|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 9:22:25 AM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 538
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
I am a genetic engineer and I am currently at work in the Canary Islands without the governments consent on a project to enable human mothers to give birth to baby giraffes. Unfortunately, your premise will be proven wrong inevitably. Mu-ah-hah-hah!
Do not contact me about this, because I am currently orbiting the moon in my homemade trash-fueled rocket ship listening to David Bowie. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 9:23:17 AM
|
|
|
Real_Solitude
Posts: 390
Joined: 5/9/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
I know one thing; The ancestor of my neighbors were human, not dogs, cats, goats, sheep, zebras or monkeys. So i still know better than evolutionists do because evolutionists don't know the difference between humans and animals.  And until they do, thy won't have a clue who can breed what.  Their imaginations will simply run wild with legendary and fictitious beasts that turned into humans. So evolution was simply invented to try to deny God & it does a horrendous job of it because it is the stuff of science fiction and is only good for great entertainment. 
You're making this too fun for me to leave.
How do you know that the ancestors of your neighbors were humans? What evidence do you have to support your hypothesis that ancestors of your neighbors have always been humans? How can you prove that they weren't cats, dogs, etc...
Also, please give me a point-by-point comparison on the differences between humans and animals. These should preferably be morphological or genetic differences.
Thirdly, at least attempt to present a cogent argument. You can argue, like others on here do, that the fossils we have don't represent human evolutionary ancestors, but the 'beasts' we cite as being the progenitors of the human race are neither legendary (They existed before human speech developed, and as such couldn't be put into legend.) nor fictitious (we have the fossils of a great many of these "imagined" creatures.)
Evolutionary theory also says absolutely nothing about anything supernatural, including God. It is a theory about the change of genetic information from one generation to the next. I suppose it does do a horrendous job at attempting to deny God, because it say nothing about God. Many Christians will attest to this, in that it is compatible with Christian belief.
_____________________________
"Instead of feeling alone in a group its better to have real solitude all by yourself."
~Faye Valentine
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 9:31:35 AM
|
|
|
Carico
Posts: 531
Joined: 8/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Real_Solitude
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
I know one thing; The ancestor of my neighbors were human, not dogs, cats, goats, sheep, zebras or monkeys. So i still know better than evolutionists do because evolutionists don't know the difference between humans and animals. And until they do, thy won't have a clue who can breed what. Their imaginations will simply run wild with legendary and fictitious beasts that turned into humans. So evolution was simply invented to try to deny God & it does a horrendous job of it because it is the stuff of science fiction and is only good for great entertainment.
You're making this too fun for me to leave.
How do you know that the ancestors of your neighbors were humans? What evidence do you have to support your hypothesis that ancestors of your neighbors have always been humans? How can you prove that they weren't cats, dogs, etc...
Also, please give me a point-by-point comparison on the differences between humans and animals. These should preferably be morphological or genetic differences.
Thirdly, at least attempt to present a cogent argument. You can argue, like others on here do, that the fossils we have don't represent human evolutionary ancestors, but the 'beasts' we cite as being the progenitors of the human race are neither legendary (They existed before human speech developed, and as such couldn't be put into legend.) nor fictitious (we have the fossils of a great many of these "imagined" creatures.)
Evolutionary theory also says absolutely nothing about anything supernatural, including God. It is a theory about the change of genetic information from one generation to the next. I suppose it does do a horrendous job at attempting to deny God, because it say nothing about God. Many Christians will attest to this, in that it is compatible with Christian belief.
What evidence do I have that my neighbor's ancestors were human? Well you can go to a maternity ward and see what humans breed for one thing. Another thing you can do is read history books to see what humans have been breeding for thousands of years. But most importantly, you need to understand the birds and the bees to know why humans breed humans and apes breed apes. Maybe then you'll be able to tell the difference between science and science fiction. But I'm not holding my breath. 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 9:35:32 AM
|
|
|
Carico
Posts: 531
Joined: 8/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
quote:
ORIGINAL: Real_Solitude
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
I know one thing; The ancestor of my neighbors were human, not dogs, cats, goats, sheep, zebras or monkeys. So i still know better than evolutionists do because evolutionists don't know the difference between humans and animals. And until they do, thy won't have a clue who can breed what. Their imaginations will simply run wild with legendary and fictitious beasts that turned into humans. So evolution was simply invented to try to deny God & it does a horrendous job of it because it is the stuff of science fiction and is only good for great entertainment.
