were bred from wolves.

Dogs are an example of how one species can come from another.

And this is within relatively recent human history. That they can be bred through artificial means it can happen in nature.

This is an example of how animals can offspring varieties of animals in not millions, but hundreds of years. How does this support your case?

What do you imagine a "transitional species" would look like? How would a "transitional species" be different from a "species"? What is to stop a Creationist from playing infinite regression, where you'll keep demanding to see transitions between transitions? Say, if we find a transition between Homo Erectus and Neanderthal, would you then ask for a transition between this transition?

I would imagine a transitional form to show gradual change in species, not dramatic. There is no species that is between a horse and a giraffe. No animal or fossil that has an intermediate neck. A horse can't give birth to a giraffe so where's the transition? As for your examples, we are a little skeptical of your "transitional primitive human" forms based on history of hoaxes. Piltdown man is now an acknowlaged hoax, the only evidence for nebraska man turned out to be a pigs tooth, Ramapithecus consisted of a mere handful of teeth and jaw fragments put together incorrectly by Louis Leakey. It was actually an ape jaw. Eugene Dubois acknowledged java man was probably just a large gibbon and admitted that he withheld parts of four other bones of apes found in the same area. Neanderthal man was a man crippled with arthritis and rickets. Their fleshy portions are all imaginative. See the pattern?

I'm curious and no Creationist has ever answered this question: do you believe there's a conspiracy then?

Well conspiracy is a strong claim. Someone would need a lot of evidence to say there's conspiracy. I won't say there is but what would you consider all these hoaxes? How would you categorize them? In no other field has there been more hoaxes.

[Minimalist]

See the pattern?

The pattern is that science continues seeking answers and refines its findings as more evidence is accumulated.

Religion insists that its bullshit is unchanging and true.


So, yes. The pattern is quite obvious.

[Phil]

There is no species that is between a horse and a giraffe.

Who told you horses evolved into giraffes? They lied to you and you were to fucking stupid to know any better.

[chi pan]

See the pattern?

The pattern is that science continues seeking answers and refines its findings as more evidence is accumulated.

Religion insists that its bullshit is unchanging and true.


So, yes. The pattern is quite obvious.

The pattern was that many hoaxes were made, many more are to come. There isn't any transitional forms between apes and humans that haven't been disproven. Funny how you guys don't know what a transition is unless it pertains to apes and humans.

---

There is no species that is between a horse and a giraffe.

Who told you horses evolved into giraffes? They lied to you and you were to fucking stupid to know any better.

Then what did?

[NoMoreFaith]

This is an example of how animals can offspring varieties of animals in not millions, but hundreds of years. How does this support your case?

It shows the creation of a new species by semi-artificial means. Natural Selection takes a lot longer for obvious reasons.

I would imagine a transitional form to show gradual change in species, not dramatic. There is no species that is between a horse and a giraffe.
No animal or fossil that has an intermediate neck. A horse can't give birth to a giraffe so where's the transition?

Firstly, Giraffes are not directly related to horses. How can you expect us to take you seriously if you do not even know that much about giraffes.

There are several transitions, Samotherium to Giraffa is the transition you are looking for.
You are absolutely right, there isn't an abundance of those fossils, but there aren't very many people looking either, it may come up, who knows.
Have you read anything on how the Giraffe neck at ALL.

The recurrant Laryngeal Nerve of the Giraffe is a nerve that goes from the brain to the larynx of the giraffe.
However... it goes via the chest, by the aorta and alllllllllll the way BACK up the neck.

Whys this? Not very smart, certainly not intelligent. However, what it does show is that the Giraffes neck has elongated over time. "Stretched" is an inaccurate word for it, but the most expressive.
This is consistent for the nerve in fish, its the most direct route, but once you have mammals, with necks, it becomes a redundant route.
If the ancestors of the giraffe didn't slowly naturally drift towards a long neck, but instead was a sudden change, or was actually designed, this nerve needs only go from brain to larynx.. not from underneath the heart.

Now this isn't absolute proof obviously, however.. what we have, including the actual evidence, is that where we have not found any fossils (they don't happen easily you know), but we can look at the genetic similarities and the shared traits. We can show the giraffe shares traits with its brothers and ancestors in the evolutionary tree.

So the question is; Why does it share the same traits, when it no longer makes sense for it to do so? The only reasonable answer is that came from a common ancestor.

