I don't think you'd understand the answer if someone gave it to you.
It would interfere with your religious beliefs.
Tom
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Disproof of Darwinism
- Thread starter questfortruth
- Start date
It would interfere with your religious beliefs.
Tom
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
Read enough of questforthruth's posts and you'll soon see that he has nothing BUT bold empty claims.
Heyo
Veteran Member
Maybe you should have a look at Linnaean taxonomy - Wikipedia. That was the basis of Darwin's theory about the emergence of species.
You'd learn that homo and panini are sister clades. Both belong to the hominini which in turn are simians.
They all (and others) form the order primates. You can look at a cladogram here.
Drink deeply from the wisdom of Wikipedia and never get your clades in a knot again.
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
Note here again the complete ignorance about what the ToE is. Though ignorance really isn't the right word, since he's been told time and again that the ToE doesn't even come close to claiming that one day a chimp suddenly turned into a human being. Perhaps childish misrepresentation would be a better term.
McBell
Unbound
McBell
Unbound
That is YOUR hangup.
Not mine.
Heyo
Veteran Member
The probability is 1.
Heyo
Veteran Member
It's a bit complicated but here is a series of videos that explains everything you need to know about the ancestry of homo sapiens:
Altfish
Veteran Member
Wrong, do you understand anything?
tas8831
Well-Known Member
tas8831
Well-Known Member
How many creationists, via their own writing, prove beyond a shadow of doubt that they are spectacularly ignorant of the ToE on this forum in 2020?
At least 1, but I'm betting there are more.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
If apes are fish, then the first law of logic is violated. If apes are not fish, then I have the question: how probable for fishes to become apes?
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
What is the probability for fishes in the Pacific Ocean to become apes during one hour of waiting time? And after one year?
McBell
Unbound
Pokemon is not an accurate representation of how evolution works
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Do not attack person, attack the idea.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Darwinism has no single calculation of probabilities, no single experimental data of transition from fishes to apes, thus it is not a Theory.
Heyo
Veteran Member
Watch the Systematic Classification of Life series. It will help you to answer that question yourself (and many others).
Heyo
Veteran Member
It seems you need to read (and understand) this: Theory - Wikipedia
Altfish
Veteran Member
Read the book. Stop making ignorant comments. Learn about evolution, learn waht it says; all you are saying is nonsense, it shows you do NOT understand what you are arguing against.
Apes are not fish, Shubin doesn't say that.
But we do have the same very distant ancestor.