[QUOTE="GabuEx"]
Sorry, but wrong. If you name me any two organisms on Earth, I can list you all of their common traits.
deadpool86x
Ok, common house fly and a Rose.
The common house fly and the rose are both members of the domain Eukaryota, which means that they are both organisms composed of many organic cells that contain a nucleus in which their genetic material is carried. This is differentiated from the domains Bacteria and Archaea, which are unicellular organisms whose cells do not contain a nucleaus.
If we did not evolve from an animal with a tail, then why do we have a tailbone?
well, you think its possible for things to naturally occur, so i believe that our traits naturally came to be. There is a need for it, permits limited movement between the sacrum and the coccyx. I don't think we evolved it from anything else, i think its a vital part of the human structure.
deadpool86x
It can't be too vital, as operations have been successfully performed to remove it.
Beyond that, however, you did not answer the question. It is not simply any old bone. It is precisely the same bone structure that is observed in chimpanzees, which do have a bone, and whose tailbone provides support - hence the name. We thus have a bone to support a tail, yet no tail. The theory of evolution explains this very easily: our ancestors had bones, and the tailbone is a remnant from that heritage. What is your explanation?
If flightless birds did not evolve from birds that flew, then why do they have hollow bones?
Since when to genetic mutations make sense all the time? Your argument for that is the same as a group of incestuous kids having more kids with more horrid mutations and spawning off a new type of human.
deadpool86x
You did not even attempt to answer the question. There are flightless birds with hollow bones. Yet, there are also flightless birds with marrow-filled bones. The theory of evolution can explain this very easily: the flightless birds with hollow bones have been observed to be more closely related genetically to birds of flight than flightless birds with marrow-filled bones. What is your explanation?
I am in fact trying to understand the views of others. You seem to be unable to think outside the box and are proving the point i made in my first post where i said why do they always reply with "OH YA, well why is this or that then???" Thats not a valid excuse for your beliefs, if anything is willfully ignorant, it would be the person who keeps says "Oh ya, well how come they have this or that trait?" If you cant think for yourself, dont post, and your inability to explain it doesnt justify anyone not believe in god doing it all
deadpool86x
I can tell you that I most certainly am thinking for myself, considering that I have studied this topic in depth and have arrived at my own conclusions. I am a little confused as to why you are coming to the conclusion that providing evidence in favor of evolution is not thinking for oneself.
Also, you may not have noticed, but there was a bit more to my argument than just "well why do we have trait X?", but you seem to have not quoted any of that argument, so perhaps you don't have a response...?
Once again, your opinion. While flawed and its apparent you dont have the ability to think outside the box, all I can say it continue thinking 0+0= a complex number. I believe math is law and cant be changed, you believe that on a tuesday 15 billion years ago these math laws didnt exist or could be broken for a short time.
deadpool86x
I am becoming further convinced that you neither understand this nor have any interest in understanding it, because it seems to me that someone who is interested in understanding this would not be so apparently comfortable with making scientifically and mathematically meaningless statements. :?
Log in to comment