Question for Evolutionist's, page 49

privacy

Pages: << 46 47 48 49 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 13 times

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 08:05 AM by iterationzero

reply to post by wmd_2008

I think you missed the mocking sarcasm in flyingfish's response. You two are arguing from the same side of the fence.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 08:46 AM by steveknows

Originally posted by TexasEngineer
Some more questions for evolutionists (if you're willing to think for yourself):

1. How many DNA pairs are in the human genome?
2. How many of those human DNA pairs differ from those of a chimp?
3. How long would it take for a human to evolve from a chimp, assuming the necessary DNA mutations take place in exactly the right sequence, without any mistakes, and at the rate that is survivable.

Some hints:

1. More than you can count on both hands and feet.
2. It is said that we are 98% monkey.
3. A maximum of four mutations per generation, recognizing that most of those are unsuccessful (e.g., result in death).

So how many generations does it take for a chimp to evolve into a human?

If you fail to understand that we don't come from chimps and that it has never been claimed that we do I don't understand why you're even debating this. We don't come from any great ape as we are a great ape but we have a common ancester. Also Bonobos are our closest relative and not the chip though it is like a chimp.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 07:22 PM by flyingfish

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by wmd_2008

I think you missed the mocking sarcasm in flyingfish's response. You two are arguing from the same side of the fence.

Yep, my sarcasm went right over 2008's head.
However I agree that man creates gods.

edit on 20-10-2011 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 20-3-2012 @ 11:57 AM by drgrantdiz

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
reply to post by Youji69

So there's nothing actually observable? We have to just believe that one fossil became another without seeing it happen? I know its supposed to take "millions and millions of years" but if that's the case wouldn't we see animals even today evolving and becoming a knew kind? How come we never see this? I think it takes alot of faith to believe one animal genus became another with no one ever seeing it happen.

because the process takes millions and millions of years; through a complex system known as natural selection which ensures the "Suvival of the fittest" thus passing down genes that are strong and getting rid of genes that are weak. You can't see this because as far as I know you are not looking, nor could you live long enough to see a drastic change. how does creationism explain the development of antibiotic resistent bacteria?

reply posted on 21-3-2012 @ 04:01 PM by Sphota

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
reply to post by Youji69

So there's nothing actually observable? We have to just believe that one fossil became another without seeing it happen? I know its supposed to take "millions and millions of years" but if that's the case wouldn't we see animals even today evolving and becoming a knew kind? How come we never see this? I think it takes alot of faith to believe one animal genus became another with no one ever seeing it happen.

Yes, it takes a REALLY LONG TIME for this to become this or even this.

The first one isn't around anymore...well, sort of. It is around in that it became those other two. But those other two are mutated versions of the first one. Nothing just --- *snap* *poof* *bam* --- turns into something else.

Likewise, two contemporary creatures cannot be the ancestor or progeny of one another. That's an answer to the age old question why no gorillas (or chimps or whatever) haven't spontaneously turned into and/or given birth to a human.

It happens with plants too, by the way. That's how this, this, this and finally this can all be related. Not because one or the other "made" or "produced" the other three, but because all of them come from a shared ancestor that is not around anymore, except under the accepted understanding that all four of them technically "ARE" that ancestor, just with changes depending on the environment.

reply posted on 21-3-2012 @ 04:03 PM by Sphota

Originally posted by drgrantdiz

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
reply to post by Youji69

So there's nothing actually observable? We have to just believe that one fossil became another without seeing it happen? I know its supposed to take "millions and millions of years" but if that's the case wouldn't we see animals even today evolving and becoming a knew kind? How come we never see this? I think it takes alot of faith to believe one animal genus became another with no one ever seeing it happen.

because the process takes millions and millions of years; through a complex system known as natural selection which ensures the "Suvival of the fittest" thus passing down genes that are strong and getting rid of genes that are weak. You can't see this because as far as I know you are not looking, nor could you live long enough to see a drastic change. how does creationism explain the development of antibiotic resistent bacteria?

Weak and strong are relative terms. We're actually dealing with their "ability to adapt to and take advantage of a particular niche" It's not that a nose or fingers are weak adaptations, they just aren't that great when you live under water.

Pages: << 46 47 48 49 >> ^^TOP^^