What does the fossil record say?

[wilsoncole]

An admission that I was wrong is what you will get, take it or leave it.

Too proud, huh?
OK - I'll take it.

Any is also grammatically correct.

Then you should be able to justify it by "Parsing and Analysing" it. Show us WHY it is correct.

No its not contradictory per se by your definotions of the terms man and race, its nonsense in terms of biology as man is a race and there is only 1 race if men, but not contradictory.

Holy Cow! You can't be for real! That was just an example, man - not a biological fact.

At this point, with multiple people having shown you that you are wrong and with many different examples I see no need to respond to any further to your irrelevant defences of your mistakes. Your character has been amply demonstrated to the posters here and that was, in part, my purpose in continuing.
Standard 2 etc have never been terms used in British schools, so what you describe just didn't happen under the British educational system.
Of course you have now admitted that it you were educated somewhere in the commonwealth and not britain. So which education system was it really?

It was all under the British Government and their system of colonialism and slavery.
STANDARD:

7. Chiefly British A grade level in elementary schools.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/standard
This alone should be enough, but I'll "sweeten the pot."

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-512161.html
http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/h/hi/high_school.htm
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Education_in_Malaysia

Members or former members of the British Commonwealth:
India, Singapore, Scotland, New Zealand, S. Africa, Maylasia - ALL has or had "Standards" instead of Grades.
EVERY Standard had a final Exam. You were not promoted to a higher grade if you flunked.
Ever heard “School Leavers Exam?”
If you flunked that final test, you did not graduate from Elementary School in the
British System, as applied in the Commonwealth.

You try so hard to discredit me.
See how you end up discrediting yourself?
　
(\__/)
( ‘ .‘ )
>(^)<

Wilson

 

[camanintx]

Here's something that comes quite close:

Modern Humans, Neanderthals May Have Interbred

Really? Are you suggesting that Neanderthals were apes?

 

[DeistPrimate]

Fair enough, but please give a definitive, demonstrable definition of "kinds" if you're going to use it in future discussion.

Newhope's so called "definition" of' Kinds' certainly failed to define any extinct form from the fossil record, maybe Wilsoncole's definition can be more useful?

Since there are fossil forms ancestral to two different modern 'Kinds' (dogs and bears for example) this could be interesting.

 

[David M]

It was all under the British Government and their system of colonialism and slavery.
STANDARD:

7. Chiefly British A grade level in elementary schools.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/standard
This alone should be enough, but I'll "sweeten the pot."

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-512161.html
http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/h/hi/high_school.htm
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Education_in_Malaysia

Members or former members of the British Commonwealth:
India, Singapore, Scotland, New Zealand, S. Africa, Maylasia - ALL has or had "Standards" instead of Grades.

Evidence? Because according to your "High School" link the information on India makes no mention of "standards", nor does it do so for New Zealand, South Africa or Singapore.

Your forum link indicates the New Zealand used to use the term Standard but only in primary school and no mention was made of exams.

Scotland does have "Standards", however this not the name for a class it is a name for a set of exams taken at 16 (i.e. like the english GCSE) with the "Highers" taken at 18 (like the english A Level).

EVERY Standard had a final Exam. You were not promoted to a higher grade if you flunked.
Ever heard &#8220;School Leavers Exam?&#8221;
If you flunked that final test, you did not graduate from Elementary School in the
British System, as applied in the Commonwealth.

You try so hard to discredit me.
See how you end up discrediting yourself?

Wilson

Really. All those links confirm what I said.

Nowhere in those links does it say that there is a final exam for each class or standard.

This was your earlier claim

No person is promoted to the next higher class unless first he passes that final exam

In the Malaysian system (which does call its primary school classes Standard) the article directly refutes your claim.

Students are promoted to the next Standard, regardless of their academic performance.

Nowhere does it even imply that every standard has a final exam.

It does mention 1 exam.

Until 2000, the Penilaian Tengah Sekolah (PTS) or Middle School Evaluation test was given to students in Standard 3 who passed a qualification test. Excellence in this test allowed students to skip Standard 4.

Failing this exam does not prevent student from moving from Standard 3 to Standard 4, instead excelling in this exam allows them to move directly to Standard 5.

In secondary school there are 2 exams mentioned. The first is in Form 3

In Form 3, the Penilaian Menengah Rendah or Lower Secondary Evaluation is taken by students. Depending on their results, they will be streamed into either the Science stream or Arts stream. The Science stream is generally more desirable, and students are allowed to elect to go to the Arts from the Science stream, but not vice-versa.

