Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm looking forward to the day when you can show me some physical evidence that God created the world.
Lol, science based on a lack of evidence is not to be termed science, its something else masquerading as science and i truly look forward to the day when science shall expose this charade!
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe article on the rete mirable is pretty fascinating, and it's precisely the kind of thing that evolution predicts - many small changes over a long period of time resulting in new organisms. The network that carries the blood is the raw material, but with a few small changes in orientation that network can develop fascinating new attributes, such as countercurrent heat/matter exchange.
yes i genuinely want to know how it is theorised that this occured, i was not messing as i usually do, sorry i should have made that clear! so what you are essentially saying is there may have been a whole series of at present "missing links", which stem from reptiles to birds and in the process of evolution, these small increments were passed on fro ...[text shortened]... species to the next. ok, that's quite simple, that's all i was asking, you can relax now 🙂
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThat statement, feathers are unique to birds, is not true. There have been found in the fossil record, feathered dinosaurs, so they whether feathers evolved from birds or dinosaurs, there are two distinct lines where feathers appeared. That is in the known fossil record already.
ok them ol friend, I will ask you the same question which Andrew noticeably evaded, are we to seriously assume that the feather, which is unique to birds, with its unparalleled qualities of insulation and function as an airfoil, with its several hundred thousand barbules and millions of barbicels and hooklets began life as a longish scale loosely at ...[text shortened]... which frayed and spread out until it evolved into the highly complex structure that it is today?
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knobwe are living proof noobster, take a look at your body and tell me if it does not reek of design! 😉 but this is not the place to discuss it, come to the spirituality forum and we can talk there!
I'm looking forward to the day when you can show me some physical evidence that God created the world.
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhousethe statement was meant to be seen in terms of what we have at present, are not feathers exclusive to birds today? there are no other contemporary species that that exhibit feathers, are there?
That statement, feathers are unique to birds, is not true. There have been found in the fossil record, feathered dinosaurs, so they whether feathers evolved from birds or dinosaurs, there are two distinct lines where feathers appeared. That is in the known fossil record already.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf we have to go to the spirituality forum that tells me all i need to know already.
we are living proof noobster, take a look at your body and tell me if it does not reek of design! 😉 but this is not the place to discuss it, come to the spirituality forum and we can talk there!
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knobactually noobster, we need to remove ourselves from the fantasy realm of the science forum, you know, species shape-shifting and metamorphosing into other species, superfluous scales elongating and over aeons of time forming themselves into intricate feathers, legendary mythical creatures in the form of 'missing links', etc etc, infact, the land of Mordor and the science forum have it all, i am waiting for Sauron to post a response this very minute, when you are ready my good fellow 😛
If we have to go to the spirituality forum that tells me all i need to know already.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie…. mythical creatures in the form of 'missing links'
actually noobster, we need to remove ourselves from the fantasy realm of the science forum, you know, species shape-shifting and metamorphosing into other species, superfluous scales elongating and over aeons of time forming themselves into intricate feathers, legendary mythical creatures in the form of 'missing links', etc etc, infact, the land of ...[text shortened]... waiting for Sauron to post a response this very minute, when you are ready my good fellow 😛
…
http://forums.armageddononline.org/living-evidence-missing-t6177.html?s=0f76f993416c09f34940be2ebe29df15&
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieLove it, 'the fantasy realm of the science forum'. Taxi for Mr Carrobie!!!!
actually noobster, we need to remove ourselves from the fantasy realm of the science forum, you know, species shape-shifting and metamorphosing into other species, superfluous scales elongating and over aeons of time forming themselves into intricate feathers, legendary mythical creatures in the form of 'missing links', etc etc, infact, the land of ...[text shortened]... waiting for Sauron to post a response this very minute, when you are ready my good fellow 😛
2 edits
Originally posted by Andrew Hamiltonyes as i suspected, utter fantasy! not one creature seen as an intermediary, just lots of talk of superfluous organs etc. reptiles are reptiles, birds are birds, mammals are mammals, lad de dah, noobsters yer uncle!
[b]…. mythical creatures in the form of 'missing links'
…
http://forums.armageddononline.org/living-evidence-missing-t6177.html?s=0f76f993416c09f34940be2ebe29df15&[/b]
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieEven if a complete fossil record came and slapped you round the face like a wet fish you still won't accept it, because you don't want to. You term science 'fantasy' yet your beliefs, evidence is contained in a book of stories written 1700-2000yrs ago. That's fantasy my friend, and i view it as delusional.
yes as i suspected, utter fantasy! not one creature seen as an intermediary, just lots of talk of superfluous organs etc. reptiles are reptiles, birds are birds, mammals are mammals, lad de dah, noobsters yer uncle!
