You're too slow. I already squashed your precious archaeopteryx AND neanderthal. I'm not interested in repeating it twice to Dion's sock account.
You should try reading up on articles newer than 1974.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
You should try reading up on articles newer than 1974.
Hilarious that you don't see the INHERENT CONTRADICTION in this small statement.
Why aren't they preserved? There should be BILLIONS of skeletons! Your claim is UN. SUPPORTED. LOL
“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon [money, possessions, fame, status, or whatever is valued more than the Lord].”
Matthew 6:24 AMP
Matthew 6:24 AMP
Excuse me, but you STILL don't understand evolution. First, give me the REAL-WORLD example of turtles doing this. Show me the evidence. Or did you make this up out of whole cloth?
SECOND: They are STILL TURTLES.
You don't understand the difference between survival of the fittest and mutations.
Mutations ALWAYS involve the loss of information. Your little phony scenario ISN'T mutation. It's a variance that doesn't change the fact that the creature is a turtle.
The evolutionist supposes that a mutation occurs that will increase information content and make the resultant organism more survivable than the rest of the population. First of all – there is no example given in the evolutionary literature – no, not one – of this ever happening. Shouldn’t there be some laboratory evidence of this? Furthermore, any “useful” mutation will be swamped by a much larger number of deleterious mutations.
Besides, just what is a “useful” mutation? To build new genes, and thus new biological structures, requires the integrated complexity of thousands of new nucleotides, arranged in just the right sequence. Impossibility upon impossibility.
Even if the “right” mutation happens, though, the organism must survive to reproduce. Then natural selection must operate. The typical thought is that an environmental change is so severe that only the mutated offspring’s descendants survive. Alternatively, it’s postulated that the population grows exponentially so that a mutant’s higher reproductive capacity eventually dominates the population.
But this is all wishful thinking. Calculations can be done to show that a given mutant’s genome has a good chance of randomly disappearing. One also has to imagine gazillions of changing environmental conditions necessary for natural selection to pressure the old genome out of existence. Where is the quantitative discussion of all of these environmental miracles that are so finely tuned to favor a mutant genome over the rest of the population? With rare exceptions, mutations just don’t have anything to do with environmental pressures. The descriptions in the evolutionary literature are wonderfully vague and qualitative – and written for popular consumption. They don’t attempt to approach the scientific and mathematical rigor that you see in ANY other field. Additionally, populations don’t typically expand exponentially. They run into barriers that limit growth. Yet populations of the millions of species on this planet do survive – for the thousands of years since creation. Any complex genome will experience error catastrophe and extinction if given the millions of years of alleged evolutionary history.
I believe today's theory is now that man and the apes came from the same ancestor. When the ape theory started losing ground after Lucy and a couple of others they went to a new theory. An animal fossil resembling a lemur supposedly started it for the primate series although there now may be new theories. It happens when their theories start falling apart. Like the big bang at first it was just a tiny speck (a singularity) so dense that it held in it the mass of the universe. Later on, that seemed impossible to many, so the big bang happened everywhere although they were not sure where everywhere was. Now, there is this one mentioned recently:
"The new theory, which is laid out in a recent paper in the journal Physical Review of Letters, aims to preserve a rule of physics called CPT symmetry. In the anti-universe before the Big Bang, it suggests, time ran backwards and the cosmos were made of antimatter instead of matter." Full article below.
New theory: "mirror image" of our universe existed before big bang
The Big Bang didn't just result in our familiar universe, according to a mind-bending new theory.
futurism.com
“The duel between Christianity and atheism is the most important in the world, and the struggle between individualism and collectivism is the same struggle reproduced on another level.”
William F. Buckley, Jr.
If the big bang theory espoused by the evolution religion is true, then why do some moons rotate backwards? Defying the angular law of momentum?
I believe ... they rotate backwards to disprove evolution and God has a sense of humor. Lol
I believe ... they rotate backwards to disprove evolution and God has a sense of humor. Lol
It wasn't "debunked" you goof. It isn't a chicken's direct great great great grandfather. It's one example from among the vast permutations of life that existed at that time that had common features handed down to modern birds. This is the same misunderstanding as you did with human evolution a few posts ago. Of course Australopithecus and other hominids existed at the same time. Because it isn't some direct line of x turns into y that then turns into z. Individual populations change due to their mutations and environmental factors. Not entire species at a time. Crocodiles were around before the dinosaurs and are still here today relatively unchanged because they're so well adapted. All crocodiles don't cease to exist if one of them is born with a shorter snout, passing that on and eventually leading to a species of short-snouted crocodiles in one particular area.
Just to merge two current thread thots: Klaus Schwab will split Hell wide open unless he repents.
Well that's convenient. "News" media are all squawking about five dollar a gallon gasoline. That means it is coming soon.
