What is the evolutionairy theory on the Giraffe?

joz:
Which would be fine if you had any evidence for your explanation other than a 2000 year old religious document......John Paul:
Actually all the observed, testable, repeatable and verifiable experimental evidence supports the Creation PoV IMHO. Let's see we have "Variation under domestication", "Variation under nature", "Struggle for existence"- all are evidence for the Creation model of biological evolution. BTW, the Bible is more than 2000 years old.What is your evidence that random mutations culled by natural selection could give rise to life's observed diversity from one or a few populations of single-celled organisms which just happened to have the ability to self-replicate?Where is the biological or genetic evidence that a giraffe could evolve from a short necked ancestor?------------------
John Paul

joz:
I think this really comes down to the whole can small changes (mutations) add up (integrate would probably be a better term) to large changes argument you left hanging about a week or so ago.... so get your arse back over there and finish it....John Paul:
So we can go back & forth "can not"/ "can too"? What a waste of time. Show me the biological or genetic evidence...joz:
BTW...So the bible was written more than 2000 years ago huh....Lets see Jesus was apparently crucified in the early part of the fourth decade A.D. so any document that mentions this would (until 2030 something) be LESS than 2000 years old.... Just a small point....John Paul:
ROTFLMAO! Ever hear of the Torah (Old Testament)? Only the New Testament was written after the death of Jesus. Genesis was written well before Jesus was born. Actually if Jesus died during his 33rd year on Earth he would have died in the third decade AD. He wasn't born in 1 AD or zero or even 1 BC. Herod died in 4 BC and Mary & Joseph were fleeing his decree (kill the babies) when Jesus was born. With that in mind Jesus would have been born in or before 4 BC.------------------
John Paul

joz:
I wasnt the one who said The Bible (note not the old testament, not parts of the bible) is more than 2000 years old, you were the ages of parts of the bible (torah, or old testament) are immaterial in refuting the claim that the bible was written MORE than 2000 years ago....John Paul:
True, but taken in context Genesis is the part of the Bible that speaks of a Special Creation. That said Genesis is part of the OT, which is more than 2000 years old.This is what transpired joz:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by redstang281:
Wow, so not only would all that have to occur, but also the giraffe would have to be isolated and we would hope that the giraffe baby could nurse milk off the giraffe for a long enough time to grow to reach the tree branches.
This is why the evolution community has given up on that theory of giraffe evolution and has started a new one.Meanwhile the creationists still maintain the giraffe was created a giraffe as God designed him as one of the creatures to help maintain plant grow.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
joz:
Which would be fine if you had any evidence for your explanation other than a 2000 year old religious document......John Paul:
This implies you are talking about what drives the Creationists' PoV- which is Genesis. And as you have learned, Genesis was written before 1 AD, making it older than 2000 years.joz:
So it was his 33rd year on earth that moves the older than 2000 years cutoff point to a minimum of 2020 something we are still in 2001 so it isnt older than 2000 years....John Paul:
Nice blatant misrepresentation of what I posted. It that all you have? Perhaps you should re-read my post so you will know what I was referring to by posting his age at his death and when he was born.------------------
John Paul

joz:
And I say again I am not the one who said and I quote "BTW, the Bible is more than 2000 years old."You didn`t say Genesis, you didn`t say the old testament or the Torah you said the bible....John Paul:
And I as have shown you, it is. And as I also pointed out, in the context of what you were talking about- only Genesis applies.------------------
John Paul

mark24:
Firstly, a valve is anything that can restricts flow in one or both directions. A small flap which bends one way & less so in another would have the ability to restrict flow in one direction. This is true REGARDLESS OF HOW SMALL it is. If it proved to be an advantage then nat. sel. takes over.John Paul:
Please show that random mutations culled by natural selection can build such a thing. You are guilty of oversimplifying living organisms. That is the card that evolutionists play all too often. It is NOT as simple as having a longer neck or valve control but what builds these. The onus is upon those making the claim to substantiate it. We're waiting...------------------
John Paul

joz I gave you examples- what you have not done is to show RM & NS can build anything. That is what the ToE states. Even if recombinations, duplications etc,. are included in as random mutations, you still have nothing but inference from phylogeny and paleontology (which assume the ToE is real). So where is the biological or genetic evidence?Talk about being a hypocrite- stop whining and provide the evidence that is required to substantiate your pet theory.------------------
John Paul