|
Author
|
Topic: Potential falsifications of the theory of evolution
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Which side are you on?
In comparison, Noah's flood only rained for 40 days and 40 nights, and covered a mere 1/4 of the earth's surface for less than a year and then it all ran off into the flooded areas of the oceans. To cover that quarter would still have to cover 100% of the earth to over 29000 feet according to your mythological book of genesis.
Gen 7:20 KJV writes: 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Which side are you on?
No, I don't think he can. His point is pointless in either area or volume.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
Message 281 of 968 (591913)
11-17-2010 2:06 AM
|
Reply to: Message 276 by ICANT
11-16-2010 3:20 PM
|
|
Re: Which side are you on?
Suppose the ark was built on the highest dry land available.
The flood then rose 22 feet above the dry land the ark was sitting on.
The water would not even reach the 1st floor of the ark as it had lower second and third floors, and it never would have lifted off the ground. Then pray tell, how did the Ark land on the mountains of Ararat if no mountains existed?
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 276 by ICANT, posted 11-16-2010 3:20 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Bump for ICANT
in such a short period of time 6 million years is a short period of time? coyote Don't you realize that some of those species evolved into the next species? They didn't go extinct but changed. arachnophelia stated, human and chimpanzees are both crown species of the primate family tree. one did not evolve into the other; The point is that chimpanzees & humans had a common ancestor some 6 million years ago, through evolutionary processes, there were changes which eventually resulted in chimps & humans, those intermediate species either evolved into the chimps & humans or became a dead end. This is the same scenario that has gone on through all types of living things, some species survive, some don't.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 380 of 968 (600062)
01-12-2011 9:43 AM
|
Reply to: Message 377 by barbara
01-12-2011 9:22 AM
|
|
Re: Bump for ICANT
As of now there has not been found a fossil that can be regarded as the concestor of the humans & chimps. Possibly do to the fact that chimps evolved in the forests & humans in the savannahs. Also the line from concestor to chimp has yet to be found, whereas the human line has a number of finds. According to Richard Dawkins's Ancestor's Tale So, when we and the chimpanzee/bonobo pilgrims meet at the rendezvous point, the likelihood is that the shared ancestor that we meet in the pliocene clearing was hairy like a chimpanzee, and had a chimpanzee-sized brain.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 377 by barbara, posted 01-12-2011 9:22 AM | | barbara has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Bump for ICANT
So from going from nearly human looking, Neandertal, some of them went back to looking like chimps and some humans Where did I say anything about neanderthals? The point is all the intermediates between the common ancestor and the 2 living lines, the chimps & humans, are no longer alive, they either became extinct or still remain as the end products. Edited by bluescat48, : typo
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 381 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-12-2011 10:09 AM | | Dawn Bertot has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Bump for ICANT
For the creationist its not so much that we reject your "evidence", it simply makes no sense that they would not have survided in some fashion There are numerous possible reasons they did not survive. In the case of the Neanderthals, it is possible that they couldn't survive the last ice age along with the sapiens, or they may have been simply killed by the sapiens the way some sapiens do today, because they were different. The actual reason may never be known.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 388 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-12-2011 11:14 AM | | Dawn Bertot has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Bump for ICANT
Since the fossil record does not prove absolutely evolution, it would follow that an observation in the opposite direction is more than plausible the sharp distinctions and trail of the fossil record do not show a clear cut evolution of every species on earth. Really? So What! The fact is there is, at least there is some evidence to back up the The ToE. Where is the evidence for your viewpoint? It would not be more plausible, unless there was evidence to back it up, for which, there is none.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
™ Version 4.2