TBH I havent looked to see if there is any refutation to that refutation, from what you posted he seems to have got some things wrong how wrong and why I havent looked into either as I felt it was irrelevant to why and what I posted to the other fella As for explaining, if you check back all I said was that at some point there must have been a half way point if you like so if over years evolution takes place (and if you will homour me here) so if the finches darwin observed had evolved to having 9" beaks (i know not real measurements) from say 4" beaks then at some point the beaks would have also been 5,6,7,8 inches long too. Because evolution doesnt happen overnight
So me and Acworth may be able to drink beer ,watch porn eat bacon and still sneak into heaven? Thanks for the heads up guys..
I understand sex booze and music are a given. Not sure about porn. doubt there will be time with the first 3 going on
A halfway point between what and what, exactly? I assume that man is at one end, but what are you suggesting is at the other? The problem with proving these things is that those that don't accept the theory simply wait until there's a single gap in the fossil record and then point to it, as if they've succeeded, somehow.
I have always argued (ask PNP) that evolution is the second stage in creation (if you like). It is not concerned with how as such but what happened after The reaon I highlighted that point is, if you will go back to how this started with you, is that something had to be there to evolve and it would have been a process so the concept of half ape half human is not that far fetched evolution the word gives you a clue
abiogenesis is a different debate and at present ludicrous in my opinion. but a different debate I was actually saying that those who believe in spontaneous creation of a species from another is not proven What is proven is in some cases an adaptation if you will, and even that takes many many years
You said half man, half monkey. Monkeys are primates, apes are also primates, but monkeys are not apes and apes aren't monkeys.
Nobody's suggesting spontaneous creation of a species from another species. Evolution doesn't suggest that. It suggests adaption, which will eventually turn one species into an entirely separate species, which has been proven and observed.
you know i dont believ there is an accurate fossil record in existence yet My comment was clear cut in all honesty if you care to check. I asked whether people accepted hanuman as being real? you know the hindu god Because if evolution of one species to naother is true then at some point (basd on evolution occurring over many years) there must have been a halfway point see the finches example again
should have said primates to be fair though the fella went into the whole monkey bit and BIK put him right
which is why its feasible for a half ape half man species although I would be interested in an example of a species turning into a completely different species that has been proven AND observed
Convenient and yet completely irrelevant. Going by what we already know, there's no realistic objection to evolution to be made by citing the fossil record. Hanuman was/is supposedly a Vanara, a shape-shifting group of sentient ape-like creatures with supernatural powers. In what way is that relevant to evolution? And again I'll ask you, a halfway point between humans and what?
