Posted on 06/25/2007 5:18:09 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
Gee, your whole natural selection argument gets shot to hell, and all you can do is offer up your creationism strawman again? I never made a claim regarding creationism. But thanks for playing anyway. We have some wonderful consolation prizes for you.
How's that again?
I never made a claim regarding creationism.
That's funny. So were my questions too hard for you?
As opposed to you talking about their present environment as though that were their environment 1,000,000 years ago or more. LOL!
these same giraffes who as adults have "naturally selected" long necks to enable them to better see predators even though they have no predators
Were there no predators back when they first evolved? LOL!
these same giraffes who have a decided "naturally selected" height differential between male and female
In case you hadn't noticed, most species show differences between males and females. Maybe not in your case.
Yes, your natural selection argument is total crap.
As opposed to your argument? What was your argument again?
He didn't believe in Darwin's evolution either so kind of stupid to call on him for your point
I Agreee - ‘most people really don’t give a darn and have never bothered to look into the evidence because they’re too busy with other things in their lives. Unfortunate, but that’s the way humans work.’
However, maybe you who are so sure should apply the scientific approach to dis-proving the Bible - most especially the life of Jesus Christ and related prophecies?
Did you know Jesus fulfilled over 100 prophecies? 33 on the day he was crucified? Read Psalm 22.
You experts are always asking the most difficult questions and yet know that most will not be answered in our lifetimes. Yet I’ve posted before and do so again - one of the best chreation science websites to try to explain:
- the movement of continents
- where all the water went from a global flood
- problems with Darwinian theory - even quotes from Darwin and other pro-evolution experts themselves
- origin of comets, asteroids, and meteoroids
- problems with old-age dating theories
and lots more I don’t have the time to list at www.creationscience.com - it’s basically a whole book available online or can be ordered in hardback.
I have yet to see anyone truly refute all the science contained therein.
I checked out the website you referenced. I went to the section titled How Accurate Is Radiocarbon Dating? and found it is largely tripe.
For example, the site states:
In one study of eleven sets of ancient human bones, all were dated at about 5,000 radiocarbon years or less!This is standard creationist nonsense, copied from one creationist website to another without bothering to check its accuracy--of which there is none. The true story is presented in a recent Darwin Central blog.
The reason I check out the radiocarbon dating sections of these sites first is that I know that field, and can spot errors and nonsense quickly. And, if the site is so poor in this one section, what confidence should I have in other sections where I don't know the data as well?
But, I guess this is what we should expect from creation "science" eh?
It's not just journalists that do that. Frankly, it's that kind of behavior that has done more harm to the effort to convince people that evolution is true than anything. (Which is fine by me, by the way.)
When a person can only support their views on something with what amounts to 'your momma', they show they don't have all that much confidence in the position themselves.
Coyoteman I really didn’t expect much more than that in your response. Only pro-evolution info gets your full attention
Did you know that the site author was at one time a proponent of evolution? Walt Brown’s credentials are impecable. The information is presented mainly in laymans terms but provide material and endnotes that go far deeper than any other I’ve seen - including talkorigins.
Many things which you simply refuse to discuss here. I doubt you have read even 2% of this website and far less than that much with an open mind.
Tripe is simply your opinion - one that seems to spend more time attacking others on FR rather than reading well-researched reasoning for:
a)not only the hundreds of problems with evolution but also b)a complete historical framework that may describe events more closely parallel to the Biblical record than any other creation or apologetics website to date.
Then why is he writing nonsense in the section that I referenced?
And if he writes nonsense in that section, why should I trust anything else he says?
I see. So the populations of International Falls, Minnesota and Dalandzadgad, Mongolia consitute two seperate species of man?
They can evolve very quickly into what?
For example, a new strain of bacteria. I am sure you are familiar with the problem of micro-organisms becoming resistant to the drugs that medicine has available to treat disease. This is the result of the evolutionary process.
There seems to be some confusion here about what the term evolution means in biology. It refers to a change in the characteristics of the gene pool of a population over time.
Obviously you do not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.