Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Nov. 26 2012,16:19)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 26 2012,15:47)|
|1) Common sense really doesn't work in science. That's why we have evidence and statistical data. What's yours?|
I'm sorry, evidence and statistical data for what?
Science. It's sure not ID that has evidence and statistical data.
|2) Do you look EXACTLY like your parents? Do you have exactly the same genes as your parents?|
Do your children look EXACTLY like you? Do they have EXACTLY the same genes as you?
No, due to the recombination of both of their DNA I would not expect any of this.
|Since the answer to these questions is all "No", then you are transitional between your parents and you children. |
So, you think I am evolving into my children? Scary...LOL
Wow. You really don't know shit about evolution do you. And that's a common creationist tactic known as a 'strawman'. You can't attack the argument that your opponent makes, so you make up an argument and attack that instead.
Now, listen very carefully. Individuals don't evolve. Say it with me. Individuals don't evolve.
POPULATIONS evolve. When your children were born, the allele frequency of the entire human population altered (very little, but measurable). That's evolution, which, I believe, you agree with.
|Finally, what is a transitional fossil? It is not a fossil that is a direct descendant of another fossil. It is impossible to tell if one fossil is directly descended from another fossil. What you do is examine the characteristics.|
For example, one fossil has legs that are 120 centimeters long. Another fossil with almost no other differences has legs that are 100 centimeters long and they are separated by 15 million years. A third fossil has legs that are 60 centimeter longs and it's dated 30 million years later.
Do you see a trend.
No, but you would see a trend. I would probably just think I found three different fossils with different leg lengths as we see in real life organisms. I certainly would not feel I had enough data to draw scientific conclusions.
Yes, that's what I said "trend" and not "scientific conclusion". For it to be a scientific conclusion we would need to statistically analyze all the data... which was done in the case of whales. Again, I suggest you actually research the article.
I know you won't find evidence that convinces you because you are immune to evidence. But at least you wouldn't be ignorant of how science actually works.
|Now let's compare to your analogy (I hate analogies). The woman loses weight and loses weight and will eventually die from lack of nutrients and body mass. Similarly the fossils I described above, the legs keep getting smaller and smaller until the legs finally disappear.|
And then how does she pass that trait on ter her offspring...:)) Into Lamarkianism much?? :)))))
And again, strawman. Attacking a made up argument that I didn't use.
Did you know that traits like leg-length and even tendency to weight gain are GENETIC.
You might look up evolution of whales.[/quote]
Just count the fallacies...
Edited by OgreMkV on Nov. 26 2012,16:32
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.