6 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobno this is not true noobster, i champion science against delusion and fantasy, which is why i have come to you today, it has nothing to do with what i want to believe or otherwise, that is irrelevant to anyone but me, the fossil record is really interesting, for it does not show a gradual metamorphosis (transmutation i think is the proper word) from one species to another even as Darwin himself fantasised, “The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, must be truly enormous.” was his exact words, Lol, what a noob, he was thus forced to admit, and i quote, “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”, ahem....., Taxi for Darwin anyone??, perhaps you in your erudite brilliance can fill in where ol Charles couldn't, noobster my old friend, for what we behold from the very earliest of times, according to the fossil record, is a complete and utter spectacular rise in diversity, not a slow evolution from the first “simple” life forms to complex ones, thus the theory of punctuated equilibrium was invented, but thats another story 🙂
Even if a complete fossil record came and slapped you round the face like a wet fish you still won't accept it, because you don't want to. You term science 'fantasy' yet your beliefs, evidence is contained in a book of stories written 1700-2000yrs ago. That's fantasy my friend, and i view it as delusional.
interesting word and quite amusing to say "fossiliferous", try it noobster my friend
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie…not one creature seen as an intermediary
yes as i suspected, utter fantasy! not one creature seen as an intermediary, just lots of talk of superfluous organs etc. reptiles are reptiles, birds are birds, mammals are mammals, lad de dah, noobsters yer uncle!
…
They have intermediate characteristics thus demonstrating credible evolutionary intermediate linkages -isn’t that enough?
Also see:
http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-Bio03Tuat03-t1-body-d2.html
Title: Peripatus—“Living Fossil” and “Missing Link”
“…these animals possess anatomical features both of the segmented worms (Annelida), of which the common earthworm is a familiar example, and the Arthropoda, the great phylum that contains the crabs, lobsters, shrimps, spiders, scorpions, millipedes, centipedes, and insects….”
This is a living missing link between simple worms and more complex Arthropoda and it shows intermediate characteristics and it is definitely considered to be an “intermediary” and is alive today.
is Peripatus also just a fantasy?
5 edits
Originally posted by Andrew Hamiltonwhy do every time i come here i need to meet a challenge, it would be really refreshing just to have some fun for a change, i dont mind anyone making fun of my theology, as long as i can have some fun with their evaluation of data, and no, it wasn't enough
[b]…not one creature seen as an intermediary
…
They have intermediate characteristics thus demonstrating credible evolutionary intermediate linkages -isn’t that enough?
Also see:
http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-Bio03Tuat03-t1-body-d2.html
Title: Peripatus—“Living Fossil” and “Missing Link”
“…these animals possess anatomic ...[text shortened]... tely considered to be an “intermediary” and is alive today.
is Peripatus also just a fantasy?[/b]
peripatus not a 'missing link'.
Many biologists, taking into account the mixture of characteristics — some typical of annelids and others of arthropods — consider the onychophorans to be transitional between these two major groups of animals. However, Stephen Jay Gould points out in Wonderful Life (W.W. Norton & Company, 1989, p. 168) that the appearance of arthropods, according to evolutionary timetables, should have occurred more than 550 million years ago. Gould does not believe that Peripatus could have lasted in its present form for so long.
There is an organism in the fossil record however, that is extraordinarily similar. It is Aysheaia from the Burgess Shale (dated at 530 million years old). The difference is that Aysheaia was apparently marine, whereas Peripatus and all living onychophorans are terrestrial. Nevertheless, Gould quotes G. Evelyn Hutchinson to the effect that in life, Aysheaia must have been extraordinarily similar to Peripatus (p. 169), and Gould himself says of Peripatus and Aysheaia, 'the similarities are impressive and anatomically deep, the differences superficial ...' (p. 171).
According to standard evolutionary interpretations then, organisms closely resembling Peripatus have existed for an extraordinary time interval. It seems most unlikely that an organism represented by such a restricted ecology should have survived so long. The more reasonable alternative is that Peripatus has lived only a short time on earth and that the long-age interpretations are incorrect.
MARGARET HELDER, Ph.D.,
you people are making me turn to creationist sites, ahhhh, im melting!!!!!