Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (9005 total)
44 online now:
AZPaul3, Hyroglyphx, PaulK, vimesey (4 members, 40 visitors)
Newest Member: kanthesh
Post Volume: Total: 881,216 Year: 12,964/23,288 Month: 689/1,527 Week: 128/240 Day: 17/10 Hour: 2/1

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the variety and evolution of reproduction methods over time.
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 112 of 187 (822197)
10-20-2017 9:22 PM


How did placental mammals manage to evolve from an egg-laying reptile? In order for this to happen, a line of reptiles would have had to have evolved a complete placental reproductive system while still being egg-layers.

My fragile, egg-shell mind has a lot of trouble understanding this idea. Help needed.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by jar, posted 10-20-2017 9:43 PM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 114 of 187 (822204)
10-20-2017 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by jar
10-20-2017 9:43 PM


How did a line of reptiles evolve the system of milk production and mammary glands of mammals?

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by jar, posted 10-20-2017 9:43 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by granpa, posted 10-20-2017 11:05 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 117 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 7:01 AM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 118 of 187 (822243)
10-21-2017 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by jar
10-21-2017 7:01 AM


quote:
Slowly and over long periods of time. Lots of animals secrete juices from their skin including many reptiles. The mammary system is simply a continuation of that.

Sorry, "Slowly over long periods of time" doesn't explain anything. This is the Darwinist's equivalent of the Creationists' "God did it." Any mammary system is very complex, but you seem happy to believe that such a system evolved by sheer luck. This is akin to believing a mammary system could evolve in a human male. Fantasy and rank speculation masquerading as science.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 7:01 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 7:54 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 159 by dwise1, posted 10-28-2017 2:30 PM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 120 of 187 (822246)
10-21-2017 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by jar
10-21-2017 7:54 PM


quote:
How silly can you get Dredge? No luck involved; instead there are changes that get filtered by natural selection.

Really. How does 0.05% of a mammary system confer a survival advantage?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 7:54 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 8:12 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 130 by ringo, posted 10-22-2017 3:02 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 132 by dwise1, posted 10-22-2017 11:35 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 122 of 187 (822248)
10-21-2017 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by jar
10-21-2017 8:12 PM


How would the production of milk evolve?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 8:12 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 8:36 PM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 124 of 187 (822254)
10-21-2017 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by jar
10-21-2017 8:36 PM


In other words, you have no idea how the production of milk evolved.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 8:36 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 9:00 PM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 125 of 187 (822256)
10-21-2017 8:59 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by jar
10-21-2017 8:12 PM


"jar" writes:

Would secreting something that could be suckled as nutrition help?


What secretions other than milk are nutritious? Blood can be "secreted" in manner of speaking, but not without huge risk of infection ... and a bloody wound is a universe away from a mammary system.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 8:12 PM jar has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 127 of 187 (822262)
10-21-2017 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by jar
10-21-2017 9:00 PM


In other words, you have no idea how milk production evolved.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 9:00 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by jar, posted 10-21-2017 9:49 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 129 by Tangle, posted 10-22-2017 4:44 AM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 131 of 187 (822317)
10-22-2017 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by ringo
10-22-2017 3:02 PM


"ringo" writes:

It's a pretty simple principle really


Yeah, of course it is ... for someone with a very vivid imagination.
A couple of mutations here and there can make a big difference.

Darwinists have to dumb-down very complex processes in order to make them seem plausible. Without this vital concession, junk science has no chance at all of surviving.

And a chunk of a reptile's jaw somehow evolved into the bones of a mammal's inner ear. Pure fiction.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by ringo, posted 10-22-2017 3:02 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by jar, posted 10-23-2017 7:26 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 134 by ringo, posted 10-23-2017 11:48 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 136 by dwise1, posted 10-23-2017 7:59 PM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


(1)
Message 137 of 187 (822380)
10-23-2017 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Tangle
10-22-2017 4:44 AM


The trouble with many evolutionary "explanations" is that they are untestable hypotheses relating to events that cannot be verified as factual - so in effect, they
are stories within stories. Story-telling isn't science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Tangle, posted 10-22-2017 4:44 AM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Coyote, posted 10-24-2017 12:20 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 139 by JonF, posted 10-24-2017 8:15 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 140 by jar, posted 10-24-2017 8:23 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 141 by ringo, posted 10-24-2017 12:04 PM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


