Originally posted by RJHindsCould you please summarize either your position or the position of the video? It is unfair to other posters on this board to expect them to discuss/debate a link without some sort of summary of the link or summary of your position.
Evolution - Fact or Fiction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmm-MGcPpRI
Originally posted by PatNovakThis video discusses if it is fact or fiction that all life forms have a common ancestor according to evolutionary theory. That is, is it fact or fiction that humans, oak trees, hummingbirds, and whales are distant cousins?
Could you please summarize either your position or the position of the video? It is unfair to other posters on this board to expect them to discuss/debate a link without some sort of summary of the link or summary of your position.
He points out that as a child he was told that you could turn a frog into a prince with a kiss and that was called a fairy tale. But when he got to high school he was told you could still turn a frog into a prince with a lot of time and that was called evolution.
He says natural selection and variations in the kinds is fact, but that is not what is being defined as evolution above. It is fiction that humans evolved from apes and humans evolved from a common ancestor with oak trees, hummingbirds, and whales.
Originally posted by RJHindsNOBODY says you can turn a frog into a prince no matter how much time goes by without deliberate genetic manipulation.
This video discusses if it is fact or fiction that all life forms have a common ancestor according to evolutionary theory. That is, is it fact or fiction that humans, oak trees, hummingbirds, and whales are distant cousins?
He points out that as a child he was told that you could turn a frog into a prince with a kiss and that was called a fairy tale. Bu ...[text shortened]... ed from apes and humans evolved from a common ancestor with oak trees, hummingbirds, and whales.
You love to plagiarize other people's sayings without giving an original source.
It makes you look like a moron. Oh wait, you already know that.
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsThe guy in the video concedes that microevolution/natural selection is correct, but says macroevolution is incorrect. It is impossible to believe one without the other, because they are the exact same thing, just on different time scales. It is like saying that you believe in decades, but don't believe in centuries.
This video discusses if it is fact or fiction that all life forms have a common ancestor according to evolutionary theory. That is, is it fact or fiction that humans, oak trees, hummingbirds, and whales are distant cousins?
He points out that as a child he was told that you could turn a frog into a prince with a kiss and that was called a fairy tale. Bu ...[text shortened]... ed from apes and humans evolved from a common ancestor with oak trees, hummingbirds, and whales.
Originally posted by PatNovakWow, I've never seen it put that way. I'll be using this excellent metaphor myself.
The guy in the video concedes that microevolution/natural selection is correct, but says macroevolution is incorrect. It is impossible to believe one without the other, because they are the exact same thing, just on different time scales. It is like saying that you believe in decades, but don't believe in centuries.
Originally posted by PatNovakNumbers spontaneously increasing orders of magnitude?! That has NEVER BEEN OBSERVED! 😵
The guy in the video concedes that microevolution/natural selection is correct, but says macroevolution is incorrect. It is impossible to believe one without the other, because they are the exact same thing, just on different time scales. It is like saying that you believe in decades, but don't believe in centuries.
2 edits
Originally posted by PatNovakBut the larger scale is NOT science fact because it has never been tested, observed, and repeated by peer review. I don't believe in millions and billions of years of past history. Case closed.
The guy in the video concedes that microevolution/natural selection is correct, but says macroevolution is incorrect. It is impossible to believe one without the other, because they are the exact same thing, just on different time scales. It is like saying that you believe in decades, but don't believe in centuries.
Originally posted by RJHindsI don't believe in millions and billions of years of past history. Mind closed.
But the larger scale is NOT science fact because it has never been tested, observed, and repeated by peer review. I don't believe in millions and billions of years of past history. Case closed.
Fixed.