Let's test that belief. Give us any two major groups of organisms, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitionals.
Show us what you have.
If Evolution
- Thread starter CherubRam
- Start date
Let's test that belief. Give us any two major groups of organisms, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitionals.
Show us what you have.
Awwwwww, poor dear, needs to add all kinds of children to Adam to cover the mistakes of the editors.
Outside of the bubble we have the bones of humans that lived hundreds of thousands of years ago.
Right Divider
Body part
Paul was human, capable of imperfection like Peter, Judas or any of the other apostles who were baffled by Jesus at times. Paul never knew Jesus in the flesh.
I guess you don't realize that the apostles were human, the authors of conflicted scripture were human as well. The men of the church have always been human.
CherubRam
New member
It has been said that apes are our relatives. It has also been said that man evolved from slim, that later became fish, before evolving into humans.
Adam wasn't Cain's real father, that was "the sin", that is a fact.
Apes came from another more distant branch. They aren't our ansestors.
Right Divider
Body part
Did you really think eating a piece of fruit was the sin??? :hammer:
Right Divider
Body part
Disobeying God was the sin. Figures that you would not know that.
Right Divider
Body part
Imaginative indeed. Invented in the vain mind of men.
We have the fossil record, you have the Jews story that they wrote about themselves. They made you a "Gentile dog"......and you still belive it. :rotfl:
Right Divider
Body part
You seem to be equally completely ignorant about both.
Give the aliens a call. Perhaps they have more to teach you.
CherubRam
New member
Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
Let's test that belief. Give us any two major groups of organisms, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitionals.
Show us what you have.
Quote CherubRam
It has been said that apes are our relatives. It has also been said that man evolved from slim, that later became fish, before evolving into humans.
I gave The Barbarian an answer, and now he has disappeared.
Let's test that belief. Give us any two major groups of organisms, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitionals.
Show us what you have.
Quote CherubRam
It has been said that apes are our relatives. It has also been said that man evolved from slim, that later became fish, before evolving into humans.
I gave The Barbarian an answer, and now he has disappeared.
Barbarian suggests:
Let's test that belief. Give us any two major groups of organisms, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitionals.
Show us what you have.
Australopithecines fit nicely between humans and other apes. Would you like to see the list of transitional features in Australopithecines?
Who's "slim?" Did you mean the creationist misconception that humans evolved from slime?
Actually, fish evolved into tetrapods, land vertebrates, not humans. That was later. But Acanthostega is a great transitional form between fish and tetrapods. Want to learn about the transitional features of Acanthostega?
While the existence of all these transitional forms is compelling evidence for evolution, what's even more compelling is that there are no transitional forms where they shouldn't be. No feathered mammals, no arthropods with bones, no whales with gills.
That's a much more devastating blow against YE creationism.
Let's test that belief. Give us any two major groups of organisms, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitionals.
Show us what you have.
Australopithecines fit nicely between humans and other apes. Would you like to see the list of transitional features in Australopithecines?
Who's "slim?" Did you mean the creationist misconception that humans evolved from slime?
Actually, fish evolved into tetrapods, land vertebrates, not humans. That was later. But Acanthostega is a great transitional form between fish and tetrapods. Want to learn about the transitional features of Acanthostega?
While the existence of all these transitional forms is compelling evidence for evolution, what's even more compelling is that there are no transitional forms where they shouldn't be. No feathered mammals, no arthropods with bones, no whales with gills.
That's a much more devastating blow against YE creationism.
Anyone else want to try?
Greg Jennings
New member
Tell me the last time that 99% of scientists got something wrong