On Fri, 9 May 2008 23:27:56 -0700 (PDT), Wombat
<trigby@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
: On 10 May, 05:23, Gabriel <gabriel_bapt...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
: > On Fri, 09 May 2008 23:50:46 GMT, "Robert Weldon"
: >
: > <rweldon.spambl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
: >
: > :: "Gabriel" <gabriel_bapt...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
: >
: > :news:tol9245oreo228fueur6fvtj7uuf5ksq1q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> : > On Fri, 09 May 2008 17:27:26 -0400, Bible Bob: >
<bible...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
: >
: > : >
: > : > : On Thu, 8 May 2008 20:22:50 -0700 (PDT), rogue
<rogue...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>: > : wrote:
: >
: > : > :
: > : > : >On May 9, 2:33 am, Budikka666 <budik...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
: > : > : >>www.nature.com/newsrevealsthat the platypus genome has now
been
: > : > : >> sequenced.
: > : > : >>
: > : > : >> This wasn't done by praying, or by divine revelation. It
wasn't
: > : > : >> revealed in the Bible or any other ancient religious text.
: > : > : >>
: > : > : >> Nope, it was done by the hard work of scientists the world
over, many
: > : > : >> of whom no doubt share Gabriel's faith (although not his
pig-ignorant
: > : > : >> practice of it)http://tinyurl.com/4xfj7r
: > : > : >> "Monotreme's genome shares features with mammals, birds and
: > : > reptiles."
: > : > : >>
: > : > : >> That's just what the Theory of Evolution expects to find in
such an
: > : > : >> organism - an organism which is ancestrally at a pivotal
point in
: > : > : >> evolution - ought to have a mixed up genome.
: > : > : >>
: > : > : >> Now how could this be if it was designed, by a perfect being,
: > : > : >> literally from the ground up?
: > : > : >>
: > : > : >> Clearly the platypus evolved. It wasn't designed, unless the
: > : > designer
: > : > : >> was a moron.
: > : > : >>
: > : > : >> Budikka
: > : > : >
: > : > : >And lets face it, only a designer who was a moron would put the
: > : > : >urethra in men running through the prostate, and how is that
having
: > : > : >testicles OUTSIDE the body working out? ;-) I know when I've
taken a
: > : > : >whack there it didn't do much for my faith in Intelligent
Design.
: > : > :
: > : > :
: > : > : Rogue,
: > : > :
: > : > : Only a moron would consider that a platypus evolved from another
genus
: > : > : without adequate physical evidence. Shared DNA is proof of
nothing
: > : > : other than animals are similar. If the monotreme shares genome
: > : > : features with mamals, birds, and reptiles; so what. It could
have
: > : > : originated that way. Has any scientist observed a reptile,
bird, or
: > : > : mamal evolve into a platypus? Nope.
: > :
: > : Only a complete moron would expect a reptile, bird or mammal to turn
into a
: > : platypus. That would be evidence of creation, not evolution.
: >
: > Quote where I said this happens.
:
: If you could read for cmprehension, you would have noted that the arch-
: idiot, Bible Bob, said it.
Actually, if you had read the thread, Budikka is the one that
claimed it: that Platypus are related to reptiles, birds and
mammals - i.e., that they in some way evolved from each other.
On Thu, 8 May 2008 15:33:26 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
<budikka1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
]www.nature.com/news reveals that the platypus genome has now
been
] sequenced.
]
] http://tinyurl.com/4xfj7r
] "Monotreme's genome shares features with mammals, birds and
]reptiles."
]
] That's just what the Theory of Evolution expects to find in
] such an
] organism - an organism which is ancestrally at a pivotal point
] in
] evolution - ought to have a mixed up genome.
(Monotreme being the Platypus)
Bible Bob was denouncing that claim (as ironically so are you and
rogue). Robert was responding to my post as if I was the one who
originally made that claim, or even if he was trying to claim
Bible Bob said it.
So it's clear you think such a statement that Budikka made is
ridiculous. Glad you agree that yet another claim made in the
name of evolutionism is ridiculous. If you're looking to disagree
with the person who claims such a thing is true, please talk to
Budikka.
:
: Wombat
:
: >
: > :
: > : >
: > : > Exactly. They only offer more reasons why they have faith in
: > : > their beliefs.
: > : >
: > : > People reading such things need only ask one question to realize
: > : > every single conclusion they make is nothing more than an
: > : > unobservable, untestable, unverifiable belief: has anyone ever
: > : > observed such a thing in the entire recorded history of the human
: > : > race? The answer is a resounding no.
: > :
: > : Speciation has been observed in the field and in the lab, many
times. So
: > : the answer is a resounding yes, as you have been told many, many
times.
: >
: > Speciation that you've observed has never been a case of what you
: > call a [rat] producing an animal over generations that is no
: > longer what you call a [rat]. (And you can change [rat] to any
: > animal you want, and it remains a fact).
: >
: > You've only observed [rat]s producing [rat]s that look different,
: > due to speciation.
|
