religion

[Eliseus]

Originally Posted by leewong [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"Your right on the birth aspect, but your post doesn't imply that, it implies that it is impossible to have another species from a previous species without similarities."

I didnt imply anything. I said exactly what I meant. It IS impossible to have a new species that doesnt share similarities with it's nearest ancestor. A whale isnt going to give birth to a bird (even though these have similarities still). Instead, a whale will give birth to another whale with minor differences but still a whale. Repeat that process over and over and over and over....for billions of years....that is what evolution is.

"After robot made a comment about a horse eventually become a 4-toed creature of squirrel size, you said that wasn't possible then, now it is to try and save face."

I said a horse doesnt give birth to a squirrel not that a horse cannot eventually evolve into a squirrel like creator. The point is, the horse would first give birth to horse that has some mutation that makes it .000001% more like a squirrel. Then those traits would have to be selected for. Repeat that same process a few hundred times over the course of millions of years and boom...you got yourself a squirrel-like creature.

"some weird infatuation with Darwin"

Lol, what? I havent even read the Origin of Species....imagine that. Science has long moved on since Darwin. I give the man credit but modern science has a better grasp on the mechanisms of evolution than he did. He was even...gasp...wrong on some things! It's not like all science stopped when he died or every word he uttered is infallible unchanging truth.

Science, unlike your religion, isnt ruled by edict. It is ruled by experiment and evidence. It is an ongoing process that will never have all the answers but it has the BEST answers. As soon as you answer one question, "What is an atom made of?" you have made 50 more questions, "What are the individual parts that make up and atom made of?", etc. Some may see that as a flaw in science but I think it is the best part.

So you, being a man who bases everything off of everyone else just getting what you are saying, and all the implications you have, blah blah blah. You now claim that those exact three posts you were being 100% literal in. If that is the case, I apologize, but it is more probable than not, you weren't.