You're making this too fun for me to leave.
How do you know that the ancestors of your neighbors were humans? What evidence do you have to support your hypothesis that ancestors of your neighbors have always been humans? How can you prove that they weren't cats, dogs, etc...
Also, please give me a point-by-point comparison on the differences between humans and animals. These should preferably be morphological or genetic differences.
Thirdly, at least attempt to present a cogent argument. You can argue, like others on here do, that the fossils we have don't represent human evolutionary ancestors, but the 'beasts' we cite as being the progenitors of the human race are neither legendary (They existed before human speech developed, and as such couldn't be put into legend.) nor fictitious (we have the fossils of a great many of these "imagined" creatures.)
Evolutionary theory also says absolutely nothing about anything supernatural, including God. It is a theory about the change of genetic information from one generation to the next. I suppose it does do a horrendous job at attempting to deny God, because it say nothing about God. Many Christians will attest to this, in that it is compatible with Christian belief.
What evidence do I have that my neighbor's ancestors were human? Well you can go to a maternity ward and see what humans breed for one thing. Another thing you can do is read history books to see what humans have been breeding for thousands of years. But most importantly, you need to understand the birds and the bees to know why humans breed humans and apes breed apes. Maybe then you'll be able to tell the difference between science and science fiction. But I'm not holding my breath.
Many people who call themselves Christians don't believe the bible either. In fact, a recent poll says that 83% of Christians don't believe that Jesus is the only way to God. The truth isn't determined by a vote. Once you understand that, then you'll know that if the majority of people believe we came from Venus, that doesn't make it true. So your statements about what people think are irrelevant. What's relevant is what animals and humans breed in reality, not in the imagination.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 10:10:58 AM
|
|
|
fiat_lux
Posts: 283
Joined: 5/21/2005
From: Ottawa
Status: offline
|
quote:
What evidence do I have that my neighbor's ancestors were human? Well you can go to a maternity ward and see what humans breed for one thing. Another thing you can do is read history books to see what humans have been breeding for thousands of years.
This "evidence" is not helpful as it does not falsify the theory of evolution. The written record covers only a minimal fraction of the history of life. The theory of evolution also predicts that over the short timespan of human writing, we wouldn't be seeing major changes here of the sort you seem to expect.
quote:
But most importantly, you need to understand the birds and the bees to know why humans breed humans and apes breed apes.
Let's accept for the sake of argument that you're 100% right and that every single species as it presently exists can breed only within that species (which we generally agree on, I suspect) and that the only offspring it can ever, ever have is more animals of that species. (Or more humans of the human species, as the case may be).
Where then do you claim that all the species originated?
quote:
Maybe then you'll be able to tell the difference between science and science fiction.
I request enlightenment. What is the difference?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 10:40:41 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3150
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Where then do you claim that all the species originated? My claims are worthless! The authoritative, inerrant historical account of origins clearly states that Creator God made all living organisms according to their kinds during three days of the creation week. I believe this Eyewitness record of events - do you?
quote:
quote:
Maybe then you'll be able to tell the difference between science and science fiction.
I request enlightenment. What is the difference? Science is systematic knowledge of the physical world from observation and experimentation. Evolution is not science! Fiction is an imaginary thing invented for the purposes of argument or explanation. Evolution is fiction!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 1:51:48 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
Fiction is an imaginary thing invented for the purposes of argument or explanation. Evolution is fiction!
The problem for creationists is that this "fiction" seems to describe reality very accurately.
While Genesis interpreted as science does not.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 2:57:52 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 853
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
They can if humans cross breed them. But that's no different than a black human being mating with a white human being.
It is quite different. Different human races do not require in vitro fertilization, nor do you have to worry about the size of the different populations. Exploding Chihuahuas come to mind. If left to their own Great Danes and Chihuahuas could and would not produce offspring.
quote:
Humans breed humans and dogs breed dogs.
