Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 0/65 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Mankind and dinosaur side by side ? ?
Peter
Member (Idle past 1507 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 10 of 100 (8318)
04-08-2002 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by techristian
04-08-2002 10:12 AM


We don't see evolution happening becuase it occurs
over vast amounts of time. All we can observe are
indications that it does happen.
I don't think that any scientific theory can be prooved 100%,
the best we can say is that the observable data appears to
fit the theory ... in which case the theory is likely to be largely
correct.
Perhaps it would be more constructive if you pick ONE evidence
for evolution which you doubt, and say why ... it's easier
to discuss specifics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by techristian, posted 04-08-2002 10:12 AM techristian has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1507 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 24 of 100 (8440)
04-11-2002 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by techristian
04-10-2002 8:47 PM


quote:
Originally posted by techristian:

As to a spear in a dinosaur , try to catch one, on foot, running 30-70 miles per hour.

Prehistoric hunters don't seem to have had much difficulty devising
ways of catching all manner of fast and/or large animals.
You don't need to spear a dinosaur of the run to spear/kill it.
Dig a pit, fill the bottom with spikes, cover with light branches,
place food in middle.
End result :: a large animal punctured in ways that could be
resognised post-mortem.
Human remains, along with the remains of what they eat, have been
found ... why are there no dinosaur remians amongst these ?
quote:
Originally posted by techristian:

Now I have a few questions for you. Where are your transitional species ?

Covered I feel.
quote:
Originally posted by techristian:

Why are there still certain life forms unchanged when compared to fossils "millions of years old" ?

Covered.
quote:
Originally posted by techristian:
When a new SPECIES is supposedly evolved, it must only mate within the species. WHO DOES THE FIRST ONE OF A SPECIES MATE WITH ?

Covered ... but I'd like to add emphasis to evolution being
about populations NOT individuals.
Look at galapogus finches ... like a certain Charles Darwin did
Oh, sorry, I forgot ... speciation is OK it's transitions that
are the problem
quote:
Originally posted by techristian:

Once again where are your transitional species?

By this do you mean 'missing links' ? I don't think you'll find
these ... the whole concept is a mis-conception of what evolution
is saying.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by techristian, posted 04-10-2002 8:47 PM techristian has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024