Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9173 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,558 Year: 4,815/9,624 Month: 163/427 Week: 76/85 Day: 13/12 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the variety and evolution of reproduction methods over time.
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 148 of 187 (822520)
10-26-2017 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by dwise1
10-26-2017 11:16 PM


A better example is a fish heart. It is nothing like the heart of its "descendants" - amphibians and reptiles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by dwise1, posted 10-26-2017 11:16 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by dwise1, posted 10-26-2017 11:50 PM Dredge has replied
 Message 153 by dwise1, posted 10-27-2017 11:02 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 164 of 187 (823307)
11-09-2017 2:30 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by dwise1
10-26-2017 11:43 PM


dwise1 writes:
an honest creationist is one who actually looks at the evidence.
Well, I have looked at the evidence and come to the conclusion that evolution is junk science. What could he wrong with me? Why can't I see the truth?
Have you ever tested a creationist claim?
There has been a massive experiment going on for thousands of years - humans trying everything they know to push the limits animals and plants evolution - no one has yet managed to produce a creature that was essentially different from the original. This experiment provides evidence that creatures cannot reproduce beyond their genetic limitations, which is what is Genesis "kinds" alludes to. This represents one test of creation that it has so far passed.
When are you ever going to wake up and stop doing such stupid things?
I don't think I'll ever wake up to the truth of evolution - I guess I'm just too stupid to ever rise above creationism.
Is it true that one needs to consume LSD in order to "get" ToE? Maybe that's the answer.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by dwise1, posted 10-26-2017 11:43 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 165 of 187 (823308)
11-09-2017 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by dwise1
10-26-2017 11:50 PM


... a genuinely funny post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by dwise1, posted 10-26-2017 11:50 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 166 of 187 (823309)
11-09-2017 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by JonF
10-27-2017 9:24 AM


JonF writes:
All those can be and have been tested by observing the traces they have left behind. Especially common descent (including the ancestry of humans) , tested both by fossil progression and, independently, genetics.
No, this is not true. Like any Darwinist, you are very dazed and confused - like a drunk who has just been hit by a bus. Only by consuming huge doses of assumptions, speculation and a chemical intoxicant can the dots of common descent be joined. But this is not science, just story-telling.
As an antidote to the brainwashing you've received, repeat this mantra one thousand times per day: "common descent is indecent".
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by JonF, posted 10-27-2017 9:24 AM JonF has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 167 of 187 (823310)
11-09-2017 2:40 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by ringo
10-27-2017 11:39 AM


ringo writes:
Eyewitness evidence is the worst there is. There is far more physical evidence for transitionals than there is for Napoleon.
Oh dear, that's two bad ideas in a row from you.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by ringo, posted 10-27-2017 11:39 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by ringo, posted 11-09-2017 10:57 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 168 of 187 (823311)
11-09-2017 2:50 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by dwise1
10-28-2017 2:30 PM


dwise1 writes:
Are you really that stupid? Besides the fact that your wording shows a complete ignorance of evolution (ie, we inherit our mammary system from ancestors who evolved it long before primates let alone humans), you overlook the very simple and obvious fact that human males do possess a mammary system! It doesn't develop during puberty because our hormones are not right for it, but it's there and it will develop if you mess around with our hormones (just how do you think that transsexuals are able to grow breasts?). And some men do develop breast cancer.
Deary, deary me ... a mammary system is one that produces milk, so males don't have a mammary system.
Btw, how do you know so much about transvexuates or whatever they're called? No, don't tell me; I don't want to know ...
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by dwise1, posted 10-28-2017 2:30 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by ringo, posted 11-09-2017 11:00 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 178 by dwise1, posted 11-09-2017 11:57 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 169 of 187 (823312)
11-09-2017 2:53 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by jar
11-02-2017 8:56 AM


jar writes:
There is no theory that all life on earth evolved from unicellular organisms anyway so that is simply another indication of ignorance.
The fact that all life on earth evolved from unicellular organisms is not a theory but a conclusionbased on all of the evidence ever found.
It is called the general theory of evolution and has been around for thousands of years old. Darwinism is an attempt to explain its mechanism. You evidently can't tell the difference between science and superstitious folklore.
If I was your science teacher at school I would have told you to get out of my class and study knitting instead.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by jar, posted 11-02-2017 8:56 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by jar, posted 11-09-2017 6:19 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 170 of 187 (823313)
11-09-2017 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by Pressie
11-02-2017 8:12 AM


That's not a test, but evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Pressie, posted 11-02-2017 8:12 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 171 of 187 (823314)
11-09-2017 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by Pressie
11-03-2017 9:04 AM


Reading the Geologic Column is potentially more scientific than reading tea-leaves. There's lots of room there to spin some fairy tales, nevertheless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Pressie, posted 11-03-2017 9:04 AM Pressie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Pressie, posted 11-15-2017 5:02 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 172 of 187 (823315)
11-09-2017 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by dwise1
10-27-2017 11:02 AM


dwise1 writes:
And actually we're talking about the ancestors of modern fish, not modern fish themselves. Only willfully ignorant creationists would ever try to claim that modern fish are completely identical to ancient fish.
A modern fish heart is different to that of an ancient fish? How do you know that? Oh wait ... let me guess ... you applied the first Law of Darwinism - baseless assumption and rank speculation?
And your attempt to move the goal posts is duly noted. You still need to address your claim regarding reptilian hearts.
I made a mistake about reptiles having a two-pot heart - but this was only due to gross ignorance.
Incidentally, your story about crocodiles having between three and four chambers in their hearts was a bit much to swallow. And btw, crocs aren't green, like in cartoons.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by dwise1, posted 10-27-2017 11:02 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 180 of 187 (823644)
11-15-2017 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by dwise1
11-09-2017 11:57 PM


dwise1 writes:
So if a human isn't producing milk, then he/she does not have a mammary system? How very interesting!
A mammary system is one that is capable of producing milk. Therefore a male human doesn't have a mammary system.
One does not need to be an actual transsexual to know what a transsexual is. One does not need to be an actual female to know what a female is. Are you trying to imply that in order to know about females you need to be female you
But your desperate resorting to a form of argumentum ad hominem ("attacking the person") tells me that you have nothing, so you are trying to bluff. You are trying to attack my own sexual identity in order to draw attention away from your lack of any argument whatsoever. Well fuck you so very much, you unspeakable asshole ... I'm divorced!
It is evident from these comments that you have made an unreasonable extrapolation and thereby arrived at a wrong conclusion - the same faulty process that leads people to believe that bugs can evolve into humans.
Your tell there is to go full blown bullshit. Which you have done.
Your words are like rocks hurled at my fragile, egg-shell mind.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by dwise1, posted 11-09-2017 11:57 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by Tangle, posted 11-15-2017 3:07 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 183 by Tangle, posted 11-15-2017 3:09 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 149 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 181 of 187 (823645)
11-15-2017 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by jar
11-10-2017 12:12 AM


Re: towards the subject
jar writes:
Many fish change from one sex to another including Clown fish
Actually, I concede that Clown fish present convincing evidence of evolution. There is a well-defined line of descent from Clown bacteria to Clown plankton to Clown fish to Clown amphibians to Clown reptiles to Clown mammals to clown Hominids to Clown humans. Even this ignorant creationist can see that.
So without the Clown fish, there would be no clowns to entertain our children and there would be no evolution scientists.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by jar, posted 11-10-2017 12:12 AM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Pressie, posted 11-15-2017 4:55 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 186 by Pressie, posted 11-15-2017 5:06 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024