Again no indication that failure means they will not go to the next class as you claimed.

The second is taken in Form 5.

In Form 5, students are required to take the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) or Malaysian Certificate of Education examination, before graduating from secondary school. The SPM is the equivalent of the British General Certificate of Education 'O' Levels examination.

This is where the Malaysian system certainly diverges from the British system as there is no "Graduation" from secondary school in the UK. Once the final year is over the student leaves secondary school irrespective of their academic achievement, there is no final exam.

Lets take a look at your link about High (or Secondary) schools. None of the entries mention anything about a final exam being needed to progress to the next class.

"School Leavers Exam" does not refer to a single exam needed to graduate from secondary school because mandatory education is based on age not achievement under the British system. Instead it is a term for a group of exams in different subjects taken in the final year of school. A student can fail every single subject and still leave school.

You have provided zero evidence for your claims and plenty of evidence against them in those links.

 

[Autodidact]

How? Mutations?
Mutations can vary the old, but they can’t create the new.

“. . .And God went on to say: “Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens.” And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind. . . .” (Genesis 1:20-21)​

This is where your insects come from.

DNA in animal life allows for a wide variety within each "KIND." You are witnessing such variety, but no new "kind."
KIND:
Definition:

"The Biblical “kinds” seem to constitute divisions of life-forms wherein each division allows for cross-fertility within its limits. If so, then the boundary between “kinds” is to be drawn at the point where fertilization ceases to occur."​

In recent years, the term “species” has been applied in such a manner as to cause confusion when it is compared with the word “kind.” The basic meaning of “species” is “a sort; kind; variety.” In biologic terminology, however, it applies to any group of interfertile animals or plants mutually possessing one or more distinctive characteristics. Thus, there could be many such species or varieties within a single division of the Genesis “kinds.”​

Although the Bible creation record and the physical laws implanted in created things by Jehovah God allow for great diversity within the created “kinds,” there is no support for theories maintaining that new “kinds” have been formed since the creation period. The unchangeable rule that “kinds” cannot cross is a biologic principle that has never been successfully challenged. ​

Even with the aid of modern laboratory techniques and manipulation, no new “kinds” have been formed. ​

Besides, the crossing of created “kinds” would interfere with God’s purpose for a separation between family groups and would destroy the individuality of the various kinds of living creatures and things. Hence, because of the distinct discontinuity apparent between the created “kinds,” each basic group stands as an isolated unit apart from other “kinds.”​

From the earliest human record until now, the evidence is that dogs are still dogs, cats continue to be cats, and elephants have been and will always be elephants. ​

Sterility continues to be the delimiting factor as to what constitutes a “kind.” ​

This phenomenon makes possible, through the test of sterility, the determining of the boundaries of all the “kinds” in existence today. Through this natural test of fertilization it is possible to uncover the primary relationships within animal life and plant life. ​

For example, sterility presents an impassable gulf between man and the animals. Breeding experiments have demonstrated that appearance is no criterion. Man and the chimpanzee may look somewhat similar, have comparable types of muscles and bones; yet the complete inability of man to hybridize with the ape family proves that they are two separate creations and not of the same created “kind.”​

Although hybridization was once hoped to be the best means of bringing about a new “kind,” in every investigated case of hybridization the mates were always easily identified as being of the same “kind,” such as in the crossing of the horse and the donkey, both of which are members of the horse family. ​

Except in rare instances, the mule thus produced is sterile and unable to continue the variation in a natural way. Even Charles Darwin was forced by the facts to admit:
“The distinctness of specific forms and their not being blended together by innumerable transitional links, is a very obvious difficulty.” (Origin of Species, 1902, Part 2, p. 54) ​

This still remains true.
​

(Insight vol 2 p. 152)​

If I provide you with a cite to a published, peer-reviewed scientific article describing the emergence of a new species of insect, will you change your position?

 

[Autodidact]

Then I'll just have to show you.
Here's the entire post:

Originally Posted by Autodidact
It's false.


Quote:
New species of insects come into existence frequently.


To which you added:
&#8220;You obviously missed the "new species" part of the sentence. Here it is again, emphasis mine:

"New species of insects come into existence frequently."

I missed nothing! But YOU did.
You missed the fact that the reply could be saying that the parents were new species and the offspring like the parents were ALSO new species.
So - you agreed with me without realizing it.
That&#8217;s what their parents were and that is how they stay. They&#8217;re not changing into anything else.


