A Great Debate between Indiana Jones and Chiroptera. All others please hold their posts or comments.

Well I'm new here. I believe in Creation and would like to talk about this. What gives evolutionist this idea, or do they don't agree with this. God has said every makes after their own kind.This what I see as I look at the world today.This message has been edited by Indiana Jones, 04-07-2006 06:21 PMThis message has been edited by AdminJar, 04-07-2006 05:25 PM

Do I have to post back fast. I need to do come back later on.

I would like to say that I'm not a scientist myself. I enjoy talking about this topic.'' First of all, no one claims that any organisms will breed anything other than other organisms of the same species. The old idea of Goldschmidt, of the "hopeful mosnter" is not taken seriously. No one is claiming that some dinosaur laid an egg and hatched archaeopterix. No one thinks that some fish laid an egg and produced a salamander. ''You say no one claims that animals can make something outside there kind. Well, by looking at the evolutionary tree you would think so. In evolution, all animals come from one. If so, the animals would have to make others outside their kind.'' Most creationists seem to accept "microevolution". ''We call it variations but evolutionist like to call it microevolution.This message has been edited by Indiana Jones, 04-08-2006 09:57 AM

I'm learning this new stuff. This is my first debate, so I might not win but I'll try. The word kind has many meanings I see. But whats to say that one is the right one when it comes to this topic. Between the ape and the human. Just joking buddy. The human skeleton may be close to that of some primates - but so many of our other biological parts are not! Similarity ('homology') is not an absolute indication of common ancestry (Evolution) but certainly points to a common designer (creation). To make categories for bones would be a human invention. There are limitations for categories but there are none for the human mind. To make linkings would be the mind at work."Echoing the criticism made of his father's habilis skulls, he added that Lucy's skull was so incomplete that most of it was 'imagination made of plaster of Paris', thus making it impossible to draw any firm conclusion about what species she belonged to."Referring to comments made by Richard Leakey (Director of National Museums of Kenya) in The Weekend Australian, 7-8 May 1983, Magazine, p. 3Think about living in a time where some lands didn't have some vitamins you needed. You would only eat whats around you. This would be change your shape. If a person doesn't get enough calcium for 10 or 20 years it affects their spinal column and posture, correct? (Such a deficiency can also have serious impacts on the circulation and central nervous systems as well, by the way.) Until about 100 years ago most people around the world ate only local foods. Local foods are grown in local soil. So then . if the local soil in some places was deficient in magnesium, iron, aluminum, or any combination of so many other minerals that we need at least trace amounts of . how would that affect their skeletal, circulatory and nervous systems . ? If everybody there had low iron . ? Low potassium in some areas . ? We'd get a few deformed skeletons as mute testimony to the long-term deficiencies in particular locales, correct? And that's what we find.Scientist are still using human deficiencies as proof for evolution.'' An extraordinary family who walk on all fours are being hailed as the breakthrough discovery which could shed light on the moment Man first stood upright..."Time-warp family who walk on all fours | Daily Mail OnlineOne of my questions have alway been is Horizontal Evolution.If you got Horizontal Evolution going on, how can you tell if complex animals came after the ones that were less.This message has been edited by Indiana Jones, 04-08-2006 03:42 PM

I'm sorry, I must have gotten the wrong idea. I was thinking we would
have to debate since it was called the great debate.Well animals can't make things outside there time but only over millions and tens of millions of years differences add up to a large difference between the ancestral species and the descendent species.
Would this animal become a new kind. To me, it still comes off as the same thing, are you saying they can create animals outside their kinds but with huge amounts of time. The differences become so great that they become new species or kinds.Is this it? Or no?Lets say we have a dog and it makes a dog. Whats going to get that dog to something else? Time?This message has been edited by Indiana Jones, 04-08-2006 09:17 PM