Posted on 01/30/2006 10:27:35 PM PST by Sweetjustusnow
"But the theory of man coming from apes is much more logical..../sarcasm."
....sounds like The French Enlightenment claiming that it is not possible that donkeys and horses belong to the same group....
Come on, you're smarter than that.
If you want to give him even more credit, go right ahead.
Are you suggesting that today we know EVERYTHING about the human body?
No, he isn't, nor are his observations based on any such requirement. Work on your reading comprehension.
Is the appendix the only part of the human body that was said to serve no purpose?
No, it isn't, but in any case, why are you changing the subject? He's speaking of suboptimal design, not vestigial features. And we've dealt with your misconceptions about the appendix previously.
What happened to all the others?
They're still there. Quick, why do you get goosebumps when you're cold or scared? Hint: It was functional back when our distant ancesters had fur. It's useless now that we have sparse fuzz on most of our skin. Bigger hint: For an animal with fur, the tiny muscular reactions at the base of hair follicles which we call "goosebumps" raises the fur, fluffing it up for warmth (when cold) and to make the animal look bigger and more imposing when faced with a threat it might have to fight (when feeling fear). But it's freaking useless for humans. Now, did "The Designer" give us goosebump reflexes (and the mechanism which makes it work mechanically) because a) he thought we were furry, or b) he was a lousy designer and gave us stuff we couldn't use, or c) because the designer was evolution, and we inherited our "goosebump" mechanism from ancestors with fur and it's a vestigial and now useless feature now that we're not covered in fur?
A similar thing happened to shorthaired dachshunds. The other day my wiener dog was barking at another dog, and the "fur" on her back stood up. Of course, she has fur about 1/8 of an inch long, so it did nothing whatsoever to make her look bigger and more imposing (nor would it keep her any warmer), it just made a stripe up the middle of her back turn a darker shade of reddish brown. Ooh, scary! She, like us, inherited her "fur raising" feature from an ancestor in which it was a lot more useful (in her case, the wolves which are the ancestors of domestic dogs, which have long enough fur that the fur-raising mechanism actually performs a useful function).
OOPS!
Indeed. You must be used to saying that by now
Post #35 - well said. There's a definite line between what's provenly known and what is theory. It is to our misfortune that so much money and fame is able to be had for spreading theories the populace feels "more comfortable with" without a shred of evidence to back them up.
Never let actual facts stand between an otherwise skill-less academic and a sought after tenure.
No "evolutionist" today believes in Piltdown man.
Who uncovered the hoax? It was the "evolutionists", not the creationists.
Piltdown is evidence that the scientific method works.
"1001001 1000100 0100000 1101001 1110011 1101110 1110100 100000 1110011 1100011 1101001 1100101 1101110 1100011 1100101 100001"
I'll "byte" -- what does this mean?
Unfortunately, there's no real distinction between "theory" and "what's provenly known". In science, theory does not mean "hypothesis". A theory is about the highest level an idea can achieve. The Theory of Gravity is pretty well-established.
But of course, anybody who reads these threads already knows that. They still keep mis-representing what a "theory" is. Their motives for doing so, I shall keep to myself.
I'll "byte" -- what does this mean?
Substitute the ASCII character equivalent for each binary value and it'll give a message.
It translates to: "ID isnt science". I'm not sure why he left out the apostrophe, it would be: "100111".
"Now how does God work? I get it now!" - I don't think so.
"God made the earth which means he wasn't from here, which means he was alien to this world. He had to be from somewhere else because the earth wasn't here before God. Since two things can't occupy the same space..." - See... you don't get it. God is in everything. He who made the laws of science can change and break them.
"And you want to impress the rest of us with your intellectual maturity and scientific reasoning?" - And you think your inane post is full of intellectual maturity and scientific reasoning? Do you even have a logical point? Oh and by the way where is that dang missing link?
You should pray to the Lord to give you the insight to realize that God created evolution, not Darwin.
In post #14, and it's not missing.
Unless you have INCREDIBLE FAITH!!! Me, I just don't have the INCREDIBLE FAITH it takes to BELIEVE in EVOLUTION....
Of course. Extreterestial life experiments...
Oh how inconvenient is that...
Science is a great thing. Not for the religious cult of Evolutionists however. Geology sciences prove a young earth, and also a great flood, more than a flood, a disaster unimaginable. The entire crust of the earth collapsed inward, blew apart, and shifted. Comets and meteors today are remnants of the huge forces that happened in a matter of days and weeks. Hydoplate theory is supported by science, unlike Evolution. for anyone interested read it here: Hydroplate theory
Oh boy... That is just down right laughable! These same idiots who claim that is why we get goosebumbs, are also the ones that said things like "the appendix is useless, serves no function, leftover from our earlier days", and other equally PROFOUNDLY, IGNORANT MUTTERINGS.
That so PERFECTLY decribes the large number of PHONY evolution 'discoveries' and frauds that have perpetrated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.