(\__/)
( &#8216; .&#8216; )
>(^)<

Wilson

You have absolutely no idea what the Theory of Evolution is. Do you want to find out?

You have a very odd way of processing or understanding. Let's just say your understanding of what everyone else says is unique. It makes it very hard to communicate with you.

 

[Autodidact]

Except for one thing:
If the mixing of the parents' genes results in what you refer to as "new species," then that same mixing must not have taken place for the parents when THEY were the newborn. You are saying that THEY, the parents, were never "new species" at all!
Chew on that!

DISCLAIMER:
I disagree with the claim of new species due to my position on "kinds," but I am going along with it for the sake of this discussion.


(\__/)
( ‘ .‘ )
>(^)<

Wilson

So if I can provide a peer-reviewed scientific article describing the emergence of a new species, will you change your position?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Still waiting for a demonstration of the fossil record leading to the logical and objective conclusion of Creationism...

 

[wilsoncole]

Evidence? Because according to your "High School" link the information on India makes no mention of "standards", nor does it do so for New Zealand, South Africa or Singapore.

This is a lie! Don't you realize people can check?
Since you will not be honest and report the actual words in those links, I will do so for you, plus using additional links:
Read and weep!:
"In New Zealand children start ON their 5th birthday (the day of their birthday, or the day after) so ages are not set in concrete.

Primary school
New Entrants- 5
Primer 1- 6
Primer 2- 7
Primer 3- 8
Standard 1- 9
Standard 2- 10"
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-512161.html

Malaysia:
Secondary education, like primary education is now compulsory in Malaysia. Primary schools run from Year 1 to Year 6 (also known as Standard 1 to 6, for children aged 6+ to 12+),
http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/h/hi/high_school.htm

Your forum link indicates the New Zealand used to use the term Standard but only in primary school and no mention was made of exams.

No one said they were supposed to be together in the same place. The exams I will supply in a moment. Still you said there were no Standards and there is.

Scotland does have "Standards", however this not the name for a class it is a name for a set of exams taken at 16 (i.e. like the english GCSE) with the "Highers" taken at 18 (like the english A Level).

You said there were NO "Standards" in the British Educational System. YOU ARE WRONG!

Standard 2 etc have never been terms used in British schools, so what you describe just didn't happen under the British educational system.

False! Why did you ignore the following entry?:
STANDARD:
7. Chiefly British A grade level in elementary schools.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/standard
The words above speak plainly. I couldn't make it clearer.
Now you are admitting it grudgingly.
Here - let me supply you with some more:

INDIA
Standards
1st Standard to 3rd Standard - Marathi
&#61558; 4th Standard –Hindi and Marathi
&#61558; 5th Standard to 8th Standard – Hindi and Marathi or Gujrathi
&#61558; 9th Standard and 10th Standard – Hind
http://www.utpalshanghvischool.org/IGCSE/FAQ_s_IGCSE___CIPP.pdf

Of course you have now admitted that it you were educated somewhere in the commonwealth and not britain.

I never said it was Britain - I said BRITISH educational system.

ABOUT THE EXAMS:
Primary School-Leaving Exam.
Primary School Leaving Examination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BRITISH COMMONWEALTH COUNTRIES:
http://www.tntisland.com/countries.html
In most countries, students who do not meet the required criteria are not promoted to the next higher grade. However, in a few counties, there is automatic promotion from one grade to another irrespective of student performance at the end of yearsummative examination. .... http://www.seameo.org/vl/library/dlwelcome/publications/ebook/exam/2ndintro.htm

There is one final examination held in the academic year in May for all classes, except Year 10 which has a mid year exam in December as well.
All graded work is accumulated and this, together with the examination result, determines the final grade for the year. Promotion to the next class is based on the total performance for the year.
http://www.british-school.org/guidance.htm

Malaysia
Forms 1 to 3 are known as the lower secondary level and at the end of Form 3, pupils sit for the PMR examination. This replaced the SRP (Sijil Rendah Pelajaran) or LCE where a pass was required for promotion to Form 4.
http://schools-wikipedia.org/wp/s/Secondary_education.htm

Lesotho
The 66.0 percent promotion rate for Standard 1, with a repetition rate of 24.1 percent, indicates that many pupils are caught up in a continuous round of repeating until they are either promoted or drop-out.
http://www.unesco.org/education/wef/countryreports/lesotho/rapport_2.html

Really. All those links confirm what I said.

NOT TRUE!!!!

Nowhere in those links does it say that there is a final exam for each class or standard.

There is far too much information for me to list here.
Do you still maintain that view?