But Great Dane does not breed Chihuahua, and Chihuahua does not breed Great Dane.
quote:
So once again, until evolutionists know the difference between animals and humans they won't know why humans can't breed animals any more than animals can breed humans. It's that simple.
Humans are animals. What did you think we are, fungi? Here is a good definition:
Animal: A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.
Do you fit that description? Yep, sure do. Therefore, you are an animal. Better yet, give me a description using shared features that describes a worm, fish and bear that also does not describe a human.
quote:
So one of the biggest mistakes that evolutionists make is thinking that by calling a human an ape that makes it possible for apes and humans to interbreed and exchange genes.
Humans were called apes before Darwin was ever born. Humans were first classified as apes by Linnaeus who was a creationist. "Ape" is a description of shared characteristics.
quote:
But it doesn't any more than calling a dog a giraffe makes dogs and giraffes capable of interbreeding and exchanging genes.
Giraffes and dogs are mammals, are they not? They are also tetrapods, amniotes, vertebrates, and eukaryotes, are they not?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 4:11:00 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3150
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
The problem for creationists is that this "fiction" seems to describe reality very accurately. A bit far-fetched, gluadys, since absolutely no one anywhere has ever observed even one instance of a single organism "evolving" into another. That's no reality I'm living in! But feel free to make up your own.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 5:33:42 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
The problem for creationists is that this "fiction" seems to describe reality very accurately. A bit far-fetched, gluadys, since absolutely no one anywhere has ever observed even one instance of a single organism "evolving" into another. That's no reality I'm living in! But feel free to make up your own.
The fossil record shows us it happened, ERV's show us it's happened, and on and on.
No one has witnessed a woman being built from a rib stolen out of a human being, or a man being created fully formed from dust. There is no evidence for either. There is hardly an explanation more preposterous.
You misinterpret the message of your alleged "one living witness".
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 5:42:21 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 853
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
A bit far-fetched, gluadys, since absolutely no one anywhere has ever observed even one instance of a single organism "evolving" into another.
Individual organisms don't evolve. Populations do. Perhaps you should understand the theory before criticizing it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 5:52:37 PM
|
|
|
fiat_lux
Posts: 283
Joined: 5/21/2005
From: Ottawa
Status: offline
|
quote:
My claims are worthless! The authoritative, inerrant historical account of origins clearly states that Creator God made all living organisms according to their kinds during three days of the creation week. I believe this Eyewitness record of events - do you?
Are we talking about kinds or species here? This is an important distinction. If we're going to talk about kinds, then you have to disagree with carico. If we're going to talk about species, then someone is going to have to explain to me how they all fit on the ark. Matter of fact, someone's going to have to explain it to me anyways, given the number of "kinds" there would have to be.
quote:
Science is systematic knowledge of the physical world from observation and experimentation. Evolution is not science! Fiction is an imaginary thing invented for the purposes of argument or explanation. Evolution is fiction!
The best-case scenario for your argument is that none of us have a scientific understanding of the development of life, then, since creationist beliefs are also not based on this form of systematic knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/8/2008 8:31:54 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
The problem for creationists is that this "fiction" seems to describe reality very accurately. A bit far-fetched, gluadys, since absolutely no one anywhere has ever observed even one instance of a single organism "evolving" into another. That's no reality I'm living in! But feel free to make up your own.
That is because organisms do not evolve. It is populations that evolve. And we have seen evolving populations produce new species.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 8:20:11 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3150
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Individual organisms don't evolve. Populations do. Perhaps you should understand the theory before criticizing it. Populations do not procreate. Individuals do. Perhaps you should understand the birds and bees before criticizing me.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 9:16:12 AM
|
|
|
Carico
Posts: 531
Joined: 8/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: gluadys
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
The problem for creationists is that this "fiction" seems to describe reality very accurately. A bit far-fetched, gluadys, since absolutely no one anywhere has ever observed even one instance of a single organism "evolving" into another. That's no reality I'm living in! But feel free to make up your own.
That is because organisms do not evolve. It is populations that evolve. And we have seen evolving populations produce new species.
