Evolving the Musculoskeletal System

Your right and I was wrong on this one Coyote. I was thinking we had MORE bones but they are just shaped different....my badHere is an interesting site that explains the differences;Just a moment...Thanks,
IC

No you misunderstand the question. Please revisit Message 265Respectfully,
IC

Wow Percy, I couldn't help but wonder if you were actually crying as you posted your venom.
If you look at Message 267 you'll see that I did list the source I was quoting from. I see 4 peer reviews listed. [qs]Note that he's talking about "spontaneous formation." No one believes the first replicator came about spontaneously.[qs] OK, I thought that is what you were trying to say in Message 172
[qs]The first "organism" was probably just a collection of chemicals held within some kind of membrane, and that "organism" was "fully formed."[qs] You weren't saying this collection of chemicals spontaneously formed this organism then?IC

....I would have to look into that. I know their are some pretty weird fish....all I had stated was I didn't understand what you had meant by that statement about complex creatures not evolving body parts......you guys need to lighten up a little around here.ICEdited by ICDESIGN, : No reason given.

We could start with earlobes, eyelids and a nose.ICEdited by ICDESIGN, : No reason given.

I wasn't purposely committing plagiarism. You guys act like I was trying to pull a fast one and I wasn't at all. I thought I gave the necessary references but I was obviously wrong. That seems to be the unpardonable sin around here.It seems to be no problem to blaspheme the Holy Spirit left and right around here but hey, don't you ever post information without showing where it came from.I will just retract that submission altogether. Its not a major issue to me. I do have other questions about the first fully formed organism but it is too far off topic for this thread. Yes I do. I would have a stroke if I ever heard one of you evolutionists admit to being wrong about anything or admitting there is something you don't know.IC

You know what? You want to take your gloves off and gang up on me with all these deep insults over this stupid issue? Go right ahead. It doesn't faze me in the slightest. I will stand behind any chance factor number that adds up to showing the ToE is utterly impossible in every way shape and form.
You think you are all high and mighty because you have biology knowledge and yet your conclusions are so far off you are nothing more than a bunch of well educated fools!Frankly, any person who can stand there and look at the skeletal system configuration and
HONESTLY think it could have formed by way of lucky accidental mutations is in my opinion
as dumb as random mutation and natural selection itself.I emphasize the word honestly because I know most of you are "willingly ignorant" because of your rebellion against your maker.I forgive the mean and hateful things you feel against me,ICDESIGN

Your equating a hole created by the force of running water with joints in the skeletal system?
"What do we got for him behind curtain #3 Johnny? Wank wank wank waaahhh. Twooo donkey's"

Hi Percy, Yeah, I know. The only reason I posted on that thread today is because I had a fresh reply. I have thought about picking up where we left off but haven't got a renewed motivation for it yet. I was in the frame of mind back then. When I started that thread I asked the question of how all the correct bones, joints and muscles ended up in the in the correctly needed positions and your response was "pretty much by natural selection" I believe was your response (without going back and looking). And of course I heard all the typical "who says those are the correct parts and positions" smoke and mirror responses.When I am ready to spend the time debating this subject again I would like to pitch my tent back at this point because none of those answers even came close to satisfying the question in my opinion.
Good hearing from you,
IC

Thanks Crash. That is a compliment. In Matthew 18:2 Jesus said "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."I admit I have a simple childlike approach to things but guess what? The truth is so simple a child can understand it. I may not be the most articulate cat in town but I think I bring some thought provoking points of view to the table. Heck, at least I bring a little personality into the fray with some humor and friendly gestures now and then which is more than I can say for many of the members around here. And this is the gun you brought to the fight? That's about equivalent to an empty plastic
water pistol puffing a little air spurt. You would be more vicious to tickle me to death Yes I could. Your little fairytale was quite entertaining. I had to stop half way through and run to make some popcorn. I think that was an excellent way to put it because that's exactly what this whole notion of natural selection being able to "edit" is, a fraud. In a nutshell editing is an act of intelligence with intentionality. This is in direct violation of the very premise of ToE.
And where the heck are all these bones, muscles and joints coming from to begin with. This totally screams intentionality!
A joint is needed between bones to have proper mobility and I am to believe it just happened along? Sorry, I just can't sign up for that wishful thinking fairytale!Let me give you a very simple and short quiz Crash;What is one provable truth all of these systems have in common?The Neurological System
Vision
Hearing
Balance
Smell
Taste
Touch
Skin
The Endocrine System
The Respiratory
The Gastrointestinal System
The Circulatory System
The Excretory System
The Musculoskeletal System
The Reproduction SystemDoot du doot du, doot du doot, doot du doot du doot du doot
......and his answer is?Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.