This was your earlier claim
In the Malaysian system (which does call its primary school classes Standard) the article directly refutes your claim.

It does not. See above.

Nowhere does it even imply that every standard has a final exam.
It does mention 1 exam.

Now you know better.

Failing this exam does not prevent student from moving from Standard 3 to Standard 4, instead excelling in this exam allows them to move directly to Standard 5.

Doesn't matter. You see standards and you see exams. As already brought out, some schools had both.
Standard? Why are you using that horrible word? You said it does not apply in the
British System - did you not? You see it and still you will not acknowlege it.
Seems like you were not telling the truth.

In secondary school there are 2 exams mentioned. The first is in Form 3
Again no indication that failure means they will not go to the next class as you claimed.

Niow you know better.

The second is taken in Form 5.
This is where the Malaysian system certainly diverges from the British system as there is no "Graduation" from secondary school in the UK. Once the final year is over the student leaves secondary school irrespective of their academic achievement, there is no final exam.

That is irrelevant - not a part of my contention.

Lets take a look at your link about High (or Secondary) schools. None of the entries mention anything about a final exam being needed to progress to the next class.

Now you know better.

"School Leavers Exam" does not refer to a single exam needed to graduate from secondary school because mandatory education is based on age not achievement under the British system. Instead it is a term for a group of exams in different subjects taken in the final year of school. A student can fail every single subject and still leave school.

More irrelevant stuff - thrown in for the sake of argument.

You have provided zero evidence for your claims and plenty of evidence against them in those links.

You must be blind! And not just in a physical sense.
The Parochial primary school that I attended had those conditions. Nothing that I said is a lie. I took every one of those yearly exams and even had the privilege of making it to first place once, in Standard 5. That year I made it to the National Spelling Bee. The School-Leaving exam was the toughest.

Remember this one thing:
I never said that Standards and exams for promotion applied in EVERY school in the British educational system. No need looking for information to counter that.

You have got a lot of hard bark on you, David, and I know you will argue some more. I found a lot more material, but it won't help you. You are the kind that will go down cussin'. Like Sadaam Hussein who claimed he had won Desert Storm, you will try to snatch victory even in abject defeat.


(\__/)
( ‘ .‘ )
>(^)<

Wilson

 

[DeistPrimate]

What does WIlsoncole's last post have to do with the fossil record or anything of substance in fact?

 

[painted wolf]

I'm wondering a couple of things.

1) does the existence of pre-Adamite creations and catastrophes as an explanation for the fossil record imply that God is a flawed creator.

2) does the idea that something other than God laid a misleading trail of evidence... leading so many religious people to accept evolution, imply that something other than God has creative power?

wa:do

 

[David M]

This is a lie! Don't you realize people can check?

I hope they do, because they will see your errors and that I was being truthful about what was in the links you supplied.

Since you will not be honest and report the actual words in those links, I will do so for you, plus using additional links:
Read and weep!:

Your inability to understand english is no problem but your own.

In the "High School" link the word standard as applied to classes and numbered as you claimed only appears for a single country - Malaysia. Here is the link again, everyone is free to double check whether numbered standard classes are mentioned for any other country:
http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/h/hi/high_school.htm

That is what I said and it is correct.

"In New Zealand children start ON their 5th birthday (the day of their birthday, or the day after) so ages are not set in concrete.

Primary school
New Entrants- 5
Primer 1- 6
Primer 2- 7
Primer 3- 8
Standard 1- 9
Standard 2- 10"
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-512161.html

Which is what I said. Only in your forum link does it mention standard for classes and them being numbered for New Zealand and it does not mention exams. Also the meaning of these terms is ambiguous as they have multiple overlapping names for Primary school classes.

In those 2 links the only countries that mention classes as being Standard and numbered are Malaysia and New Zealand. Exactly as I stated.

Malaysia:
Secondary education, like primary education is now compulsory in Malaysia. Primary schools run from Year 1 to Year 6 (also known as Standard 1 to 6, for children aged 6+ to 12+),
http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/h/hi/high_school.htm

Yes, that is what I said.

No one said they were supposed to be together in the same place. The exams I will supply in a moment. Still you said there were no Standards and there is.

But not in the British educational system, which is what you originally claimed. "Based on the British educational system" is not the same as "is the British Educational System"

You said there were NO "Standards" in the British Educational System. YOU ARE WRONG!

