Posted on 07/17/2007 2:30:26 AM PDT by balch3
There you go jumping to conclusions again. You assume I follow evolution merely because of the number of people who agree with it and not because the evidence supporting it. If science were merely a popularity contest then I'd be on your side with the creationism supporters because of recent poll information. So I'm sorry to disappoint you but no, I don't belive in what you would no doubt define global warming as. And no, I don't believe the earth is 6000 years old. And no, I don't believe that the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood. And no, I don't disagree with any of those merely because of the number of people who have taken the same position I have. And no, I have no idea why you would agree with any of that and I care even less.
Clearer now?
Ummm... like... ummm... bingo....
So you do not have to “prove” there this is a “missing link”. What is this skull? Is it a human or is it an ape?
Is it a human/ape? If it is human then it appears you are going along with the species to species with no evidence of the “missing link”. Show me something that is part human and part horse and then you might convince me that you have true evolution and not adaptation.
What "evidence" is there that life "evolved" from inanimate matter?
Is it a human/ape? If it is human then it appears you are going along with the species to species with no evidence of the “missing link”. Show me something that is part human and part horse and then you might convince me that you have true evolution and not adaptation.
You really could ask better questions if you studied something of the theory of evolution.
It it a human or an ape? No. It is somewhere between. That is why it is called a transitional. It has characteristics of both earlier and later species.
There is no such think as a missing link. That's a newspaper term. There are probably dozens of transitionals between human and ape, each changing only slightly from the previous, and scientists have found many of them.
And you write "Show me something that is part human and part horse and then you might convince me that you have true evolution." That would be proof against the theory of evolution, not support for it.
Evolution works in small steps over time. There is no way a horse is going to give birth to a monkey or any of the other silly things creationists seek as "proof" of evolution.
Please read up on what the theory of evolution actually states, not the strawman versions the creationists make up. It will make for a better discussion.
bttt
I used to wonder why people who seek their answers solely in religion believe that the strongest argument to undermine “Darwinism” is to claim that it’s a religion.”
I think I’ve figured it out.
It’s an attempt to shift the argument from examining the evidence to “our religion is right and your religion is wrong,” an argument with which they’re much more familiar and much more comfortable.
You use the word “probably”. Now that is really going to convince me. show me the many “transitions” of which you speak. While you are at it give me a “proof” of the trail of evolution that led to the ape.
Read a book.
I have to go to work, and don't have time to spoon feed you something you will reject anyway.
No surprise there, for believers or non-believers. The authors of the Bible were following philosophical traditions that form the roots of modern science. With no or rudimentary instruments, one can still observe phenomena and discern patterns. The ancients did not need an atomic clock to peg the equinoxes and solstices pretty accurately.
More refined scientific observations usually bear out the rough outline -- if you hear hoofbeats and a whinny in a European forest, whether you're a modern scientist or an ancient philosopher, you're overwhelmingly likely to track them back to a horse, not a zebra.
Orthodox Newtonism is dead. Neo-Newtonism, also known as Newton/Einsteinism ...
You mean other than stand waite?
is a straw man you have erected.
Foxes Book of Martyrs says it did happen..
Which is why John Fox wrote that book.. so history would not be re-written..
You know, if you repeat that enugh times, it will become true. Clicking your heels helps.
stand has parents as you well know. Surely you can back up your assertion.
Waiting impatiently for proof .... [toes tapping]
OTOH, how can you look at your own dear children and not see that the food throwing and screaming and climbing is so eerily reminiscent of the zoo!?!?!?!?!
=P
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.