Not only Natural Laws but Rules of Evolution?

[Subduction Zone]

what a load of BS.

Adam is just a character in a myth, as there are no body to test for DNA…but worse still, there are no sciences where you can turn “dust” of the ground, which I would assume to be soil, into living cells of living human being.

There are 3 main types of soils:

1. clay
2. silt
3. sand

Regardless of which type of soil Adam was made from, about 45% of the soils, and these are usually made from silicon-based minerals, hence quartz , feldspar or mica

Human cells are made from numbers of organic matters, hence organic or carbon-based molecules or compounds. There are no silicate in human tissues or human cells.

If this nonexistent Adam was made from one of these soils, then trace evidence of silicate should have passed from father to son, to today’s descendant.

And there certainly no silicate found in the DNA.

DThe molecules in DNA are all ”organic“, eg deoxyribose, one of the phosphate-based molecules, the 4 nucleobase molecules (adenine, cytosine, guanine & thymine). There are no silicon in any of these molecules.

Although, animals, including humans) have minerals in their bodies, none of them are made of silica or silicate of any types. For instance, the human bones do indeed have inorganic minerals, which give some rigidity and compressive strength to bones, carbonate hydroxyapatite. Hydroxyapatite is written in Ca5(PO4)3(OH), showed there are no silicon in in this mineral.

The point is that humans cannot be made from the any silica-based (eg quartz) or any silicate-based (feldspar or mica) soil. So talking about Adam being the new operating system for human, is just plain fabricated *** without understanding human biology and biochemistry.

and btw, wellwisher, do not confuse biochemistry or molecular biology with computer software or operating systems, because such analogies and comparisons often lead to erroneous thinking.

Checkmate atheist!!

 

[gnostic]

View attachment 79629

Checkmate atheist!!

ok, I stands corrected.

LOL

 

[YoursTrue]

Evolution. Now you know.

There's oodles of info on the internet that documents this but I'm not wasting my time posting it because from experience you won't even bother looking at it.

They're still birds though. With nothing to show their real background genealogically speaking, of course.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why doesn't he? He is pretty bright and can learn if he does not know. Just because you do not know something never assume that others do not know that thing.

Lol because you don't know the TRUE details either. Neither you nor he can give detailed info. Didn't say he's not pretty bright. You certainly don't know.

 

[John53]

They're still birds though. With nothing to show their real background genealogically speaking, of course.

Then why can't they breed together. You keep avoiding that part of your claim.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol because you don't know the TRUE details either. Neither you nor he can give detailed info. Didn't say he's not pretty bright. You certainly don't know.

We can give quite a few of the details. What makes you think that we can't?

 

[Subduction Zone]

They're still birds though. With nothing to show their real background genealogically speaking, of course.

And you are still a monkey. So what?

 

[John53]

Lol because you don't know the TRUE details either. Neither you nor he can give detailed info. Didn't say he's not pretty bright. You certainly don't know.

Have you asked for detailed information? I missed the post if you did.

 

[YoursTrue]

Then why can't they breed together.

I don't know.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know.

Then you might want to start using a different argument.

 

[YoursTrue]

Read what I said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm an Atheist, I wouldn't have a clue. I don't read minds.

Perhaps you should ask those on this board how they believe in god and evolution. With details, of course.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Perhaps you should ask those on this board how they believe in god and evolution. With details, of course.

To what purpose?

 

[John53]

Perhaps you should ask those on this board how they believe in god and evolution. With details, of course.

It's not of any interest to me so I see no reason as it's not harming me or anyone else that I know of.

 

[John53]

I don't know.

That makes your claim seem like a load of nonsense.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's not of any interest to me so I see no reason as it's not harming me or anyone else that I know of.

Here is a link to the abstract of a paper that may be of interest to you.

It's about eye stripes, eye spots and other marks and research with fish.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003347215004005

 

[John53]

Here is a link to the abstract of a paper that may be of interest to you.

It's about eye stripes, eye spots and other marks and research with fish.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003347215004005

Thanks. I had a read through it. I hadn't thought of fish, I only looked into birds and a few mammals that have eye stripes. Now I'm wondering if any reptiles have them (quick google search shows some skinks do). Interesting that so many differing animals have them. The problem I have with the camouflage explanation in the article is that there are species that seem to be advertising their eyes.

 

[YoursTrue]

That makes your claim seem like a load of nonsense.

My claim? What claim? Perhaps my memory is failing in my older age... By the way, do you know why they can't interbreed?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Thanks. I had a read through it. I hadn't thought of fish, I only looked into birds and a few mammals that have eye stripes. Now I'm wondering if any reptiles have them (quick google search shows some skinks do). Interesting that so many differing animals have them. The problem I have with the camouflage explanation in the article is that there are species that seem to be advertising their eyes.

I know what you mean. Those advertisements really draw the eye to the eyes. No pun intended. It seems the opposite of what you would expect given the value of refocusing predators away from the head.

When you first brought this up, it piqued my interest in any corollaries that might occur in insect species. There is a rich variety of patterning in insects that may result for similar reasons as those in vertebrates.

 

[John53]

My claim? What claim? Perhaps my memory is failing in my older age... By the way, do you know why they can't interbreed?

Your claim that birds are always birds, never evolving or never evolved.

The size difference is one fairly obvious reason, probably no need to go any further and look at things like the number of chromosomes.

 

[John53]

I know what you mean. Those advertisements really draw the eye to the eyes. No pun intended. It seems the opposite of what you would expect given the value of refocusing predators away from the head.

When you first brought this up, it piqued my interest in any corollaries that might occur in insect species. There is a rich variety of patterning in insects that may result for similar reasons as those in vertebrates.

I thought of insects about 5 seconds after my post went through, given the post lag that was about 5 minutes after I hit the post reply button.