|
Just A Little Something To Piss Off Creationist Morons
|
A little something for RDK to chew on.
Anatomical evidence for human evolution from fish. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13278255 You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid. Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis. 
"I received this information from visions which I experienced."
Angel dust doesn't make you see actual angels, dude.  (May 5, 2011 at 1:12 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: A little something for RDK to chew on. I predict a festival of denial coming on. 
Common guys, RDK knows god personally - the bible tells him so.
![[Image: godwalk.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk619%2Fjcincain%2Fgodwalk.gif) ![[Image: Evolution.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk619%2Fjcincain%2FPublic%2FEvolution.png)  (May 5, 2011 at 11:25 am)RDK Wrote: If anyone thinks that I need to go to any websites to explain the absurdaties of evolution, you would be wrong. I received this information from visions which I experienced. You should really stop making sandwiches using moldy bread.
Science flies us to the moon and stars. Religion flies us into buildings.
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems?  (May 5, 2011 at 2:11 pm)Thor Wrote:(May 5, 2011 at 11:25 am)RDK Wrote: If anyone thinks that I need to go to any websites to explain the absurdaties of evolution, you would be wrong. I received this information from visions which I experienced. And putting those filthy mushrooms on them such sandwiches. (May 5, 2011 at 2:53 pm)Napoleon666 Wrote:(May 5, 2011 at 2:11 pm)Thor Wrote:(May 5, 2011 at 11:25 am)RDK Wrote: If anyone thinks that I need to go to any websites to explain the absurdaties of evolution, you would be wrong. I received this information from visions which I experienced. And stop licking those toads.
Science flies us to the moon and stars. Religion flies us into buildings.
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems?  (May 5, 2011 at 2:59 pm)Thor Wrote:(May 5, 2011 at 2:53 pm)Napoleon666 Wrote:(May 5, 2011 at 2:11 pm)Thor Wrote:(May 5, 2011 at 11:25 am)RDK Wrote: If anyone thinks that I need to go to any websites to explain the absurdaties of evolution, you would be wrong. I received this information from visions which I experienced. Let him eat the mushrooms and lick the toads. It is much less harmful than eating or licking the bible.  (May 5, 2011 at 3:03 pm)Chuck Wrote: Let him eat the mushrooms and lick the toads. It is much less harmful than eating or licking the bible. Giving up the tiny amount of nutrients contained in the paper of its pages is one of the few useful things a bible can do for a person!
Galileo was a man of science oppressed by the irrational and superstitious. Today, he is used by the irrational and superstitious who claim they are being oppressed by science - Mark Crislip
How do you make a claim such as a baby starting out looking like a fish. I'm sure if you wanted to make a claim that the fish is the most predominant ancestor for us to relate to, why choose just a fish. If we had an animal past why couldn't we look like a salamander, or a toad, or a wombat for that matter. Because something appears to resemble some portion of what you say is our genetic past, does that make us part fish. Ever try to mate a human with a fish? Naturally it can not be done.
Whenever a new animal species is created, it automatically excludes itself from its own gene pool(you would have to say). Here is another difficulty that you have to overcome. Animals are given specific numbers and order of their chromosomes which makes them distinct among their animal species. Even if you tried to get them to mate, most of the time they will not even try. The numbers and order of Chromosomes has to match or the sperm will not be accepted by the egg. If an animal mutates in order to produce a new species, it has left itself without a mating partner. Most animals are repelled by something different from itself anyway. Even newborn animals are subject to scrutiny by their parents, and they will very often kill the deformed baby. Here is another thought about the start of the first animals with reproductive systems to produce the very first of a mating couple engagement. Originally, simple creatures just devided in two to create another like itself. What a surprise for these animals when they learned that not only would one animal have to spontaneously create a fully operational reproductive tract, but so would its neighbor, at the same time. Suddenly both animals have to simultaneously create these systems for themselves, but they will not be able to procreate unless both sexes realize that they now need each other. That would be an astounding coincidence to ever occur. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
