Evolution for Dummies and Christians

Sorry, but you haven't proven evolution one bit. The science of phrenology was accepted by the scientific community in the 19th century and was later proven false. The 3 previous "missing links" were also at one time accepted by the scientific community and later proven a hoax. Scientists have also changed their minds about the age of the earth in every decade which was also accepted by the scientific community and rejected for newer ages. And scientists will continue to replace their old thoeries with new ones until the end of time. So all they've shown is that cannot be trusted. Sorry.

How is it a great thing about science that they prove themselves wrong in every generation? How does that make their theories trustworthy? And why would any rational human being believe people who change their minds all the time? Believing scientists is putting your faith in shifting sand, my friend. All you get from fallible minds is fallibility.

I don't trust my doctor! All the medications I've been given have been pulled off the shelf! So I'm very consistent. The only times that scientists are right is when they agree with God's laws. If scientists always want to be right then they should agree with God. If they always want to be wrong, then they should disagree with God. It's that simple. And scientists themselves have proven that when they disagree with God, their theories change faster than the weather and are replaced with new ones. So which science do you believe? Today's science? Or tomorrow's science that corrects today's science?This message has been edited by Carico, 12-07-2005 01:16 PMThis message has been edited by Carico, 12-07-2005 01:18 PM

These conversations are all moot because animals and humans are not capable of interbreeding and exchanging genes. But again, it makes great sci-fi material!

To which scripture are you referring?

So how can animals and humans exchange genes if we cannot breed with each other?

I've heard all of what you said for 30 years before I became a Christian. But again, it overlooks the original premise of how offspring are produced. We cannot even begin to get into populations without addressing the feasibility of how even one creature in that population was created. So that is what needs to be examined before the rest of the theory can even be looked at.So again, how did 2 primates breed an offspring so different than themselves to be given the name of a new species; namely,a "Homonid" ? This has never happened since the beginning of recorded history because again, there is a natural sperme barrier between humans and animals that makes interbreeding impossible.All of us humans are capable of interbreeding with our ancestors...except the ape. So how can we be the descendants of an ape if we cannot breed with it? You do not seem to understand that a species which cannot produce offspring of another species with whom it cannot breed cannot be the ancestor of descendants it cannot produce! And that is the issue I want to discuss. Thank you.

No. I am not proposing at all that 2 beasts got together and instantly produced a human. I am simply saying that offspring come from the mating of their parents, which evolutionists seem to overlook entirely. The Oxford Dictionary and Thesausus, America Edition defines a species as; "A category in the classification of living organisms consisting of individuals with similar traits cabable of exchanging genes and interbreeding." That does not put humans ans and animals in the same species like evolutionists would like us to believe. Therefore, since species cannot cross-breed, then how in the heck can we be the descendants of apes? it's impossible except in the imagination.So are you saying we can change into birds through random mutation? If so, then where's your proof? If not, then how can you say that apes can turn into humans?You also don't understand that mutation can only occur on what is already present in the cell. It cannot produce new genes that aren't inherent in the cell. Otherwsie, scientists would simply leave cancer cells alone to mutate into healthy ones. Humans would also be able to produce offspring with wings. But we don't because we don't have that gene. Genes are passed from the parent to its offspring. So again, how did these creature acquire these new genes yet apes are still around today?Also, why haven't apes who have been isolated since the beginning of recorded history produced offspring that have turned into human beings since there've been witnesses? Did this simply happen one time so that man could be created? Why would that be?

