Do you believe in the Darwin Theory?

Well since there isn't much (if any) counter evidence for the other side of the argument, so yes I do. Fortier

oh, and that's a false dichotomy

seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?notconspiracy

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?Revinh

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?Revinh

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?Tylendal

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?C_Town_Soul

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

Yes. The idea that we evolved from apes is a common misunderstanding. It states humans and apes had a common ancestor millions of years ago.Bourbons3

yeap... and I believe in it. I`m into science (my carrier move around science) so... For me is not even a question, there is prove of fosil and evolution...

:oops:

Does tis means I do not believe in God?? Why does this two theory need to be separate?? someone had to make all this happen... Maybe God just bless the 1st ancestors... the bible can not be read word by word, it was writtent by humans with different point of view, to be read and interpreted by humans..

imho... :oops:

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?Revinh

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?notconspiracy

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

you must have amnesia..

but whatever, im not gonna keep arguing with you as we obviously couldn't get a common ground

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?Revinh

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

you must have amnesia..

but whatever, im not gonna keep arguing with you as we obviously couldn't get a common ground

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?C_Town_Soul

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sure why not. I'm gonna go kiss a frog, it'll turn into a handsome prince 40 millions years from now..

[QUOTE="Revinh"]No I don't believe Darwins theory, the only people who do are those devout zealots brainwashed by the Darwinian religion.C_Town_Soul

religions aren't based on facts as the theory of evolution is.

the theory is based on huge leaps of faith

right now, i am going to use diagrams to illustrate some evidence for evolution

this is a cladogram that I made up. a cladogram is a way to ****fy things into groups based on their evolutionary relationships.

if 2 organisms share a common trait, we can infer that these 2 organisms share a common ancestor.

which would be this thing circled by a red circle

if this is true, then this trait should be shared by all the organisms this ancestor gave rise to. this is exactly what evolution predicts.

but if we find an animal which shares traits of 2 organisms, and this trait is not shared by all organisms which branched off from their common ancestor, then evolution is false since that creature cannot have evolved. this is called a chimera. a chimera cannot fit into the nested hierarchy

evolution also predicts that this pattern will apply when we sequence genomes. simply look at what I said before and replace "trait" with "gene" or "genome sequence".

so far, none such chimeras or violations of the nested hierarchy have ever been found

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]No I don't believe Darwins theory, the only people who do are those devout zealots brainwashed by the Darwinian religion.Revinh

religions aren't based on facts as the theory of evolution is.

the theory is based on huge leaps of faith

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?Revinh

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

you must have amnesia..

but whatever, im not gonna keep arguing with you as we obviously couldn't get a common ground

I am confussed... by reading your post it seems that you both believe in the nested theory and in darwin.. so what are you arguing about?? sorry english no my 1st language and a bit tired.. :P

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]seanxiximx99, how do you explain the nested hierarchy?Revinh

There's nothing to explain about it. It annoys me how you keep bringing that up.

you must have amnesia..

but whatever, im not gonna keep arguing with you as we obviously couldn't get a common ground

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?Revinh

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sure why not. I'm gonna go kiss a frog, it'll turn into a handsome prince 40 millions years from now..

im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. notconspiracy

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*LJSEXAY

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?C_Town_Soul

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sure why not. I'm gonna go kiss a frog, it'll turn into a handsome prince 40 millions years from now..

You're welcome. gtfo

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?Revinh

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sure why not. I'm gonna go kiss a frog, it'll turn into a handsome prince 40 millions years from now..

You're welcome. gtfo

[QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*Revinh

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

2: at what point will bacteria be "something else"?

[QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*Revinh

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

the fact that is not proven by the bible it does not mean (like you said) that goes against God. The bible was written by man, interpreted by men. I`m not too practcioner of religous, but right??

I do not think they go on separate ways, maybe no the same path but close.

Like I state before.. someone could have made all this possible.. why not God??

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. Aidenfury19

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. Revinh

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

so you have evidence that falsifies evolution?

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*chang_1910

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

the fact that is not proven by the bible it does not mean (like you said) that goes against God. The bible was written by man, interpreted by men. I`m not too practcioner of religous, but right??

I do not think they go on separate ways, maybe no the same path but close.

Like I state before.. someone could have made all this possible.. why not God??

It's inspired of God.

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?C_Town_Soul

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sure why not. I'm gonna go kiss a frog, it'll turn into a handsome prince 40 millions years from now..

You're welcome. gtfo

Thank you.

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. Revinh

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*notconspiracy

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

2: at what point will bacteria be "something else"?

There really aren't any.

I'm not sure, but my point is mutation is not a basis for evolution which pretty much falsifies the theory.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

Revinh

That only is a contradiction of the Bible if you are an adherent to biblical inerrency which..if I may, is bat**** crazy. Furthermore please attempt to prove those assertions of your instead of just making unbacked claims, thanks.

There really aren't any.

Revinh

You sure there bub?

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*Revinh

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

2: at what point will bacteria be "something else"?

There really aren't any.

I'm not sure, but my point is mutation is not a basis for evolution which pretty much falsifies the theory.

second, there are most definitely intermediate transitional fossils http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

Aidenfury19

That only is a contradiction of the Bible if you are an adherent to biblical inerrency which..if I may, is bat**** crazy. Furthermore please attempt to prove those assertions of your instead of just making unbacked claims, thanks.

I've asserted them many times before in the forum. here's a website where you can investigate it further yourself www.creationevolution.net

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. C_Town_Soul

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

No I meant natural selection doesn't help to create the living thing. A stronger lion might survive better than others, but then so what? it's still a lion.