Hi Huntard,Good to here from you mate. You are right my friend. Some of my remarks do end up as you say. In fact it is one of my New Year resolutions to work on that. Having said that, the heavy condescending and belittling comes from your camp mostly. Almost every single reply from your guys are filled with hate centered comments about how stupid we creationists are. Being a rebel all my life and an Ex-Marine, my tendency is to push back. Like I said, I am trying to be more Christ-like. Boy is it hard around hereAny who mate I am off to bed. You will have to wait till tomorrow for more feedback and the answer to the quiz. Your answer was wrong. I said provable.Good night friend,
ICEdited by ICdesign, : No reason given.

I withdraw the idea of that test as being provable. The end result of all those systems produces a purpose. I had forgotten the term 'function' replaces the idea of purpose in the evolutionary world view. To me its obvious that when you have several functions working together such as in the vision system, and the end result is being able to see, it is an intentional purpose. I guess I can never prove that so what is the point.You think I don't understand the claims of the ToE. I do.
I know what its claims are and that it is impossible for those claims to be true.Right now I just feel like going away. Nobody respects anything I have to offer anyway. Nothing changes on this forum. Nothing "we" ever say will ever change your minds and nothing "you" ever say will change our minds. That's just the way it is. The endless argument......ho hum

Yes. That is exactly what it means. This is such an astonishing system with such a high level of intelligence throughout the entire design you have to infer an intelligent mind constructed it for the purpose of allowing sight.
The odds of such a construction arising without the assistance of an intelligent mind are astronomical. The true test needed is one that can prove such a design can develop without the assistance of intelligence.
I'm not sure why such a no-brainer even needs a test to begin with. This whole issue is a head-scratcher to me. So simple a child should be able to understand it. Fate or destiny are not of the physical world and are a whole other discussion entirely. Oh please. It is only accepted by those who don't want to be accountable to God.I fully understood Crash was giving an analogy but my point is still the same. Natural selection
has to have intentionality to determine if a mutation is beneficial or not and choose the best for survival.IC

Your way too deep for me Taq...NOT...and the endless argument goes on and on and on and on and on............you boys have at it, I have a toilet to clean...

Good Morning Huntard, (or what time is it for you over there in the Netherlands?) I appreciate your friendly and respectful response Mate. I was thinking if we lived in the same neck of the woods I would invite you over to watch the Super Bowl or something. We would have to keep our world views on the shelve to keep from arguing though I guessLets do a little analogy since a word picture is a pretty effective way to make a point. OK?
Lets take a man and we'll call him Mr. Chance. Now lets say for the purpose of this test Mr. Chance is a being who can live for as long as we want, lets say billions of years. Now lets give Mr. Chance a big pile of parts to work with. Lets say it is 5,000 parts along with 50,000 nuts, bolts and screws of various sizes that when fully assembled in the correct sequence would create a beautiful new Rolls Royce.Now for the purposes of this test Mr. Chance has never seen any kind of automobile and has no clue what he is suppose to build. Not only that but Mr. Chance is dumber than a room full of Creationists ...just checking to see if you were still awake. But no, lets say he has never been to a day of school in his life and wouldn't know a hammer from a screwdriver.Now giving him any amount of time you choose, would he EVER be able to assemble the Rolls Royce?