No, you are wrong. The scottish "standards" are not the names of classes nor are they numbered. They are the Standard Grade exams taken at age 16 in a number of subjects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Grade

False! Why did you ignore the following entry?:
STANDARD:
7. Chiefly British A grade level in elementary schools.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/standard
The words above speak plainly. I couldn't make it clearer.
Now you are admitting it grudgingly.
Here - let me supply you with some more:

Because your link does not specify that this applies to classes or that the are numbered as you claim nor that they have a final exam.

INDIA
Standards
1st Standard to 3rd Standard - Marathi
&#61558; 4th Standard &#8211;Hindi and Marathi
&#61558; 5th Standard to 8th Standard &#8211; Hindi and Marathi or Gujrathi
&#61558; 9th Standard and 10th Standard &#8211; Hind
http://www.utpalshanghvischool.org/IGCSE/FAQ_s_IGCSE___CIPP.pdf

Oh look, a new link. While this link does use the word standard it does not say that there is a final exam that must be passed. But halfway there for the Indian educational system. However this information was not in your links in your previous post so my statement that those previous links did not mention "standard" for Indian classes was correct.

I never said it was Britain - I said BRITISH educational system.

The BRITISH Educational System only applies to GREAT BRITAIN.

The Malaysian and Indian educational systems may be based on the British system but they are not the same as the British system.

If you had originally claimed "I was educated under the Malaysian educational system (based on the British system) blah, blah, blah" then I would not have commented, however you claimed to have been educated under the BRITISH system, which only applies to schools in Britain.

Primary School Leaving Examination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://www.tntisland.com/countries.html
. http://www.seameo.org/vl/library/dlwelcome/publications/ebook/exam/2ndintro.htm
http://www.british-school.org/guidance.htm
http://schools-wikipedia.org/wp/s/Secondary_education.htm
http://www.unesco.org/education/wef/countryreports/lesotho/rapport_2.html

A list of irrelevant links because the do not describe the British educational system, only systems that are based on the British educational system.

Nor do they cast an doubt on the accuracy of my previous post as I addressed the contents of the links you provided. My responses were made in the context of what was in those links.

NOT TRUE!!!!

There is far too much information for me to list here.
Do you still maintain that view?

It does not. See above.

Now you know better.

You mean now you have provided links that contain different information to the links in your previous post.

My responses to that post are still correct because they addressed the links that you provided and the information in them.

Doesn't matter. You see standards and you see exams. As already brought out, some schools had both.
Standard? Why are you using that horrible word? You said it does not apply in the
British System - did you not? You see it and still you will not acknowlege it.
Seems like you were not telling the truth.

Niow you know better.

That is irrelevant - not a part of my contention.

Now you know better.

More irrelevant stuff - thrown in for the sake of argument.

You must be blind! And not just in a physical sense.
The Parochial primary school that I attended had those conditions. Nothing that I said is a lie. I took every one of those yearly exams and even had the privilege of making it to first place once, in Standard 5. That year I made it to the National Spelling Bee. The School-Leaving exam was the toughest.

More irrelevance as none of it applies to the British educational system, which is what you claimed you were educated under.

Remember this one thing:
I never said that Standards and exams for promotion applied in EVERY school in the British educational system. No need looking for information to counter that.

Standards and exams for promotion do not apply for ANY school in the British educational system. They apply for some other educational systems that may be based on the British system but they are not the British educational system.

You have got a lot of hard bark on you, David, and I know you will argue some more. I found a lot more material, but it won't help you. You are the kind that will go down cussin'. Like Sadaam Hussein who claimed he had won Desert Storm, you will try to snatch victory even in abject defeat.

This is classic projection.

You were not educated under the British system of education, you were educated under the system of another country which is partly based on the British system. Your original claim was innacurate and my challenge to that claim was correct.

My comments still stand, under the British educational system there are no classes called "Standard x" and no final exams at the end of each year that must be passed. Any system outside Britain that does do these things is not the same as the British system and therefore cannot be the British Educational system.

What does WIlsoncole's last post have to do with the fossil record or anything of substance in fact?

Nothing, he has continually refused to address the fossil record in any substantive way, so I am just enjoying myself pointing out his inaccurate claims.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

What does WIlsoncole's last post have to do with the fossil record or anything of substance in fact?

Not sure myself...but I'm getting bored. :sad:

 

[tumbleweed41]

You know what would be a good discussion?
How about "What does the fossil record say?"

Hmmm...

 

[newhope101]

Newhope's so called "definition" of' Kinds' certainly failed to define any extinct form from the fossil record, maybe Wilsoncole's definition can be more useful?

