RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 26, 2014 at 8:16 pm
(This post was last modified: April 26, 2014 at 8:19 pm by Revelation777.)
(April 24, 2014 at 11:46 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote:(April 24, 2014 at 11:39 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: If I went to a local graveyard, dug up every ones bones, and lined the various bodies just so, I could create a convincing lineup showing evolutionActually no you couldn't. Our ancestors have larger canines and more protruding and they all have much stronger brow ridges then homo sapiens.
I can if we had a time machine...
But my take is that no, inert matter can't produce life
Looks like a homo sapien that over time changed a bit.
(April 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm)Kitanetos Wrote:(April 24, 2014 at 11:39 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Is the harsh truth is that once you die your dead, that's it, you no longer exist?
It is indeed the harsh truth that theists cannot accept, which is why they create the comforting lie of god and heaven.
The thought is comforting, but it is not a lie.
(April 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm)Kitanetos Wrote:(April 24, 2014 at 11:39 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Is the harsh truth is that once you die your dead, that's it, you no longer exist?
It is indeed the harsh truth that theists cannot accept, which is why they create the comforting lie of god and heaven.
The thought is comforting, but it is not a lie.
(April 25, 2014 at 12:04 am)Esquilax Wrote:(April 24, 2014 at 11:50 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Part of the problem lies is what you guys see as a transitional fossil, I don't. That is why we are at a standstill and we need to go to Argument #1 but I am waiting for something.
Yes, that is the problem: we see things as transitional fossils based on detailed cladographic, genetic and morphological study done by qualified scientists over decades, and you don't see anything as a transitional fossil based on the fact that you don't understand what half the words I just used mean, all the while bolstering your opinions with the words of uneducated creationist conmen whose arguments essentially boil down to "in my ill informed opinion, this doesn't seem transitional to me."
One of our two sides is bothering with evidence and research, and the other is being an intractable bore.
And before I go, I did ask you to admit that you were wrong about the quotes that you sourced a few pages back, and that you were lied to from the people you got them from. Any progress on that basic level of accountability, Rev?
I already explained myself. Please stay on the topic. Thank you.