Good thing for Biden that gaslighting is still free.
Biden warns gas prices could rise as the US sanctions Russia, saying 'defending freedom will have costs'
Biden announced sweeping sanctions on Tuesday as a result of a series of recent Russian escalations against Ukraine.www.yahoo.com
99% of Americans would rather pay $3.00 for gas and have Russia take over half of Ukraine as opposed to paying $5.00 for gas and have Russia stay put.
Hell, probably 75% of Americans couldn't find Ukraine on a map.
We do gain function. Look at the example of eyes I gave. But you can do that with anything. Every single thing that works in our body is gained function. Species both lose and gain features as needed. Whales are mammals that went back into the water and regained fins for swimming. Clear gain of function.
Our ancestor species no longer needed their tails for balancing on tree branches as they moved from an arboreal to a terrestrial lifestyle so we lost them.
This GIF is a perfect representation of the intellectual "battle" between Lost in FL and Dion... with Dion playing the part of the girl (which, I'm sure, is easy):
I read this a little while back and also remembered where some scientist said that what happened here on earth (the spark of life and evolution) while they believed happened was next to impossible and could not ever happen again because of the complexities involved. Rather contradictory.
- "There is no possibility that complex chemicals (DNA, proteins, etc.) necessary for life can form at random. DNA is composed of hundreds of thousands of chemical base pairs all precisely sequenced. Even if such chemicals could form it is absurdly improbable that such chemicals once formed could then randomly come together to form a living one-celled organism. Even “simple” life forms are far too complex to form at random!
- Genetic mutations virtually never add any significant information to the DNA. Genetic mutation, whether caused by radiation or chemical toxicity, simply scrambles the existing blueprint of a life form. Hence there is no mechanism for uphill macro-evolutionary change.
- There is a lack of transitional forms in the fossil record. The missing links are still missing. An authority no less than Colin Paterson, chief paleontologist of the British Natural History Museum said that he knows of no fossil for which an airtight case can be made for it being a transitional form.
- Evolutionary theory cannot account for sexual reproduction. Nonsexual reproduction would be far more efficient for proliferation of life forms in the evolutionary model.”
The same place everything else did. The beginning of the universe, the Big Bang. "Life" is chemistry. Maybe someday we'll develop a way to look further back than that but at the moment the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation and about 380,000 years post-Big Bang is the furthest we can go. Which is still pretty close in a universe over 13 billion years old.
Lol.
Your examples are variation, or the 6th type of evolution. We all agree variations happen. That does not prove AT ALL that turtles power morph into ninjas. ( The tv proves that turtles morph into power ninjas.)
Last edited:
I would love to hear @LowCountryCat break down noah's ark. Some how Noah managed to fit 10's of thousands of species on his 500ft long boat. Managed to magically feed 100,000+ animals for 2 months. Oh and enough water to cover the entire earth from seafloor to mountain top magically appeared and then magically disappeared. Man I really hope this was after dinosaurs went extinct, that would be fun rounding them up. maybe the dude that wrote the Bible liked the story he heard from earlier religions? or maybe parts of the bible were just meant to be fun stories and not taken literally? We have to ignore the very specific nature of the passages. of course at that point the entire bible is just fun stories.
Or how about this. It took 1500 years for Christianity to reach North and South America. In that time 100s of thousands of people died on the continent. If the only way to heaven is by accepting Jesus do all these people get eternal damnation? or does God exempt them from this rule because they had the bad luck to be born on the wrong continent?
Or how about this. It took 1500 years for Christianity to reach North and South America. In that time 100s of thousands of people died on the continent. If the only way to heaven is by accepting Jesus do all these people get eternal damnation? or does God exempt them from this rule because they had the bad luck to be born on the wrong continent?
If this works for Putin and he takes territory without blood, I would also say that it’s pretty smart.
We could also use peacekeepers on our southern border. Fact.
I am in no way for authoritarianism.
See how this works?
So, we all came from a rock? All the plants, insects, humans, whales, etc., all came from a rock??
And you have no observation of that? No witnesses, no proof?
In other words, you accept it to be true ON faith. Okay. Last question: Do you tithe to your religion too?
I posted this yesterday about religion. You're relying on the watchmaker argument. Behe and irreducible complexity have been refuted. That's specifically why I used the example of the eyeball, as it was one of the main examples of irreducible complexity Behe used that has been thoroughly gutted. Here's a paper that easily reduces your own mousetrap example.
wtf is your obession with a rock? nobody says that life comes from a rock. your a clown.
Did conservatives commit a lot of violence against lefties over their national pride? 😂
Or did we just watch years of unhinged Democrats due to the rhetoric and hysteria from their media and politicians? Did a conservative go shoot a senator and try to massacre Dem congressmen? Oh, no; that was a Bernie bro.
