Posted on 10/27/2009 8:11:33 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
I don’t think evolution happens rapidly. I do think variation within a species happens rapidly, comparatively.
I’ll not change your thinking and you’ll not change mine so lets just drop this now. I was replying to a post by a fellow creationist, not you.
The Bible clinched that. What this shows is scientist are not as infallible as the media trained masses think.
Coming from someone who cannot separate the stories of the old testament from the simple instruction of the new.
Okay, here’s one of may favorites:
“So youre going with the whole Adam/Eve/Cain Humanity-decended-from-incest route, eh? Good luck with that.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2353460/posts?q=1&;page=51
And I already know what you will say - that it’s not proof you don’t like Christians... but your contempt is showing.
Your posts remind me alot of this guy:
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:coyoteman/index?brevity=full;tab=comments
Who has since been banned.
What’s really funny about this post is that creationists for years, including this very same Casey Luskin, have been challenging Archaeopteryx’s status as an ancestor of modern birds by promoting Alan Feduccia’s theory that it was a true bird already. Now all of a sudden it’s not an ancestor because it’s not *enough* of a bird. Thus we see the progress of creation “science”—to heck with consistency, we’ll just cherry-pick and nitpick!
Of course, either way we have an animal that grew like a dinosaur but had feathers like a bird. But no way is it a transitional, nuh-uh, couldn’t be.
If you read the article, you'd have seen that they took tiny chips of the fossil bones and put them under the microscope. People were reluctant to take chips of the bones before to avoid damaging them.
Shades of Piltdown Man.
Piltdown Man was a hoax, as you well know. Do you have any reason to think Archaeopteryx is a hoax, or are you just slinging mud as usual?
Coming from someone who cannot separate the stories of the old testament from the simple instruction of the new.”
WOW! So I see you are quite the Biblical scholar, also, eh?
If the idea is that American English derived from British English, why are people still speaking British English?
Monkeys fill an ecological niche, where there is a “demand” for monkeys, nature has provided a “supply”. The “demand” for monkeys up in the trees did not go away just because some monkeys came down from the trees and started living on the ground.
Where do you think this variation comes from?
If you want to drop the conversation I can certainly see why.
What I'm saying is the world of knowledge isn't owned by evo scientists. They have to change their stories minute by minute as the facts come in. To insist that everyone else is a knucklehead is just bigotry.
What I'm finding is science has been taken over by religious zealots and politics. An evo is every bit as religious as a catholic bishop. After Mt St Helens blew up, several scientists were sent there, grant money in hand for years, to study the recovery of the eco systems there. They opined on the healing process that would take decades if not 100 years. Well, the lakes healed and fish were back in in about a year and grass and animals returned in about the same time. They were sent home early because every thing they thought was untrue and the basis for the grant money was lost. They even commented on the canyon that was created in one day, if looked at years from now, would be thought to have taken millions of years to carve out had they not known the eruption did it in one day. Lakes disappeared and rivers changed directions in one short period. How can evo's( and climate scientists) know anything for certain if they can't even see what has happened right in front of them? How can someone know the Grand Canyon was carved out million of years ago? Just because a park ranger reads from a pamphlet? The truth is, if we could prove that it was carved out in a catastrophe 3000 years ago, they wouldn't change their story because it would cost to much to change the history books and it would damage their credibility after insisting it happened over "million's" of years. That's politics.
I watched the "Ardi" story and saw "science" made up on the spot and anyone could shoot holes in their "theory in 2 seconds, yet there it was on TV.
One person or group of person doesn't have the final word on anything. Beware of looking for proof to support what you think. One "Christian" site isn't the final word anymore than Dawkins is the final word for evo's.
That’s pitiful....
Adaptation within a species is far different than the notion of a transition to a new species.
They can either breed in kind or not.
And then you’d have us believe that these shifts to a “new species” happen in sufficient numbers AT THE SAME TIME, so as to sustain the “new”....
...if you’d like to stop, I can see why....
So what part of your diatribe represents scientific research on the part of creationists?
Adaptation within a species is evolution by definition.
It might help if you knew you were arguing against “common descent” and not “evolution”, but you obviously don't know enough about the subject to differentiate the two.
New species arise not by the genetic changes within an individual; but from the changes and selective pressures within an entire interbreeding population; much as the selective pressure of living in Europe led to pale skin in the populations that lived there.
So where does this variation that you and other creationists propose happens thousands of times faster than any evolutionary biologist proposed COME FROM? Did you not understand the question the first time, or are you trying to avoid it?
You are really handy with strawmen, eh?
Post hoc ergo proptor hoc. (look it up)
Another one of the bats in GGG’s belfry, I assume?
The part that scientifically disproves all of the alternate evo-nonsense.
Creationists don’t pretend to know exactly how God did it.
But it’s quite easy to scientifically evaluate evolutionist theories and cite the gaps and conclusions that are a bridge too far.
Fail.....
Self assessment is good.. keep it up.
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.