Sorry but again, no population can do what no member can of the population can do. So you have not seen populations breed new species. You have seen species and speculated that they came from another species. That's called speculation , not science.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 9:21:18 AM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
Sorry but again, no population can do what no member can of the population can do. So you have not seen populations breed new species. You have seen species and speculated that they came from another species. That's called speculation , not science.
Can a single ant build an ant colony?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 11:06:51 AM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 853
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
Sorry but again, no population can do what no member can of the population can do.
They most certainly can. A single person can only have two alleles of a specific gene but a population can carry a handful to hundreds of alleles.
quote:
So you have not seen populations breed new species.
Populations do not breed new species. They become new species over time just as Latin became the Romance Languages (e.g. spanish, french, italian). It's not as if a latin speaker woke up one day and started speaking french. Instead, populations were separated from each other long enough for differences in language to build up to the point that two populations could no longer talk to each other even though each generation within the population could speak to the next.
Using the language analogy let's rephrase your questions. You are asking, in effect, why french speakers do not spontaneously start speaking italian if french and italian share a common ancestor (latin). It's a bit silly, isn't it? If we repeated history we would not expect things to work out the same way. We would not expect the same languages to appear with the same words, same grammer, same syntax, etc. If we rewound evolution we would similarly not expect the same outcome. Even more, we would not expect languages to spontaneously evolve into an already existing langauge just as we would not expect an existing species to evolve into an already existing species.
quote:
You have seen species and speculated that they came from another species. That's called speculation , not science.
The evidence (genetic, morphological, and fossil) all point to species sharing a common ancestor. It is only speculation in your mind.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 11:12:15 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3150
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
The evidence (genetic, morphological, and fossil) all point to species sharing a common ancestor. It is only speculation in your mind. That's your incorrect interpretation of the evidence, Method. I see the evidence all pointing to design and creation by intelligent agency. Indeed, you are right that interpretation is only speculation in the mind!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 11:15:47 AM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 853
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
That's your incorrect interpretation of the evidence, Method.
Why is it incorrect? We observe evolution producing a nested hierarchy. We look at the genetic, morphological, and fossil evidence and find that it falls into a nested hierarchy. Where is any of this incorrect?
quote:
I see the evidence all pointing to design and creation by intelligent agency. Indeed, you are right that interpretation is only speculation in the mind!
Interpretation is a falsifiable statement that refers to data. So what fossil, genetic, or morphological evidence would falsify the claim that life was designed by an intelligent agency? Any? It would seem to me that any pattern of homology would fit in just fine for an intelligent agency, but not so with evolution. It would seem that your "interpretation" is dogmatic.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 11:33:06 AM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Individual organisms don't evolve. Populations do. Perhaps you should understand the theory before criticizing it. Populations do not procreate. Individuals do. Perhaps you should understand the birds and bees before criticizing me.
I understand the birds and the bees. I understand why individuals procreate but it takes populations to evolve. I understand the difference between duplicating a genome and changing a gene pool.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 11:35:24 AM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
Sorry but again, no population can do what no member can of the population can do. So you have not seen populations breed new species. You have seen species and speculated that they came from another species. That's called speculation , not science.
Scientists have seen populations speciate. They have produced new species in both controlled laboratory experiments and observed cases of natural speciation. This is not speculation. It is direct observation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 11:39:06 AM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
The evidence (genetic, morphological, and fossil) all point to species sharing a common ancestor. It is only speculation in your mind. That's your incorrect interpretation of the evidence, Method. I see the evidence all pointing to design and creation by intelligent agency. Indeed, you are right that interpretation is only speculation in the mind!
Of course, it is also a false dichotomy to suppose that an intelligent agency is incompatible with common ancestry. Creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive. In fact, creationists gave up asserting that half a century ago. Now YECs rely on super-fast evolution to populate the earth with diverse species after the alleged global flood.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants - 7/9/2008 12:24:07 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3150
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
We observe evolution producing a nested hierarchy. Nope! You've interpreted the "nested hierarchy" as evidence for evolution. No one has ever observed even one single instance of evolution much less dozens of separate events producing anything. It's a wonderful fiction, Method, but it ain't science!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