Did a conservative in Portland go up and execute a Biden supporter? Oh, no that was an Antifa guy that killed a Trump supporter.
Did conservatives follow Democrats to their little speeches and try to shut it down and assault them? Oh, no that was Democrats who did that.
Did GOP praise conservatives going nationwide burning buildings, looting, murdering, and setting low bail/bailing them out or not pressing charges on them? Oh, no, that was Democrats who did that.
Your team has spent years calling everyone Nazis and saying the world was going to end. Your masters have made your base terrified to be without a mask or to live a normal life without endless shots. And they have taught you to literally hate those who did not participate in the shot.
I suggest you look in the mirror in terms of what rhetoric and devotion to the leftist orthodoxy gets you. Your side likes to crybully all the time. You refuse to leave people alone. You use the state (and banks and corporations as middle men) to harass and punish. You like to dish it but as soon as someone pushes back (ie school boards, peaceful protest in Canada), you all lose your shit.
It’s interesting to me that people who are adamant that life began with a single cell are so opposed to the story of Noah’s ark.
It’s pretty evident that Noah took a limited amount of animals onto the ark, which then reproduced and evolved over time.
Look, Darwin did basic experiments that showed it doesn’t take that long for animals to change features when you cross-produce them.
Consider the likelohood that Noah took a single type of bear onto the ark (maybe even separate types, but one male and one female), and those two reproduced after departing the ark (in fact, mama bear was probably pregnant when she crawled off the ark).
Don’t fall into the trap of assuming that all the animals were exactly the same at the time of Noah as they are now. Again, back to the “evolution” that people love so much. Certain animals could have reproduced more frequently and in more volume than we see in modern animals that we study today.
This is really not that complicated to comprehend.
It’s pretty evident that Noah took a limited amount of animals onto the ark, which then reproduced and evolved over time.
Look, Darwin did basic experiments that showed it doesn’t take that long for animals to change features when you cross-produce them.
Consider the likelohood that Noah took a single type of bear onto the ark (maybe even separate types, but one male and one female), and those two reproduced after departing the ark (in fact, mama bear was probably pregnant when she crawled off the ark).
Don’t fall into the trap of assuming that all the animals were exactly the same at the time of Noah as they are now. Again, back to the “evolution” that people love so much. Certain animals could have reproduced more frequently and in more volume than we see in modern animals that we study today.
This is really not that complicated to comprehend.
Platinum sounds concerned that his heathen ass will spend an eternity in hell it appears. Repent now, Platinum!
There were billions of skeletons. Just like there are countless skeletons of animals dying today. What happens to those skeletons? They decay. Duh. It takes vanishingly rare circumstances for a body to be perfectly preserved for long enough to fossilize. The famous Archaeopteryx fossil isn't super rare because transitional species don't exist. It's because it's so exceedingly rare to get something from 150 MILLION YEARS AGO that still has its freaking feathers on it. Sharks are entirely cartilage but their teeth!
Way too much credit. I’d guess 75% of Americans can’t find New Hampshire on a map.
Is that an arial shot of a mining site ? 🍺There were billions of skeletons. Just like there are countless skeletons of animals dying today. What happens to those skeletons? They decay. Duh. It takes vanishingly rare circumstances for a body to be perfectly preserved for long enough to fossilize. The famous Archaeopteryx fossil isn't super rare because transitional species don't exist. It's because it's so exceedingly rare to get something from 150 MILLION YEARS AGO that still has its freaking feathers on it. Sharks are entirely cartilage but their teeth!
I mean he's technically not wrong, all heavier atoms were forged in the hearts of stars. Those stars lived their life cycles and died, exploding those elements out into the universe where they coalesced. So at that phase the molecules that eventually mixed together into life were rocks. But you're talking about billions of years in between.
But you aren't an ex President of the United States who is the supposed leader of the free world. Your words aren't repeated on Russian state tv or in Ukraine. It's pathetic.
My daughter is in NTI and warrior cat is right, ALL they teach now is Islam and Satan worship. No math, social studies, not even PE. 100% Islam and Satan. For 7 hours a day.
Nope, you missed the mark on that one too.
I think it's the best explanation I've seen that fits the evidence. The geological/fossil record, the living natural world, and the brilliant work done by scientists before me based on that concrete evidence are my "witnesses" and "proof". I don't believe it absolutely. I have no 'faith' that it is true despite contradictory evidence. There is an inherent difference between religious belief based on blind faith and the scientific method. And no it does not collect it's 10%.
Everyone hates Christianity, no one hates other religions except Muslims who hate everybody.
🧐
Well, Nuclear Threat Initiative probably explains why that is.
