Your morality is 0% in line with that of the bible.
Damn you heathen! Your book learnin' has done warped your mind. You shall not be invited next time I sacrifice a goat.
Do You Have Biblical Morals?
7 comments:
Hello BaldySlaphead (great name by the way),
First of all I totally sympathise with your dislike of people like Ray Comfort who misrespresent the evolutionary position (either through ignorance or deliberately).
But do you seriously believe that all of the diversity of life that we see today came about through "teeny tiny genetic differences"? How did it all start? Where did the genetic material come from in the first place? I just think that there are far too many problems with this. Not to mention that there is zero evidence to support it. I mean, by definition the process would take so long (as you intimate by saying that no one will ever observe an ape give birth to a human), that observable evidence is just not possible. So you're back to exprapolating that something could have happened.
Just my thoughts
Paul
Sorry mate,
the last comment should have been in the post above (I've added it now).
cheers,
(as you intimate by saying that no one will ever observe an ape give birth to a human)
You really should look up the definition of ape and visit a hospital some time. We see apes giving birth to humans everyday. Here is a hint a human is a type of ape.
What would you consider evidence? Also evolution deals with chemicals/life after it starts reproducing and says nothing of where it came from or how it started reproducing, that is called abiogenesis.
Not to mention that there is zero evidence to support it. I mean, by definition the process would take so long (as you intimate by saying that no one will ever observe an ape give birth to a human), that observable evidence is just not possible.
I object to this, Paul. You see, observable evidence for evolution is very much in, for want of a better term, evidence.
Archae, Lucy, Tiktaalik, are all fossils of creatures which have a mosaic of ancestor and decendant features. More importantly, all three were expected to exist by evolutionists long before they were discovered.
DNA studies between populations in many, many different parts of the world always reveals the same thing: the longer two species have been seperated, the more genetic differences exist.
Molecular evidence, such as Human Chromosome number 2 and Endogenous Retrovirus's, all support the theory of common ancestry, in the case of ERV's quite strongly.
Morphological changes have been observed in many different species, from Darwins finches to all the selectively bred dogs, cats and pidgeons.
Speciation has been observed in mosquitos, bacteria, and other creatures. The nested heirachy of life-forms is a result of the "tree-of-life" of common descent. No real creature has yet been identified for which a valid evolutionary path cannot be posited.
Evolution happens.
Ahhhh Quasar you beat me to the fun. I wanted to see what his definition of evidence is first. Then bring up the mountains of evidence. I am sure if he tells us what evidence he expects to see for evolution, we could show him the evidence. As long as it is something expected of evolution, in other words no dogs being born from cats.
ERVs and Cytochrome C are some of the best evidence for evolution. There is enough evidence just between those two things that we don't need all the transitional fossils we have found like Lucy, Tiktaalik, and Archeopteryx.
Although Archae is my favorite on account of my unhealthy and possibly unnatural predisposition towards Aves, Tiktaalik has the most awesome discovery story.
In short: evolution predicted that we should find a fish with legs in strata of a certain age in a certain location. So the discoverers actually went to the exact location where the modern theory of evolution predicted a fish with legs could be found, with the express intention of finding a fish with legs.
They returned with Tiktaalik roseae.
http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/
This is the website about that amazing discovery. It chronicles everything that went on with that discovery by the people who discovered it.
Post a Comment