[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

That would be a proof against evolution

Amen!!! Shout Glory!!!

Christ wins again!!!

[John Kirk]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Nobody has ever seen one species turning into another species. I just doesn't happen. Dogs change but always stay as dogs, you can't breed one into a cat no matter how hard you try.

YIC

Jack

That would be a proof against evolution, you still don't know what evolution is, go for once in your little existence give an accurate definition of evolution like in the science books from real scientists.

If you still are to stubborn to even try then shut up.

[Jack O'fagan]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

That thing would die out in one generation. It's survival of the fittest. It's adaption to your environment. That thing would get eaten and go extinct.

Any recognizable evolution of species takes MILLIONS of years. It doesn't just happen with the blink of an eye.

Nobody has ever seen one species turning into another species. I just doesn't happen. Dogs change but always stay as dogs, you can't breed one into a cat no matter how hard you try.

YIC

Jack

[John Kirk]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Sister Maria asked where, in the BIBLE, it says that apes and monkey are different kind.

And if evolution and common ancestry is so true, how come I haven't seen one of these at my local fishing hole?


Don't bother answering, as I already took the liberty of checking the 1611 K.J. Bible for you.

Here is the problem again from your ignorance of the theory and fact of evlution, common ancostry doesn't mean to have characteristics from different species.

But to evolve and adapt to the envirronment, and has properties to survive in this conditions. Not to have limbs of future species, that's just ridiculous.

Each parents give birth to an individual with slight variations, micro-evolution, which you agree with. A large change to forming an new species is just micro-evolution on a longer time-scale, called macroevolution.



Go read a book or something.

[Cicero]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Also we don't have tails because our ancestor(ape) didn't. Big apes lost their tail because they evolved a arboreal locomotion called brachiation, thus the tail became superfluous

[Cicero]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Sister Maria asked where, in the BIBLE, it says that apes and monkey are different kind.

And if evolution and common ancestry is so true, how come I haven't seen one of these at my local fishing hole?


Don't bother answering, as I already took the liberty of checking the 1611 K.J. Bible for you.

That thing would die out in one generation. It's survival of the fittest. It's adaption to your environment. That thing would get eaten and go extinct.

Any recognizable evolution of species takes MILLIONS of years. It doesn't just happen with the blink of an eye.

[CyberYahweh]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Proverbs 19:25
"Smite a scorner, and the simple will beware: and reprove one that hath understanding, and he will understand knowledge."

This forum isn't for debating - it's for Glorifying God by means of his HOLY WORD; and thusly rebuking all of those who are so bold, as to deny God's love, in HIS Holy Word.

Additionally - you posited that it could have existed for a short time, in order to die out. Where are your transitional fossils?

2 Timothy 4:2
"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine."

[Dingleberry]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Well by the size of this creatures head it would actually overbalance and die out.
So no, it would be a rubbish salmon catcher.

Also thanks for whoever removed my link about evidence of the difference between ape and monkeys.
I love seeing how pathetic your debating/argueing skills are.
The second you lose the arguement due to lack of evidence you just delete all the other sides information.
Fair

[Seth Campbell]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Why would you see that kind of animal if evolution was true?

Why wouldn't you, seems that would be the perfect salmon catching machine.

[Dingleberry]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

And where in the Bible does it say that "apes" and "monkeys" are different kinds? They are OBVIOUSLY of the same kind, so there's NO DIFFERENCE!

It doesn't matter if its not in the bible, its true that apes and monkeys are difference.

See here for more information: [Darwinista website deleted]

Sister Maria asked where, in the BIBLE, it says that apes and monkey are different kind.

And if evolution and common ancestry is so true, how come I haven't seen one of these at my local fishing hole?


Don't bother answering, as I already took the liberty of checking the 1611 K.J. Bible for you.

Why would you see that kind of animal if evolution was true?

[CyberYahweh]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Sister Maria asked where, in the BIBLE, it says that apes and monkey are different kind.

And if evolution and common ancestry is so true, how come I haven't seen one of these at my local fishing hole?


Don't bother answering, as I already took the liberty of checking the 1611 K.J. Bible for you.

[F. Nietzsche]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

And where in the Bible does it say that "apes" and "monkeys" are different kinds? They are OBVIOUSLY of the same kind, so there's NO DIFFERENCE!

There are numerous species of both great apes such as chimpanzees, gorillas, and the like and monkeys, such as capuchins, howler monkeys, and other similar species.

None of the species currently alive today is a direct ancestor of human beings according to evolutionary theory either. The hominids and great apes are separated by a common ancestor around 14-6 million years ago, depending on the species.

[Mrs. Mary Whitford]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Not that i believe in Evolution but evolutionists believe we came from Apes not monkeys that didn't have tails.

And where in the Bible does it say that "apes" and "monkeys" are different kinds? They are OBVIOUSLY of the same kind, so there's NO DIFFERENCE!

[Father Grigori]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Not that i believe in Evolution but evolutionists believe we came from Apes not monkeys that didn't have tails.

[F. Nietzsche]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Indeed, it is not complex: you have no idea what caused the world to exist, you have no idea what caused the universe to exist and you have no idea what was before. The only idea you have according to your previous post is the hope that at some point in the future some scientist will think up a theory that is so ridiculously stupid that no Christian will bother disproving it, so you will accept it as truth.

No idea isn't an entirely accurate statement.

There is some answer in string theory, but the problem is that it isn't scientifically established fact and remains outside the realm of testability with current technology.

But yes, there is a very large hole in the scientific understanding of the universe as to what caused it to begin. I however, must emphasize, the hole in the theory is decidedly not fitted in such a way as to justify a young-Universe biblical theory while remaining consistent with the rest of science.

Did you know that Darwin rebuked his entire theory of evolution before he died?

Before he died he Had been reading the Bible. He found out about one Called Jesus of Nazareth and how He had paid the price for man to live forever with Christ. Darwin insisted before he died to his friends and family that they must tell everyone about Christ and what He did on the cross at Calvary!

Just shows it's never too late

A scientific theory is independent of the later rebuttal of its originator. The reality of evolution is in no way undermined by a later rejection by Darwin since it's reasonably well corroborated.

That statement, however, isn't accurate, though often repeated as if it were. Darwin never rejected Natural Selection on his deathbed.