How can evolution be true if there are no between-stage fossils? (+ 1 more question)

I have one thing to say about the Garden of Eden topic...Eve was framed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by izoakl:
i.e. lets say a girraffe came from a zebra, then why dont we have... quote 'Girrebra' fossils? We have girraffe and zebra fossils... but no 'girrebra'. (this is just some in-between form i made up).

​

And this goes for everything...

​

anyone have an answer?

​

--------
my next question is...

​

why do people argue over creation and evolution if evolution gives you NO destiny , and creation does.

​

---

Why on earth do you think that giraffes came from zebras?If this is a "let's suppose" that you just made up, then I think that you might be interested to know that the Theory of Evolution NEVER "supposes" anything resembling your scenario.Perhaps you might want to familiarize yourself with what the ToE actually does claim, and the evidence which supports it, before continuting to waste time destroying false versions of it (strawmen). Here is a good place to start:TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

All I am going to say is that anyone who claims to understand the bad acid trip that is the Book of Revelations is talking out of their arse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
All I am going to say is that anyone who claims to understand the bad acid trip that is the Book of Revelations is talking out of their arse.

---

​

Just wanted to say thanks for writing "arse" - made me quite nostalgic for home.

​

And of course you're right about Saint John the Crackhead ...

​

LOL!!!

​

---

quote:

---

If you mean by sermons by the clergy, sure, they usually aren't in any real depth. But many Christians are in Bible study groups, in which we study each book of the Bible (about 1/2 to 1 term to study one book). In these groups, we discuss and learn about them as a group-we did Revelation last year. Right now we're doing Deuteronomy (which you'd probably agree is one of the harder to understand books).

---

But who among you, in these study groups, has any grounding in hebrew, or the culture and history of the time when the Bible is written, so you can make intelligent interpretations and judgements about what the Bible says?I mean, generations upon generations of Biblical scholars who have all the background expertise still do not all agree upon a lot of what it means, so why do you think that a lay-person can?Furthermore, Who among you understands how and where and why all of the various translations came about; there were many political and social agendas which predicated changes to the text. How do you even know which Bible to use if you (most likely) don't know the history of all the changes it has gone through?

quote:

---

Anyway, if you've ever read the Left Behind fiction series (By Tim Lahaye and Jerry B. Jenkins) about Armageddon, you quite quickly realize how Revelation is applicable.

---

Um, that's like saying,"If you've ever seen Star Trek; The Next Generation, you quickly see how time travel is possible."Or,"If you've ever read Nostradamus' prophecies, you quickly see how accurate they are if you liberally-interpret them."[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 10-23-2002]