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

Revinh

That only is a contradiction of the Bible if you are an adherent to biblical inerrency which..if I may, is bat**** crazy. Furthermore please attempt to prove those assertions of your instead of just making unbacked claims, thanks.

I've asserted them many times before in the forum. here's a website where you can investigate it further yourself www.creationevolution.net

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. Revinh

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

No I meant natural selection doesn't help to create the living thing. A stronger lion might survive better than others, but then so what? it's still a lion.

second, all our "new" features are nothing more than modifications of features which have existed for hundreds of millions of years

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*notconspiracy

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

2: at what point will bacteria be "something else"?

ok... I`m not going to enter on this discussion... Everyone has right to their opinion and believe and BELIEVE me they are not going to change in one night on some internet forum...

now about that...

Bacteria are "evolving".. that is why the Antiotics resistant strains, that is why some bacterias/virus stop "existing" and that is why we can find a bacteria that did not produce disease in human that years ago did not... Same reason why we (usa at least) needs Flu vacinnaccion yearly...

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*Revinh

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

2: at what point will bacteria be "something else"?

There really aren't any.

I'm not sure, but my point is mutation is not a basis for evolution which pretty much falsifies the theory.

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

notconspiracy

That only is a contradiction of the Bible if you are an adherent to biblical inerrency which..if I may, is bat**** crazy. Furthermore please attempt to prove those assertions of your instead of just making unbacked claims, thanks.

I've asserted them many times before in the forum. here's a website where you can investigate it further yourself www.creationevolution.net

Of course..you're for that website..

"transitional forms" are very rare and questionable. it's a fact that the record shows sudden appearances of animals and hardly changing over very long periods of time. im not gonna get more into the fossils it's up to you to investigate the facts and evaluate the which sources are actually reliable.

what about nylonase?

Wow everyone's missing the point of this thread, he said "evoluted" :|

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. notconspiracy

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

No I meant natural selection doesn't help to create the living thing. A stronger lion might survive better than others, but then so what? it's still a lion.

second, all our "new" features are nothing more than modifications of features which have existed for hundreds of millions of years

how would it change from being a lion?

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

Revinh

That only is a contradiction of the Bible if you are an adherent to biblical inerrency which..if I may, is bat**** crazy. Furthermore please attempt to prove those assertions of your instead of just making unbacked claims, thanks.

I've asserted them many times before in the forum. here's a website where you can investigate it further yourself www.creationevolution.net

Of course..you're for that website..

"transitional forms" are very rare and questionable. it's a fact that the record shows sudden appearances of animals and hardly changing over very long periods of time. im not gonna get more into the fossils it's up to you to investigate the facts and evaluate the which sources are actually reliable.

what about nylonase?

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. Revinh

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

No I meant natural selection doesn't help to create the living thing. A stronger lion might survive better than others, but then so what? it's still a lion.

second, all our "new" features are nothing more than modifications of features which have existed for hundreds of millions of years

how would it change from being a lion?

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="LJSEXAY"]

[QUOTE="kingamez"]I believe in evolution. *hides from incoming lightening bolts from god*C_Town_Soul

FYI....evolution doesn't disprove God. I don't know why so many atheists assume it does.

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

The fossil record document abrupt appearances of animals that hardly changed over long periods of time.

Mutations does absolutely nothing to change a living creature from what they are. The only thing that can happen during reproduction is errors in copying which results in deformities and weaker organisms. Some bacteria may have developed or "evolved" resistance to some antibiotics but it's through loss or corruption of genetic information, it doesn't change them into something else.

2: at what point will bacteria be "something else"?

There really aren't any.

I'm not sure, but my point is mutation is not a basis for evolution which pretty much falsifies the theory.

uh ok.. it still only explain how they survived. there's not gonna be anything that will change them from what they are

Of course..you're for that website..

"transitional forms" are very rare and questionable. it's a fact that the record shows sudden appearances of animals and hardly changing over very long periods of time. im not gonna get more into the fossils it's up to you to investigate the facts and evaluate the which sources are actually reliable.

what about nylonase?

Revinh

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]im sorry revinh, but I dont ever remember you ever presenting evidence which falsifies evolution by means of natural selection. notconspiracy

You can't reasonably expect him to produce something which doesn't exist.

Well I don't have to. Natural selection or survival of the fittest gives no support to Darwin's theory. It only explains how a living thing survives not how they arrive.

No I meant natural selection doesn't help to create the living thing. A stronger lion might survive better than others, but then so what? it's still a lion.

second, all our "new" features are nothing more than modifications of features which have existed for hundreds of millions of years

how would it change from being a lion?

dictionary.com

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

It might not necessarily go against God's existence but it does contradict the creation account of the Bible, which says he created different kinds of sea, flying, land creatures and humans (and different kinds of plants). They were to reproduce according to their kinds, though there can variations within the 'kind', there was no common ancestor, human did not evolve from some ape like ancestor, and there's no shapeshifting of creatures no matter how long it takes and regardless of their environment.

notconspiracy

That only is a contradiction of the Bible if you are an adherent to biblical inerrency which..if I may, is bat**** crazy. Furthermore please attempt to prove those assertions of your instead of just making unbacked claims, thanks.

I've asserted them many times before in the forum. here's a website where you can investigate it further yourself www.creationevolution.net

Of course..you're for that website..

"transitional forms" are very rare and questionable. it's a fact that the record shows sudden appearances of animals and hardly changing over very long periods of time. im not gonna get more into the fossils it's up to you to investigate the facts and evaluate the which sources are actually reliable.

what about nylonase?

so? even if they did evolve that ability, it's not a change that's a progression toward becoming something else.