[Gabriel Reproba]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

carbon dating

Sheesh... you think people use carbon dating? Get your facts straight. Scientists claim to use use radiometric dating, not carbon dating. (Radiometric dating is just as innacurate as carbon dating, but it sounds more 'scientific' which is why they thought it would fool us all.) It must be embarrassing that you don't know anything about the theory you have been brainwashed to believe in. What does it feel like to have a TrueChristian™ know more about your own misguided myths than you do? What else do you have wrong in your misunderstanding of your own superstitions?

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

The fact that the Bible is not evidence for God, as it was written by MEN...? You could say that any old book is evidence that something exists then. I've read Harry Potter, but I don't believe in magic. I've read Lord of the RIngs, but I don't believe in dwarves, elves or orcs. Why? Because we have no evidence that any of them exists.

But none of those books were written by God, unlike the Bible.

[Gabriel Reproba]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

I've read Harry Potter, but I don't believe in magic. I've read Lord of the RIngs, but I don't believe in dwarves, elves or orcs.

And yet you have read Origin of the Species (a book written by MEN) and you believe THAT. Was Darwin not a man? Has his original theory (yes, scientists admit evolution is just a big guess) not been proven to contain errors and changed again and again over the last 150 years?

The BIBLE has stood the test of TIME.

[Backwards Child]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

It was the first creature with both amphibian and fish characteristics, because it was the first creature that God decided to create that had both amphibian and fish characteristics. That still doesn't mean anything. It's not a loophole, you're just misconstruing the evidence and assuming that it means the theory of evolution is correct. All it means is that God decided to create a fish with legs.

Nonono, there are other fish that god made with both amphibian and fish characteristics, but he made them all at the same time, remember? It most definitely IS a loophole. Even if we were just misconstruing the evidence, it does not change the FACT that "God" practically handed us exactly what we needed to disprove you. I ask you again, why did he do that?

[Jacob the Angry Liar]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Nobody does. However, it IS a transitional form, because we can trace it back, using fossils and carbon dating, to be the first creature to have both amphibian and fish characteristics. It then fits the definition of "transitional form." Again, why did God put such a convenient loophole for us? If he had at least mentioned it in the Bible, that would've been different. Odd that he didnt.

It was the first creature with both amphibian and fish characteristics, because it was the first creature that God decided to create that had both amphibian and fish characteristics. That still doesn't mean anything. It's not a loophole, you're just misconstruing the evidence and assuming that it means the theory of evolution is correct. All it means is that God decided to create a fish with legs.

[Backwards Child]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

It's not a transitional form. It's just a fish that happens to have legs. What's so significant about that? Who says a fish can't have legs?

Nobody does. However, it IS a transitional form, because we can trace it back, using fossils and carbon dating, to be the first creature to have both amphibian and fish characteristics. It then fits the definition of "transitional form." Again, why did God put such a convenient loophole for us? If he had at least mentioned it in the Bible, that would've been different. Odd that he didnt.

[Jacob the Angry Liar]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Oh, stop quoting scripture, it doesn't mean a thing. Nobody was around to hear God say all of this when he was supposedly making the Earth, and anyone who does claim to know is obviously a liar. And if God made the tiktaalik, then why did he make it so that it fit evolution perfectly? Wouldn't he have left that out, you know, something to trip us evolutionists up? After all, if there were no transitional forms EVER found, that'd be a pretty massive hole. Oddly enough, he was all too content to give us exactly what evolutionists have been looking for. Not too smart, if you ask me.

It's not a transitional form. It's just a fish that happens to have legs. What's so significant about that? Who says a fish can't have legs?

[Backwards Child]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Genesis 1:24 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so."
1:25 "And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

As it should be blatantly obvious from this scripture, God created ALL creatures. This "tiktalik", if it ever existed at all, was created by God. It's called "intelligent design". With the wise range of creatures on this earth, you can expect that He would have created something like that. A fish with legs? Pretty clever, but not something to get excited about. God created it just like everything else. This has nothing to do with evolution. It's just another animal.