(1)
Message 142 of 187 (822514)
10-26-2017 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by jar
10-24-2017 8:23 AM


Re: and so Dredge posts yet another porkie...
jar writes:

There is evidence. It comes in the form of fossils and genetics and geology and in fact every single line of scientific inquiry. And every new process or procedure or technology simply confirms that the reality is that evolution is a fact, that the Theory of Evolution is the only explanation for the variety of life seen now and in the past


Stop talking nonsense. You sound like a damned fool.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by jar, posted 10-24-2017 8:23 AM jar has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


(1)
Message 143 of 187 (822515)
10-26-2017 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by ringo
10-24-2017 12:04 PM


This is a very poor analogy. There are thousands of eye-witness accounts of Napoleon's existence. How many eye-witnesses accounts are there that describe mammals evolving from a reptile?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by ringo, posted 10-24-2017 12:04 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by ringo, posted 10-27-2017 11:39 AM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


(1)
Message 144 of 187 (822516)
10-26-2017 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by Coyote
10-24-2017 12:20 AM


It's usually pointless comparing religious faith to science, but ToE is like religion in that it relies heavily on faith.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Coyote, posted 10-24-2017 12:20 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


(1)
Message 145 of 187 (822517)
10-26-2017 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by JonF
10-24-2017 8:15 AM


JonF writes:

Name a dozen untestable evolutionary explanations.

The theory that all life on earth evolved from unicellular organisms is untestable.

The theory that the three cellular kingdoms (eukaryotes, eubacteria, archaebacteria) share a common ancestor cannot be tested. Any theory of how the three cellular kingdoms evolved from a common ancestor is untestable.

The theory that a mammal's four-chambered heart evolved from a reptile's two-chambered heart is untestable. Any theory of how a four-chambered heart evolved from a two-chambered heart is untestable.

The theory that milk production evolved in some reptilian "ancestor" of mammals is untestable. Any theory of how milk production evolved is untestable.

The theory that human descended from a monkey-man cannot be tested. Any theory of how a human evolved from a monkey-man cannot be tested.

I could go on. Suffice it to say that there would be literally thousands of Darwinist explanations that are untestable ... and I would venture to say that the vast majority of Darwinist explanations are untestable. Hence, ToE is heavily dependant on speculation, assumptions and faith - so it's just glorified story-telling, not science.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by JonF, posted 10-24-2017 8:15 AM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by dwise1, posted 10-26-2017 11:16 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 151 by JonF, posted 10-27-2017 9:24 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 160 by Pressie, posted 11-02-2017 8:12 AM Dredge has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


(1)
Message 147 of 187 (822519)
10-26-2017 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by dwise1
10-23-2017 7:59 PM


dwise1 writes:

Merle was the first of extremely few honest creationists that I have encountered in the more than three decades I've been studying and discussing "creation science." On CompuServe around 1990, he was doing things that no other creationist would do: he would actually try to engage in a discussion, would actually respond to questions, would actually try to support his claims and statements, and when he said he'd go read something he would actually follow through and actually read what he said he would. He was an honest creationist, so after about a year he came to realize how false creationist claims are so he switched to arguing for evolution.


Oh, I get it ... an honest creationist is one who gets converted to evolution and the creationists who don't are all dishonest. I'm glad we got that straightened out.

--------------------

Poor, stupid, gullible Merle. He fell victim to the greatest hoax in the history of mankind.

Merle: "Several medical students were doing research there. Perhaps some day they would need to operate on my heart or fight some disease. Was I to believe that these medical students were in this room filled with misinformation, and that they were diligently sorting out the evolutionist lies while learning medical knowledge? How could so much error have entered this room? It made no sense."

These medical students thought evolution could advance medical science? LOL! What deluded, brainwashed fools.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by dwise1, posted 10-23-2017 7:59 PM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by dwise1, posted 10-26-2017 11:43 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 157 by ringo, posted 10-27-2017 11:43 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020