tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13313594.post3056087433937017553..comments2023-11-03T01:24:37.142-07:00Comments on Militant Ginger: Darwin's LegacyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13313594.post-29508803498609400862008-05-02T07:17:00.000-07:002008-05-02T07:17:00.000-07:00Actually, I think politics proves Darwin's theorie...Actually, I think politics proves Darwin's theories are correct! The current Democratic primary lends much support to the theory that Democrats are evolved from monkeys! And surely the entire Republican philosophy is based on the idea of 'survival of the fittest' (or, at least, 'pay for your own damn healthcare.')<BR/><BR/>My major problem with Christianity as a whole is that God clearly is not a loving God, otherwise he wouldn't have let the Tsunami kill 250,000 people, or wiped out New Orleans with Katrina, or force God-fearing, church attending families to face things like cancer, or lose their house to wildfires.<BR/><BR/>If God DID exist, he's surely cruel, neglectful and heartless.<BR/><BR/>Besides, how to do you explain things like people having pre-hensile tails (some people are even born with them showing) and other biological traits that are the same as monkeys?<BR/><BR/>If man isn't evolved from monkeys, when God was at the assembly like, he clearly used many of the exact same parts.<BR/><BR/>Ohh! Actually, after I wrote my original response, I even looked up 'missing links' and found the exact path of fossils that illustrate how a fish became a bird. Fish became amphibians first (they have the fossils to show this) then turned into reptiles (again, still have the fossils) and then reptiles became birds (they have the exact 'link' as a fossil) which explains why fish, amphibians and reptiles all lay eggs.Roland Hulmehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08979437320446956987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13313594.post-5525473403291478512008-05-02T06:28:00.000-07:002008-05-02T06:28:00.000-07:00Its not as evident as you lead it to be. But had a...Its not as evident as you lead it to be. <BR/><BR/>But had another thought. The reason Darwinism has caused more havoc then creationism is not due to one being based in truth and the other not being.<BR/><BR/>It has to do with one being based on love and compassion and the other being based on 'we are not special'. <BR/><BR/>One is based on faith of a higher power that tells us to love each other and take care of our brothers and sisters. So you will naturally see more actions in relation to kindness on the grand scale of things. The other things your a monkeys cousin (again, does make the existence of democrats reasonable), and the fittest must survive. <BR/><BR/>That is why you see so much more havoc with Darwin's theory vs. Creationism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13313594.post-62083867958096200722008-05-01T09:14:00.000-07:002008-05-01T09:14:00.000-07:00Hi CK! Excellent point you raised in my previous p...Hi CK! Excellent point you raised in my previous post and I hope I've done it justice here.<BR/><BR/>As for the missing links - what do you mean we don't have fossil records? There are thousands of them?<BR/><BR/>It was during the Carboniferous period when fish left the sea and arrived on land, their fins turning into legs (it's no coincidence that fish have four fins and animals have four limbs.)<BR/><BR/>Fish evolved into amphibians, who could leave the water and walk on land (although not very well, as their limbs were still much like fins and their skin wasn't watertight.) However, these amphibians later developed into reptiles, mammals and later still, birds.<BR/><BR/>Pederpes was one of the earliest reptiles and still looked much like a tadpole on short, fish-like legs.<BR/><BR/>The first creatures to go from fish to amphibian were Carboniferous tetrapods and we have stacks of fossils of those, which clearly show the development from fish to amphibian. All land-based non-insect life evolved from those beasties. <BR/><BR/>When it comes fish-into-frog, there are no missing links whatsoever. It's all clearly illustrated in thousands of fossils.Roland Hulmehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08979437320446956987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13313594.post-25815784841843995002008-05-01T08:43:00.000-07:002008-05-01T08:43:00.000-07:00If Darwin were right we would have MILLIONS/BILLIO...If Darwin were right we would have MILLIONS/BILLIONS of 'missing links'. But we don't. We don't see the fossil records show us the transformation from a fish to a bird. <BR/><BR/>We see huge gaps in the fossil record when compared to Darwins theory.<BR/><BR/>Which fits directly into intelligent design. No need to see a fish turn to a bird, if a bird was designed as a bird and a fish as a fish.<BR/><BR/>Animals adapt and evolve... but they don't change what animal they are in the process.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com