RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: Evolution Question #1, The Problem of Whales< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
dougp59



Posts: 9
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 03 2006,10:08   

From www.evolutionsucks.org

Evolution Question Number One;

The theory of Evolution says that all life evolved from lower life forms. In other words, we came from fish. †Which of course came from even simpler blobs of something. †

Oddly enough though, evolutionists say that the whales (a mammal) evolved from a hoofed land animal called Mesonychids. †Textbooks describe these beasts as about the size of a hyena. †

The Mesonychids would have of course evolved from a reptile from a fish from a simpler blob of something, you get the picture.

Simpler to more complex life forms, that is the essence of Evolution by natural selection. †They call this; "speciation".

So, a simple form of life in the ancient seas evolves into a fish, which evolved into a reptile,which evolved into a land animal. †

Once it had accomplished this monumental feat, it then decided to get REALLY BIG, loose its' legs and return to the seas! †

Oh, and do not forget that it has to move itsí nostrils to the top of the head so they become blow holes so they can breath when they surface.

Question #1 †Can you show the transitional fossils that prove ANY of this?
Evolution Sucks

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 03 2006,12:55   

Dude, could you at least TRY to come up with something new?  It's totally boring to listen to the same old crap that ICR was putting out  ***forty years ago***.   (yawn)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2006,17:10   

Are you serious?

Traditional fossils or anything else don't "prove" a theory, a theory describes and explains the facts. This isn't religion. This isn't armchair football.

There are plenty of resources about the evolution of whales. However you sound like you first need to understand evolution itself. May I suggest Talk Origins.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4511
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2006,05:51   

The ID advocates in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case last year got their butts kicked hard over claims concerning whales:

Quote

Finally, Dr.  Padian's unrebutted testimony demonstrates that Pandas distorts and misrepresents evidence in the fossil record about pre-Cambrian-era fossils, the evolution of fish to amphibians, the evolution of small carnivorous dinosaurs into birds, the evolution of the mammalian middle ear, and the evolution of whales from land animals.  ([178]16:107-17, [179]16:117-31, [180]16:131-45, [181]17:6-9, [182]17:17-27 (Padian); P-855.25-855.33, P-855.34-855.45, P-855.46-855.55, P-855.56-866.63, P-855.64-855.82).


It was unsurprising, since the objection was one of the ensemble of old, bogus antievolution arguments:

Claim CC216.1:
There are gaps between land mammals and whales.


And even more on the subject:

The Origin of Whales and the Power of Independent Evidence

These questions seem to establish the ignorance of the questioner rather than any problem in evolutionary biology. Astute antievolutionists don't invoke whale evolution as a problem for evolutionary biology.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
  3 replies since Nov. 03 2006,10:08 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]