So how and why did these populations change, particularly since they haven't changed much at all since there have been wintesses? And if they changed enough to turn into humans, then why are humans and apes still not able to mate with each other? You still do not understand that every offspring is capable of mating with all of its ancestors which is precisely what makes them the same species...except the human and the ape. So that is why humans and apes not only not the same species, but cannot be the descendants of an ape!And how do you know that the Chihuahua came from a wolf? Who said? Last I heard, Chrihuahuas came from chihuahuas. And why are wolves not breeding chihuahuas today?You guys believe anything you read, particularly if the person has a Ph.d after his name! You can then be very easily brainwashed by people and not able to think for yourself. All I have to do is earn a Ph.d and people would believe me if I said that a cat came from a dog. Well, sorry, but reality doesn't support that and neither does it support that wolves breed chihuahuas.And what constitutes who is in which kingdom? If I have a degree in science and i say that humans and animals are in the same kingdom because they have certain characteristics in common, then poepl would simply accept whatever I say. Humans and plants have certain characteristics in common; we both need food, water, mate, and grow. But does that make us plants? Sorry but calling a human an animal doesn't make him one nor does it make himcapable of being the descendant of an animal or breeding one.I'm not going to discuss evolutionary changes without first discussing the feasibility of the premise that a human is a mixture of an animal and a human. When talking about "Natural selection" you still forget that apes are attracted to apes and humans are attracted to humans.This message has been edited by Carico, 12-07-2005 02:50 PM

But you forget that apes and humans cannot interbreed so your point is moot. We're talking about human origins. And since apes and humans cannot interbreed then apes and humans cannot be intermingled. To say that they can is insinuating bestiality.

The problem with your theory is that mating has never been shown to be possible between apes and humans. Never. It is only possible in the imagination. You would then have to fix a point in time when apes stopped being able to breed with humans and that would be as speculative as saying that aliens came millions of years ago and deposited human beings. You are also suggesting bestiality. There is nothing in the theory of evolution that has any factual bases. And if you're a biblical creationist, you would know that God said he created man separate from the animals, each animal to its own kind, and that man is the only creation in which He breathed life, making him even more distinct from the animals. He also said that man would rule over the animals, not descend from the animals and that He created man out of the dust of the earth, not from the womb of apes. So there doesn't appear to be much about biblical creationism with which you agree.This message has been edited by Carico, 12-07-2005 04:50 PM

You just contradicted yourself. You said that we've been able to cross-breed to obtain a chihuahua from a wolf and now you say they cannot interbreed. So which is it?

If a human being takes a sperm from one dog and fertilizes it with the egg from another dog and that creates a new breed, then why do humans do that if those dogs could do it by themselves??? You forget that humans were not around to manipulte the egg and sperm of apes to create the human being! So again, your point is completely useless. Cross-breeding is a HUMAN manipulation. It does not occur on its own because animals only mate within their own species. Lions are not attracted to leopards and tigers are not attracted to wolves. Only human beings can manipulate the egg and sperm from each species to breed animals. And again, the human wasn't around to do that before the human being waas created.

Oh? And when was the magic point where certain dogs stopped breed with other dogs and apes stopped interbreeding with humans? Do you even know what you're saying? You're suggesting offspring through bestiality which is not only perverse, but has never shown to be possible. You also have zero proof that animals and humans have EVER been able to interbreed except only in the imagination.

But truth is never complex. It is simple and obvious and very easy to explain because it can be observed in reality. Each species breeds its own kind and has been doing so since the beginning of recorded history. So reality confirms the biblical account of creation perfectly. Each animal reproduces itself through mating. Humans breed humans and apes breed apes. But since evolution contradicts that reality, then it becomes very complex to try to explain away its enormous contradictions. One lie always begets another and another until it finally contradicts the first lie. The truth, on the other hand, never works that way. it can be explained very easily and very simply.If evolutionists are arrogant enough to contradict God, then they will not only be wrong, but look foolish as well. Playing God never works.The lies are in the contradictions of evolutionists. It simply doesn't make sense that animals can produce human beings. That again, is only possible in the imagination. I look at reality for the truth which is the only place it can be found. The truth is that humans breed humans and apes breed apes. Even children can see that. But not scientists who are stuck in their imaginations instead of simply observing reality. If they observed reality, they would see the simple truth about reproduction instead of making up stories that contain incessant contradictions and contradict reality.This message has been edited by Carico, 12-08-2005 12:05 AM