Evolution vs. Creation

I fish wrote:

<quoted text>
Evolution is a philosophy. You didn't know?

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, I wouldn't cut out an Appendix if I didn't know whether or not it was needed!
On your counter-evolutionary evidence, can you introduce some links on the subject? I'd like to read what's being discussed there. I think the DNA entropy only proves that single cells must die over time but I'd rather see the actual data.

Judged:

1

thewordofme wrote:

<quoted text>
How did god come into being??

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>Genetic homology is not scientific evidence.... it is merely philosophical evidence against intelligent design.

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>
I asked for scientific evidence, not atheist BS.
"Massive records of various other species evolving, including man?".. there is no evidence of human evolution.

HTS wrote:

"half a wing" raises survivability? How does half a wing raise survivability without co-evolution of instinctive behavior to use half a wing? How about a tenth of a wing? Have you considered improbability?

Langoliers wrote:

<quoted text>
"God go to extreme measures to trick us into thinking that he/she was not there and meddling in events, just to test our faith?"
He gave us the Bible there is no trick into thinking he does not exist.

Judged:

1

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>
Appendices are often prophylactically removed because it is known through observation that they have a propensity to become obstructed and inflamed. This is an observation that has nothing to do with Darwinism. It is also known that if they have a function, it is not a vital one and the body can do fine without an appendix. Again, these are observations which are independent of whether or not one believes that man evolved from a worm.

HTS wrote:

If you're interested in genetic entropy, Dr. Sanford's book is excellent. He is a geneticist at Cornell and his book completely demolishes Darwinism from the standpoint of molecular biology.
Here's a review:[/QUOET]

Unfortunately as his hypothesis requires not only a young Earth but also a complete and total rejection of reality, this is not the case.

[QUOTE who="HTS"]The genomes of all species are deteriorating over time. That is a scientific fact and is completely contradictory to the founding premise of Darwinism.

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
Unfortunately the data provided by reality conflicts with his baseless assertions. I've asked him numerous times to counter this but it has not been forthcoming.

Judged:

1

1

1

Igor Trip wrote:

<quoted text>
If you could debunk bird evolution you wouldn't be asking about Pterosaurs.
Pterosaurs evolutionary pathway was most likely through small forest dwelling lizards jumping from branch to branch. By spreading their legs out they would fall slower and so could drop further. Bigger and webbed feet would allow them to fall further and even glide a short distance. The webbing then just needs to increase in size until they had full wings.
As nothing new needs to evolve there's no problem here.
Gliding Geckos.
http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2010/...

Judged:

4

3

3

skoller wrote:

Noah's ark was an early model of the Starship Enterprise. Which explains how they managed to transport billions of species to safety during the great flood, and reach the heavens, among other magical feats as explained in the bible. No way they could have fit all those animals on a ship built by one man in short period of time.
The name of the ship has been pronounced phonetically for centuries which explains the confusion. The true name was "Noaazark 1 of the Federation." And, let's not forget the U.S.S Tower of Babel the Great.

Judged:

1

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>Your incredulity of God is begging the question. If you think a pterosaur evolved, then let's see the evidence. If a pterosaur couldn't have evolved, then that fact is evidence of intelligent design.

Langoliers wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is a scientific fact about fossils.
Fossils can only tell us what the animal or plant was, period - nothing more!
A Fossil cannot prove evolution.
It can suggest it but it can't prove it.

Judged:

2

2

2

thewordofme wrote:

<quoted text>Fossils are one of the most important sources of information about the Earth's past. They can tell us the age of the rocks in which they are found, what the environment was like when the fossilised organisms were alive, and even how the organisms functioned. They can also tell us about Earth movements, such as mountain building, about the former positions of continents (ancient geography), and about the evolution of life on Earth. Some of these uses for fossils are of economic importance, assisting in the search for oil and minerals. http://cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sciences/Pale...

There are many things to learn grasshopper.

TheBlackSheep wrote:

<quoted text>Nothing comes into being, but through god. Nothing.

Judged:

1

1

thewordofme wrote:

<quoted text>How did god come into being??

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>There's an enormous problem... The pterosaur had an elongated fourth digit of the forelimb... Not just webbed feet. Any proposed pathway of evolution would obviously require that behavioral instincts would co-evolve along with the altered digits... And that would have to occur in the same generation which is clearly impossible. Furthermore, there would obviously be a stage where the creature could not glide bit would have sacrificed it's forelimb functionality. You need to explain what survival advantage there would be in a fourth digit 50% longer than a normal digit, and how such a mutation would even be maintained in the population given the fact that it would have to mate with unmutated offspring. Bird evolution has the same problem.
Has a lizard today ever produced an offspring that could be construed as one step toward a flying reptile? Has any creature ever produced such an offspring?

Subduction Zone wrote:

<quoted text>
You obviously do not know what constitutes evidence. The theory of evolution demands genetic homology. It was predicted before we could analyze genes. When genes were observed to be homologous in a mode that supports evolution that is evidence for evolution in the same way that nonhomology would be evidence against evolution.
HST, please quit trying to play these stupid "heads I win, tails you lose" arguments.

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
Hmm. And not free. It will have to wait.
So how does a genome "deteriorate" rather than evolve? There's something subjective about that.

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>If you don't think gliding requires instinctive behavior try doing surgery on a squirrel and sew flaps of skin between its legs. Push him out of a tree. He will fall flat on his face.

Langoliers wrote:

<quoted text>
The Chicken!
God most Likely created a mature universes and earth. Why would he create a new violent universes and then wait "billions and billions" of years for things to claim down then create a new violent earth and wait 4.5 billion years to let things calm down to then create a fully mature man and women and trees and animals were all fully mature upon creation why not then the Earth and Universes too?
The Chicken was created as a fully mature animal.