|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 194 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
And you're dead wrong about Lucy, too. There was no "totally human legbone" involved.
can you prove that? Im not saying that teen is right either, but can u back up what you're saying? See Lucy's Knee Joint: A Case Study in Creationists' Willingness to Admit their Errors.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 194 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
from what i have just read i am dead on about lucys knee joint, just because the finder didnt put it in writing doesnt mean he didnt admit it, and he wasnt the only one to admit it.
Then you have a severe problem with reading comprehension. From the linked page:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 194 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Umm, about Lucy's "knee joint" it wasnt a knee joint they found over a mile away and 3 stratus layers down. Knee joints are cartalidge. It was the bones in the knee, and they proved that Lucy didnt walk upright. Another thing, Lucy's toes and feet were grasping and curled, like an apes, not a humans. Totally false, as demonstrated at the link I posted already.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Here's Lucy. Which of those bones are "fully human" and don't belong ?
Fossil Hominids: Lucy (AL 288-1)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hitchy Member (Idle past 5144 days) Posts: 215 From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh Joined: |
Baugh had not only damaged prints in his attempts to remove them from the surrounding rock, but an article in Evolution/Creation(or is it Creation/Evolution) from the mid-80's talked about how he "modified" the prints.
Granted, a lot of creationists have distanced themselves from Baugh, but you can still see him on TBN on a regular basis!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
moon Inactive Member |
There are many definations about evolution.
Some biologists say Evolution is the process that brings all life on earth.And evolutionists define it as change in alleles' frequency.What Darwin said was "Descence with modification." All are true. To make clear about how evolution occurs, first, it is start with mutation. When our genes(DNA or RNA) replicate, some mistakes occurs, and thus the replicants vary. Remember that even the genes of identical twins are not the exact copies. And there always a struggle for survival. In that struggle, variants with the characters of more reproductive sucess will be favored for survival and unfavored ones will be eliminated. Then the variants which have more reproductive success will become dominant within species.This is what Darwin defined about evolution. But i think it is(waht i wrote) not as clear as it should be. If u really want to know about it in detil, visit www.evolvingcode.net and enter the classroom. There r lectures about evolution. Or read Darwin's Origin of Species, Dawkins' "Blind watch maker" and "the selfish Gene". they r really cool. moon
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Welcome to EvC, moon. Enjoy your visits here.
Please have a read over the forum guidelines and perhaps have a look at:
Message 1 This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 05-09-2004 07:21 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
moon Inactive Member |
Sorry. I'm totally out of topic. I'd just read Teen's first few questions and....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
moon Inactive Member |
I don't know where this topic should go? But i need some help with this topic.
Some creationist say that Miller's experiment is totally a fake! There can be oxygen in the earth environment which will destroy the formation of amino acids. Is there any explanations for that. Could somebody give me the sources to refute their arguement.Or I can use some evidences that RNA and DNA can be / are synthesized in the lab?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined: |
There is a series of posts in a reasonably current thread on this:
Message 1 Or I can use some evidences that RNA and DNA can be / are synthesized in the lab? I'm no expert but I don't think this has been demonstrated under plasible pre-biotic conditions. This message has been edited by NosyNed, 05-09-2004 09:17 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 503 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
moon writes: I don't know where this topic should go? But i need some help with this topic.Some creationist say that Miller's experiment is totally a fake! There can be oxygen in the earth environment which will destroy the formation of amino acids. Is there any explanations for that. Could somebody give me the sources to refute their arguement.Or I can use some evidences that RNA and DNA can be / are synthesized in the lab? Before the Miller experiment, and after as well, the creationist's main slogan is "life can't come from non-life." The Miller experiment blew that out of the water. There are 2 main reasons why the experiment can't be a fake. 1) It has been repeated thousands of times by thousands of scientists around the world. Unless this is a world wide conspiracy, the experiment ain't fake. You could probably perform this experiment by your self. 2) It hasn't been demonstrated by anyone that the presence of oxygen absolutely prevented the formation of organic molecules from happening. I am absolutely 100% sure that if God suddenly appear all around the world and told everyone that the Miller experiment was not a fake, you would still find some creationists that would completely ignore the overwhelming evidence and continue to preach their lies. The Laminator
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
moon Inactive Member |
Get it. Thank a lot.
Nosyned, Thanks u, too.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024