Does the fossil record show a multitude of “transitional” forms that would support the idea of evolutionary change?
Here are some comments as a result from a quick google search, reference is an article in Forbes magazine:
Archaeopteryx …. has feathers… small teeth…has wings…flew…… BUT, since it has a fused clavicle, we are going to call it a transitional form which proves it came from dinosaurs. Wait a minute…. feathers…. wings…. flew… but because it has a fused clavicle we are going to call it a descendant from dinosaurs.
Nope, folks it is a bird. Paleontologists and evolutionary fan boys seeing something that isn’t there
Actually birds are part of the dinosaur family. Not hard to find that info.
Pretty easy to find info that says man causes global warming, the earth is flat and Epstein committed suicide.
Each of which is a separate proposition with it's own burden of proof.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
Does the fossil record show a multitude of “transitional” forms that would support the idea of evolutionary change?
Here are some comments as a result from a quick google search, reference is an article in Forbes magazine:
Archaeopteryx …. has feathers… small teeth…has wings…flew…… BUT, since it has a fused clavicle, we are going to call it a transitional form which proves it came from dinosaurs. Wait a minute…. feathers…. wings…. flew… but because it has a fused clavicle we are going to call it a descendant from dinosaurs.
Nope, folks it is a bird. Paleontologists and evolutionary fan boys seeing something that isn’t there
Actually birds are part of the dinosaur family. Not hard to find that info.
Pretty easy to find info that says man causes global warming, the earth is flat and Epstein committed suicide.
Each of which is a separate proposition with it's own burden of proof.
Ok, I’ll bite. How will you prove that archaeopteryx is not a bird.... or for that matter prove that it descended from dinosaurs.....or that whales descended from that small land mammal?
Last edited by TF49; 08/14/19.
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
Does the fossil record show a multitude of “transitional” forms that would support the idea of evolutionary change?
Here are some comments as a result from a quick google search, reference is an article in Forbes magazine:
Archaeopteryx …. has feathers… small teeth…has wings…flew…… BUT, since it has a fused clavicle, we are going to call it a transitional form which proves it came from dinosaurs. Wait a minute…. feathers…. wings…. flew… but because it has a fused clavicle we are going to call it a descendant from dinosaurs.
Nope, folks it is a bird. Paleontologists and evolutionary fan boys seeing something that isn’t there
Actually birds are part of the dinosaur family. Not hard to find that info.
Pretty easy to find info that says man causes global warming, the earth is flat and Epstein committed suicide.
Each of which is a separate proposition with it's own burden of proof.
Ok, I’ll bite. How will you prove that archaeopteryx is not a bird.... or for that matter prove that it descended from dinosaurs.....or that whales descended from that small land mammal?
Actually, I was referring to your conflated red herrings regarding global warming, flat earth, and Epstein.
But since you ask, lets see what a real Evolutionary Biologist has to say about whales. OH, we have the fossils AND the DNA:
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
Religion would be a lot more credible if it eliminated myths after they are proven as myths.
I would propose that we eliminate the Book of Genesis from the Bible and start with Exodus. After all, just who said which books were "Scripture?" A group of pre-renaissance so-called Catholic bishops, who never knew Jesus or even Peter or Paul, 300 years after the Acts of the Apostles. They kept some books and threw away others. Why shouldn't we do the same? What reason is there to think that these medieval people were divinely inspired?
And if you think they were, how do you explain that the Catholic Bible contains different books than the Protestant Bible does?
The demonstrably incorrect myths in Genesis detract from the message of Christianity.
Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.
Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.
Um, um, um. I'm sure glad that first little amoeba knew I was going to need Kentucky fried chicken in Lard and hatch peppers split and filled with bacon and cream cheese.
Smart little bugger it was. Sitting there and decided it wanted company and started dividing. Then later on the protozoa decided to become more advanced to ensure their survival and stated becoming something that couldnt divide and multiply but wanted to have sex so it became 2 sexes requiring two consenting individuals making life actually more complex, but then they had to, didnt they?
SOB knew I wouldn't care for a tough old rooster.
Ecc 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but that of a fool to the left.
A Nation which leaves God behind is soon left behind.
"The Lord never asked anyone to be a tax collector, lowyer, or Redskins fan".
Science being self correcting through peer review can and does weed out bad science. That it the very purpose of the method. Evolution has stood the test of peer review for one hundred and fifty years without being toppled.
Religion has no such checks and balances. People accept dogma on faith, with any serious questioning it's teachings being discouraged, faith being seen as a virtue.
[Religion has no such checks and balances. People accept dogma on faith, with any serious questioning it's teachings being discouraged, faith being seen as a virtue.
Oh man, is that ever wrong. There's something like 33,000 Christian denominations because nobody questions.
But then based on deprecated translation of an ancient Hebrew text we conclude the absurdity that God is the root of all evil.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
[Religion has no such checks and balances. People accept dogma on faith, with any serious questioning it's teachings being discouraged, faith being seen as a virtue.
Oh man, is that ever wrong. There's something like 33,000 Christian denominations because nobody questions.
That's not an example of questioning the central beliefs of Christianity or any religion, of course, each religion does reject the teachings of other faiths without too much effort. It is an example of the absurdity of faith. Countless denominations squabble over things like the Trinity or the Divinity of Jesus, salvation through grace or works, etc....yet they do not question faith itself, or their own faith, or the existence of God, they tinker with the details, fretting over things that are taken on faith.
Originally Posted by nighthawk
But then based on deprecated translation of an ancient Hebrew text we conclude the absurdity that God is the root of all evil.
The writers of the Torah/OT describe what they believed their God to be like. Christian writers added their own beliefs, which Judaism rejects. Each clinging to their own interpretations and their own faith.
If we assume that God does not exist then nothing in this thread matters. In fact neither you nor I matter, neither does anything else in the universe. Might be wise to have an open mind.
Quote
Are you concerned with arguments on the role and attributes of Shiva or Ganesh, Shakti or Hanuman?
Yes, and I studied it long ago and concluded Western thought (I-thou relationship) was correct.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
If we assume that God does not exist then nothing in this thread matters. In fact neither you nor I matter, neither does anything else in the universe. Might be wise to have an open mind.
Quote
Are you concerned with arguments on the role and attributes of Shiva or Ganesh, Shakti or Hanuman?
Yes, and I studied it long ago and concluded Western thought (I-thou relationship) was correct.
How did you conclude that? What was it that convinced you?
That was 40-some years ago and I wouldn't try to explain it if I could remember. Requires understanding four semesters of Philosophy before you get there.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
Did you always want other people to do your homework for you?
It's a discussion forum. I asked you to explain your reasoning. Do you assume that your position is true beyond question? You reject the beliefs of Hinduism, others reject your beliefs. Who is right, and why....that is the issue.
