What's new

Science vs. Creationism

Actually, they would have used briefs flying stints while mostly running on the ground (even today, many birds live mostly or entirely on the ground), and those brief bouts of flying would still be an advantage (in certain conditions) over things that could not fly at all.

Many of the dinosaurs were very bird-like, and not much transition was needed. Even so, there are many more than two fossils of one species.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils#Dinosaurs_to_birds

...don't evolutionists believe that ALL dinosaurs disappeared at once, leaving the earth barren of living reptiles.....and then somehow started over again as croc-a-gators out of swamp slime???
 
...don't evolutionists believe that ALL dinosaurs disappeared at once, leaving the earth barren of living reptiles.....and then somehow started over again as croc-a-gators out of swamp slime???

No, I don't know any who believe that. Many species of dinosaurs died off relatively quickly (over a few thousand years), but the earth was not barren of reptiles. Crocs/gators have a different branch from turtles, snakes, and lizards, not to mention birds and mammals. I'm pretty sure all of those types of reptiles were around before the KT extinction.
 
No, I don't know any who believe that. I'm pretty sure all of those types of reptiles were around before the KT extinction.


..."pretty sure" huh? Well, think again! Commenting on the new theory and the apparent sudden extinction of the dinosaurs, one science writer admits: “They could shake the foundations of evolutionary biology and call into question the current concept of natural selection.”

University of Arizona scientist David Jablonski concludes that ‘for many plants and animals, extinction was abrupt and somehow special. Mass extinctions are not merely the cumulative effects of gradual dyings. Something unusual happened.’ Their arrival was also abrupt. Scientific American observes: “The sudden appearance of both suborders of the pterosaurs without any obvious antecedents is fairly typical of the fossil record.” That is also the case with dinosaurs. Their relatively sudden appearance and disappearance contradicts the commonly accepted view of slow evolution.

Dinosaurs appear suddenly in the fossil record, with no links to any ancestors before them. They multiplied greatly, then became extinct.

.....oh, by the way....I'm "pretty sure" about that, too!
 
Do you still have your " beautifully designed" wisdom teeth Pearl?

Now that's an IDesque name.

You can't reasonably explain how the jaw even came about...you start with fish who already has a jaw.
You can't reasonably explain how the skeletal system even came about...you start with fish who already had a skeleton.
You can't reasonably explain how the circulatory system came about...you start with fish who already had a circulatory system.
You can't reasonably explain how the reproductive system came about...you start with fish who already had a reproductive system.
You can't reasonably explain how sexual differentiation came about...you start with fish who were already sexually differentiated.

All of these systems are irreducibly complex. They couldn't have come about by accident.
 
So you see hind declaws in one dog and believe it is design and you see other dog with no hind declaws and believe it is designed as well? Ain't making sense to me at all my friend.

Creationists believe in variability within kinds. It is designed variation.
 
Last edited:
A fair challenge. I was interested in the data on the number of amylase copies in long-established populations with a pronounced difference in diet due to available food.

Here's a question:

I have heard of how some genes are expressed. . .. the proteins they code for being produced. . . . as a result of the presence and inferentially the binding of it to some "trigger" that starts the production.

How do we know that the presence of starch in the diet doesn't cause the genes to be copied or duplicated within the DNA in the first place. It appears to me that you assume something about how the genome regulates itself. .. . assume results like what you cite are "obviously" a matter of statistical chance, when it might be the result of some highly sophisticated design feature of the genetic system. . . .

It seems like you are talking about the science of nutrigenomics.
It is how food talks to your genes.
The information your body receives from the food you eat turns your genes on and off.
 
Last edited:
Now that's an IDesque name.

Has nothing to do with ID. More like symbol of maturity/wisdom at the age when they erupt. And you avoided and did not answered my question.

You can't reasonably explain how the jaw even came about...you start with fish who already has a jaw.
You can't reasonably explain how the skeletal system even came about...you start with fish who already had a skeleton.
You can't reasonably explain how the circulatory system came about...you start with fish who already had a circulatory system.
You can't reasonably explain how the reproductive system came about...you start with fish who already had a reproductive system.
You can't reasonably explain how sexual differentiation came about...you start with fish who were already sexually differentiated.

All of these systems are irreducibly complex. They couldn't have come about by accident.

I sometimes can't understand if you really sincere in what you are posting or just specifically ignoring and avoiding all the facts about fish evolution, skull evolution, jaw evolution, etc, etc, we posted before. We never start with fish, what the heck are talking about?
There is numerous scientific theories how most primitive life started on Earth and it does not include intelligent design. We already talked about it, I am so surprised that you keep coming back to it.
 
Creationists believe in variability within kinds. It is designed variation.

That must be the most unbelievable statement from all creationism delusions I have read in this thread. So basically you saying that designer created variability which is not evident at first but starts happening after some time because designer installed it and programed it to appear after hundreds or thousands of years. Fantastic.
 
..."pretty sure" huh? Well, think again!

That's always a wise idea. The KT extinction event was 65 million years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous–Paleogene_extinction_event

The first turtles show up 220 million years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle

Lizards are dated between 250 and 200 million years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizard

Snakes to 125 million years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake

Croco/gator family goes back at least 125 million years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocodilia

Therapod dinosaurs, the ancestors to birds, were a distinct group 230 million years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theropoda

Mammals no later than 167 million years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammals

So, to be clear, almost no one believes all retiles died out at once and were remade from the crocodilians.

Commenting on the new theory and the apparent sudden extinction of the dinosaurs, one science writer admits: “They could shake the foundations of evolutionary biology and call into question the current concept of natural selection.”

That's the great thing about science; it adapts to new data.

Mass extinctions are not merely the cumulative effects of gradual dyings. Something unusual happened.’ [

Yep. The KT extinction even was caused by a massive meteor. The Permian extinction by unequaled volcanic activity spewing huge amounts of carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere.

Dinosaurs appear suddenly in the fossil record, with no links to any ancestors before them. They multiplied greatly, then became extinct.

.....oh, by the way....I'm "pretty sure" about that, too!

As usual, you're wrong. The ancestors dinosaurs are archosaurs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archosaur
 
I sometimes can't understand if you really sincere in what you are posting or just specifically ignoring and avoiding all the facts about fish evolution, skull evolution, jaw evolution, etc, etc.....
There is numerous scientific theories how most primitive life started on Earth and it does not include intelligent design. We already talked about it, I am so surprised that you keep coming back to it.

....the only "fact" you have is that Klinko's back tattoo is permanent....and can only be removed by laser treatment or scrapped off with a busted beer bottle! (The later being my choice!) Oh, and you do have "numerous scientific theories" but there all as believable as a "rhinoceros coming from the butterfly" and a marvelously functioning Universe came about by your blowing your nose!
 
Back
Top