Well conspiracy is a strong claim. Someone would need a lot of evidence to say there's conspiracy. I won't say there is but what would you consider all these hoaxes? How would you categorize them? In no other field has there been more hoaxes.

Biology is certainly the least certain of the natural sciences, and has far more error. However, science is self-correcting. Who do you think spotted this flaws and "hoaxes". It wasn't religious people. It was OTHER scientists.

So in your world view, scientists are exposing the errors, and occasional outright lie themselves, and correcting mistakes. Those that lie, are severely crippled in the scientific community.

[DeistPaladin]

This is an example of how animals can offspring varieties of animals in not millions, but hundreds of years. How does this support your case?

Dogs have been around for more than a few hundred years but the breeding of wolves into dogs (separate species) shows that speciation is possible (contrary to ID proponents assertions, that microevolution happens but there is some sort of barrier that prevents speciation or macroevolution).

In sum: it happened therefore it can happen.

Clear?

I would imagine a transitional form to show gradual change in species, not dramatic.

Evolution does not feature dramatic changes at all. Dramatic changes, like a horse giving birth to a giraffe, would disprove evolution and be evidence for a supernatural influence.

There is no species that is between a horse and a giraffe. No animal or fossil that has an intermediate neck. A horse can't give birth to a giraffe so where's the transition?

There is none. Again, that would disprove evolution.

Think wolf to dog. Even though that was artificial selection, the same process is at work.

As for your examples, we are a little skeptical of your "transitional primitive human" forms based on history of hoaxes. Piltdown man is now an acknowlaged hoax, the only evidence for nebraska man turned out to be a pigs tooth, Ramapithecus consisted of a mere handful of teeth and jaw fragments put together incorrectly by Louis Leakey. It was actually an ape jaw. Eugene Dubois acknowledged java man was probably just a large gibbon and admitted that he withheld parts of four other bones of apes found in the same area. Neanderthal man was a man crippled with arthritis and rickets. Their fleshy portions are all imaginative. See the pattern?

Remember what I said about the process of peer review? Remember how I explained that the process of peer review ferrets out all the frauds and mistakes to separate out what is legitimate?

It was that very process that exposed these hoaxes. Scientists, not Creationists, exposed and rejected these hoaxes. That's how it works. And guess what? The puzzle fit together much better when these hoaxes like Piltdown were rejected. Scientists were relieved, not dismayed. For so long, the Piltdown man stuck out like a sore thumb. The more legitimate fossils were discovered, the less Piltdown made sense.

Scientific peer review. It works.

Well conspiracy is a strong claim. Someone would need a lot of evidence to say there's conspiracy.

Indeed you do.

Again, we have:

1. A hundred years.
2. Across all international borders
3. Complete subversion of the peer review process.
4. Total takeover of the entire field of biology

You don't just need to assert a conspiracy here. You need to assert the BIGGEST CONSPIRACY OF ALL TIME AND A VAST INTERNATIONAL ILLUMINATI STYLE ORGANIZATION BEHIND IT!

I won't say there is but what would you consider all these hoaxes? How would you categorize them?

As frauds successfully exposed by the rigorous process of peer review proving that science can be relied upon to factor in all available evidence and discard what turns out not to be true.

In no other field has there been more hoaxes.

Really? Source please?

[Phil]

Then what did?

Look it up yourself. I am not your flunkie nor am I your teacher. Matter of fact if an idiot like you ever set foot in any classroom I taught in, I would throw you out the fucking window.

[The Grand Nudger]

Chip, the common ancestor of cattle and deer would be what you're looking for with regards to giraffes ..not horses. Horses are Equidae Perissodactyla, Giraffes - Giraffidae Artiodactyla. They're both ungulates, both mammals, but apart from that there's quite a bit of separation.

Pointing to two animals in separate families and orders and asking for a transitional fossil between them is just about as far off the mark as you could get without shooting at something other than the mark. No one claims to have such a fossil, and no one claims that such a creature ever existed. You're arguing against a dragon.

Heres the only other surviving rep of the branch the giraffe belongs to btw.. Funny how it looks very little like a giraffe, and a whole lot like some other notable creatures. That's the trick about animals and their family trees btw, you can't judge them by how they look (ergo giraffe/horse), that's often convergence at play.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giraffidae
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okapi

[Minimalist]

The pattern was that many hoaxes were made, many more are to come.

The biggest of them being your fucking religion.