Oh, stop quoting scripture, it doesn't mean a thing. Nobody was around to hear God say all of this when he was supposedly making the Earth, and anyone who does claim to know is obviously a liar. And if God made the tiktaalik, then why did he make it so that it fit evolution perfectly? Wouldn't he have left that out, you know, something to trip us evolutionists up? After all, if there were no transitional forms EVER found, that'd be a pretty massive hole. Oddly enough, he was all too content to give us exactly what evolutionists have been looking for. Not too smart, if you ask me.

[Jacob the Angry Liar]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Genesis 1:24 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so."
1:25 "And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

As it should be blatantly obvious from this scripture, God created ALL creatures. This "tiktalik", if it ever existed at all, was created by God. It's called "intelligent design". With the wise range of creatures on this earth, you can expect that He would have created something like that. A fish with legs? Pretty clever, but not something to get excited about. God created it just like everything else. This has nothing to do with evolution. It's just another animal.

[Backwards Child]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Go back and look at my picture again! What's not to agree with?

Checkmate, bub.

The fact that the Bible is not evidence for God, as it was written by MEN...? You could say that any old book is evidence that something exists then. I've read Harry Potter, but I don't believe in magic. I've read Lord of the RIngs, but I don't believe in dwarves, elves or orcs. Why? Because we have no evidence that any of them exists.

[Jed_Cassidy]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Seriously? Because the guy nicknamed it a fishapod, its ridiculous? If you had taken the time to look at the articles that were linked to those pictures, or click on any of the links, or even read ANYTHING that you don’t agree with, you would have realized that we KNOW that each and every one of those creatures existed. Why? Because we have fossils of them. I don’t see any material evidence of your God…

Checkmate, bub.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Seriously? Because the guy nicknamed it a fishapod, its ridiculous? If you had taken the time to look at the articles that were linked to those pictures, or click on any of the links, or even read ANYTHING that you don’t agree with, you would have realized that we KNOW that each and every one of those creatures existed. Why? Because we have fossils of them. I don’t see any material evidence of your God…

Go back and look at my picture again! What's not to agree with?

[Backwards Child]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Just a bit of friendly advice, metaphorically you are pissing into the wind in this place.

I am here for purely scientific purposes. A large percentage of Christians, and Baptists in particular, have unchanged DNA going back several generations. The ones that have not recessed to the point they cannot use a computer are not here of course, but there is an interesting cross section of genetically challenged individuals here.

Ha, thanks, but Im only here because I try to read and talk about things that I don't agree with so i dont stagnate in my beliefs, because who knows, one of them might have some kind of intelligent argument. But when I came here, and saw this place, it was pretty difficult not to give some sort of argument. Plus, I get to use quotes that they give me in my controversial topic speech, so its actually all good.

[Backwards Child]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Clearly nonsense, from the name onwards. Fishapods? Come on, it even sounds like a kind of pokemon or something. And look at that picture:

Someone clearly just scribbled those monstrosities in Microsoft Paint while off their face on salvia. If implausible drawings are admissible, then I'd like to present the following scientific diagram proving beyond all doubt that God wrote the Bible (Our Lord is depicted behind a cloud so as not to be a graven image):
You see?

Seriously? Because the guy nicknamed it a fishapod, its ridiculous? If you had taken the time to look at the articles that were linked to those pictures, or click on any of the links, or even read ANYTHING that you don’t agree with, you would have realized that we KNOW that each and every one of those creatures existed. Why? Because we have fossils of them. I don’t see any material evidence of your God…

[John Scopes]

Re: Should Evolution be Taught in Schools?

Not a man-fish, a amphibian-fish. And certaintly not magic.
And the fact that you even asked that shows that you will never be satisfied, and demonstrates your ignorance. If I provided you with THOSE fossils, you would say, "Well now there is FOUR gaps in the fossil records! Where are the transitional forms between those and tiktaalik?" But in any case, if you had actually rad the article, you would have seen this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fishapods.png

Panderichthys is the transitional form between Fish and tiktaalik, and Acanthostega and Ichthyostega are form in between tiktaalik and true amphibians.

Just a bit of friendly advice, metaphorically you are pissing into the wind in this place.

I am here for purely scientific purposes. A large percentage of Christians, and Baptists in particular, have unchanged DNA going back several generations. The ones that have not recessed to the point they cannot use a computer are not here of course, but there is an interesting cross section of genetically challenged individuals here.