re: Intelligent Design Vs. Evolution

Took me forever, but I finally read this entire thread. Quite a few people, in explaining why they don't believe in evolution, demonstrated that they clearly don't even understand evolution.

quote:

---

I'm still looking for the fossils that prove that bats and whales are related. After all that is what most people claim. That bats evolved into whales.

---

Who claims that?

Answer is no one really knows for sure

quote:

---

A mutation would not move a non-seeing organism to a seeing organism with one mutation. And a mutation which wasn't useful, we are told will disappear over time. So, how do you get large changes in an organism through random mutations assuming non-utilitarian mutations don't ultimately survive?

---

As I said, watch Cosmos. It goes into detail how and why the eye evolved the way it did.

quote:

---

I'm still looking for the fossils that prove that bats and whales are related. After all that is what most people claim. That bats evolved into whales.

---

I hope you're trolling.

quote:

---

I'm still looking for the fossils that prove that bats and whales are related. After all that is what most people claim. That bats evolved into whales.

---

The cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) are marine mammal descendants of land mammals. Their terrestrial origins are indicated by:

Their need to breathe air from the surface;
The bones of their fins, which resemble the limbs of land mammals
The vertical movement of their spines, characteristic more of a running mammal than of the horizontal movement of fish.
The question of how a group of land mammals became adapted to aquatic life was a mystery until discoveries starting in the late 1970s in Pakistan revealed several stages in the transition of cetaceans from land to sea.

Ambulocetus natans was an early cetacean that could walk as well as swim. It is the only species classified under the genus Ambulocetus. Along with other members of Ambulocetidae, it is a transitional fossil that shows how whales evolved from land-living mammals.

Ambulocetus natans lived in the Early Eocene (50 to 48 million years ago) of Pakistan. When the animal was alive, Pakistan was a coastal region of India, which was then an island continent in the Indian Ocean (see Indian Plate).

LINK

LINK

quote:

---

Just because you're not satisfied by an answer doesn't preclude it from being right

---

FWIW this is a 2 way street.

quote:

---

If he is "Christ" and did the things written about is not a fact.

---

OK but I'll disagree.

quote:

---

Yes we do.....if you're referring to Jesus when say Christ, he's a historical fact. As far as the existence of God, either you believe or you don't.

---

Historical fact? The problem with the historicity of Jesus is that the vast majority of the authors are Christian and his existence removes their objectivity.

There are no (zero) contemporary articles of Jesus. That means that the entire time he was going around raising people from the dead, being the son of God and getting crucified: Not a single person mentioned him.

Not a single scholar. No coins, no bust, no paintings, no articles/writings, no mention whatsoever.

John, Matthew, Mark and Luke?

John: C. 90 AD (60 years after Jesus died), author is unknown.

Matthew? 70 - 110 (they don't actually know, but even at the lowest: 40 years after Jesus had died). "The Gospel of Matthew is anonymous: the author is not named within the text, and the superscription "according to Matthew" was added some time in the second century."

Luke? 80 - 100, 50 years after Jesus Death. "The author is traditionally identified as Luke the Evangelist.[7] Modern scholarship generally rejects the view that Luke was the original author,[8] with the most that could be said being that Lukan authorship is "not impossible"." -- Author unknown.

Mark? 30 years after Jesus had died. The authorship? You guessed it.

Most modern scholars reject the tradition which ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion narrative.



Evidence: Inscriptions? Coins? Busts? Scholars? Friends? Family? Gospels?

None, none, none, none, none, none, all authored decades after his death and by anonymous men. If you say that's concrete fact then I feel sorry for you, son.

quote:

---

Didn't realize a lot of "contemporary articles" were written back in the day. Good to know.

---

What he means by contemporary is articles written about Jesus in his time. Articles contemporary to him, as opposed to shite written 100 years after he died.