Since there are fossil forms ancestral to two different modern 'Kinds' (dogs and bears for example) this could be interesting.

No..my definition most certainly covered extinct fossils. It is a matter of phylogeny.

Likewise your definiton of same species is tied to ability to interbreed or genetic similarity. Your researchers are also unable to apply their concepts of species or relatedness to the old fossils with precision using your current definitions of 'same species' alone.

I hope Wilconsole can supply another definition of kind.

The fossil record appears to be saying this apparently simple task of classification is not as easy as one may think when it comes to ancient fossils.

 

[wilsoncole]

I hope they do, because they will see your errors and that I was being truthful about what was in the links you supplied.

I thought you were blind in more ways than one. Now I am sure of it.

1. But not in the British educational system, which is what you originally claimed. "Based on the British educational system" is not the same as "is the British Educational System"

Standard Grade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2. The BRITISH Educational System only applies to GREAT BRITAIN.

3. The Malaysian and Indian educational systems may be based on the British system but they are not the same as the British system.
4. If you had originally claimed "I was educated under the Malaysian educational system (based on the British system) blah, blah, blah" then I would not have commented, however you claimed to have been educated under the BRITISH system, which only applies to schools in Britain.
5. More irrelevance as none of it applies to the British educational system, which is what you claimed you were educated under.
6. Standards and exams for promotion do not apply for ANY school in the British educational system. They apply for some other educational systems that may be based on the British system but they are not the British educational system.
7. You were not educated under the British system of education, you were educated under the system of another country which is partly based on the British system. 8. Your original claim was innacurate and my challenge to that claim was correct.

9. My comments still stand, under the British educational system there are no classes called "Standard x" and no final exams at the end of each year that must be passed.
10. Any system outside Britain that does do these things is not the same as the British system and therefore cannot be the British Educational system.

Now - maybe you can tell me why in Secondary School, every one of our GCE and City Guild of London tests had to be sent off to England for grading.

And why you keep ignoring the information here:
STANDARD:
7. Chiefly British A grade level in elementary schools.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/standard

and here:

Any is also grammatically correct.

Then you should be able to justify it by "Parsing and Analysing" it. Show us WHY it is correct.

Eh?

(\__/)
( ‘ .‘ )
>(^)<

Wilson

 

[camanintx]

When you're done arguing about english grammar, maybe you could give us a reference to recent attempts to hybridize humans and chimps.

 

[wilsoncole]

When you're done arguing about english grammar, maybe you could give us a reference to recent attempts to hybridize humans and chimps.

IF you can show me where I said that such attempts have been made.
Can you?


(\__/)
( ‘ .‘ )
>(^)<

Wilson

 

[newhope101]

I'm wondering a couple of things.

1) does the existence of pre-Adamite creations and catastrophes as an explanation for the fossil record imply that God is a flawed creator.
I know that some researchers thing the K2 was more of a Kfluff, with many more mammals surviving than previously expected. I think major catastrophies are required in toe to explain genetic bottle necks. Creationists do not require such events. All creation was perfect until mankind chose to sin. Hence mankind was sentenced to death in this life. This concept is somewhat supported by what are termed 'deleterious mutaions' that resulted in mankind. You say these evolved. I say this is Gods recompence that will stay with us untill the new world. At that time it will be be reversed,,,somehow,
2) does the idea that something other than God laid a misleading trail of evidence... leading so many religious people to accept evolution, imply that something other than God has creative power?
I think the trail of evidence is more of a concern to evolutionists as they try to show ancestry. The churches threw their towel in behind evolution way to early based on misleading and biased evidence. Priests are not scientists..it's all about keeping parishioners happy. The churches probably jumped ship on that irrefuteable and convincing evidence that we evolved from knuckle walkers, now antiquated.

Of course others have creative powers. Toe is an example of creativity. Evolutionary theory remains a theory undergoing evolution itself.The greatest work Satan has ever accomplished is to lead the world into disbelief in God. This is prophesied and has most certainly come to fruition.
wa:do

You mention a misleading train of evidence for creationists. I am unsure of what you speak to as the fossil record, without assumptions behind it, is clear evidence of creation.

 

[camanintx]

IF you can show me where I said that such attempts have been made.
Can you?


(\__/)
( ‘ .‘ )
>(^)<

Wilson

In Post 1135, you said that man and ape cannot be hybridized, proving that they are two separate creations and not of the same created “kind.” If there is no record of any such attempts to hybridize humans and apes in recent history, I am curious how you come to this conclusion.