|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: To "Hitchy"--Creation discussion... (Side comments to the "Great Debate" topic) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
You said
I then added that, as far as mammals go, only humans and cetaceans have sex facing each other. Over in the great debate. Now, I know this was only by way of example, but it's not actually true: Orang-utans and Bonobo chimps have also been observed mating face-to-face.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
The topic title was originally To Hitchy: Factual error. I have modified it to To "Hitchy"--Creation discussion... (Side comments to the "Great Debate" topic).
The "Great Debate" topic is To "Hitchy"--Creation discussion with high school science teacher. This topic is now designated as the place for other members to make comments related to the above cited. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Whale and dolphin, even reptiles and snakes mate face to face.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hitchy Member (Idle past 5146 days) Posts: 215 From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh Joined: |
Would it be better to say "some primates" instead of "humans"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hitchy Member (Idle past 5146 days) Posts: 215 From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh Joined: |
Sure they do, as well as birds. I was just talking about mammals, though.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Yeah, but mammals just can't do the shimmy and shake like a snake.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hitchy Member (Idle past 5146 days) Posts: 215 From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh Joined: |
Thanks for the response. It's hard to smile when you debate a creationist!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 505 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Hey Hitchy, I recently saw the movie "Bad Boys 2." In one scene, we can see 2 rats going at it. They were facing each other. Is it true?
The Laminator
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hitchy Member (Idle past 5146 days) Posts: 215 From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh Joined: |
Huh, the only reference I remember about rat-f**king was in All the President's Men. I have never seen rats getting it on. However, I do remember a part of Beavis and Butthead Do America showing a couple of vultures getting it on and the one was behind the other! As far as know birds are beak to beak, cloaca to cloaca (I hope I spelled that correctly!) Anyway, that was just a cartoon...
OK, I'll look up the rat thing...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Some birds, maybe. But so far as I know for most birds, the male gets onto the females back.
I've got to admit that I wonder how sme birds manage - like stilts - but if avocets can do it, I suppose it's possible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hitchy Member (Idle past 5146 days) Posts: 215 From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh Joined: |
I am done until I can actually get some more info on animal sex. Any places I can look? I guess I don't know as much about sex as I thought I did!?! One thing, if you ever are feeling bad or sad or whatever and you need a pick-me-up, just look at a picture of two turtles in love. I don't know why, but that just looks funny!
Thanks for the information.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
My main familiarity is through nature programs on TV and direct observation. Ducks are relatively easy to watch at this time of year and they crtainly take the male-on-top position - in the water (to the point where the female is almost entirely submerged). The avocets I saw on TV - stilts are also wading birds but with even longer legs. Some birds do go face-to-face in courtship displays but I've never heard it said that they actually mate like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1372 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
oh, i had one. i didn't get to far into it because i do not enjoy reading creationist rhetoric without being able to reply.
but here's one i found on the frist page: but i want to call servant on this one:
Moreover, you are wrong on the topic of kinds v. species. A horse, donkey, and zebra are not considered the same species, but they ARE the same kind according to the Bible's definition. Also, a wolf, a cyote, and a huskey are not the same species, but they are the same kind as described in the Bible. book, chapter, and verse for that definition?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
And remember there are kinds of cattle according to the bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1372 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
i'm reasonably certain that "kind" is a generic word meaning "division" or "type" just like it is in, you know, ENGLISH.
i looked up the hebrew word, miyn, in a concordance, and it gave me this really incoherent bit about the difference between "kinds" and "species" like so:
1) kind, sometimes a species (usually of animals) ++++ Groups of living organisms belong in the same created "kind" if they have descended from the same ancestral gene pool. This does not preclude new species because this represents a partitioning of the original gene pool. Information is lost or conserved not gained. A new species could arise when a population is isolated and inbreeding occurs. By this definition a new species is not a new "kind" but a further partitioning of an existing "kind". Bible Search and Study Tools - Blue Letter Bible blb is great sometimes. lets you know what the word means, quite literally. however, sometimes, on important words, they write a huge paragraph with absolutely no justification whatsoever for anything it says. if they had said "we think this is refering to genus, or family, but not species" it might have sounded a little more educated. but that shows clear and completely unreasonable bias towards creationism, and says NOTHING about what the bible actually says. ironically, the list of uses of the word miyn below it are better. most of them appear to be refering to specific animals.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024