Creationist VP-elect of the USA
Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8
Wortfish wrote:felltoearth wrote:In your wet dreams. The Dover judgement would prevent any such thing.
One judge in one court doesn't change anything. Creationism has been taught in American public schools before. At the very least, criticism of Neo-Darwinism will be made a mandatory component of the science class.
Calilasseia wrote:An old one from my archives, but prescient in the context of this thread ... someone should make Pence look long and hard at this, until the concept finally strikes home ...
felltoearth wrote:More moronic ass slop. This has been thoroughly dealt with time and again.
Again, you are being disingenuous or moronic. Your pick.
Calilasseia wrote:
What evolutionary biologists (which is the proper term for the people who spend decades studying the subject) actually postulate here, is that the same processes resulting in changes that don't involve the formation of new taxa, are also involved in changes that do produce new taxa.
Wortfish wrote:Calilasseia wrote:An old one from my archives, but prescient in the context of this thread ... someone should make Pence look long and hard at this, until the concept finally strikes home ...
I am sure that Pence accept microevolution as do all creationists. He asked me to show you this slide:
Wortfish wrote:Calilasseia wrote:An old one from my archives, but prescient in the context of this thread ... someone should make Pence look long and hard at this, until the concept finally strikes home ...
I am sure that Pence accept microevolution as do all creationists. He asked me to show you this slide:
Wortfish wrote:Evolutionists disingenously like to claim that macroevolution just means speciation
Rachel Bronwyn wrote:If you study even a single semester of comparative vert anatomy, you're overwhelmed by the similarities between birds and reptiles. They're the same.Calilasseia wrote:
What evolutionary biologists (which is the proper term for the people who spend decades studying the subject) actually postulate here, is that the same processes resulting in changes that don't involve the formation of new taxa, are also involved in changes that do produce new taxa.
That's really well put.
Rumraket wrote:Wortfish wrote:Evolutionists disingenously like to claim that macroevolution just means speciation
How is that dishonest? That's literally just what practicing evolutionary biologists use the word to mean. You can't fault biologists for the poor education of creationists, and the creationist lies and misuse of well-defined technical terms.
Calilasseia wrote:Oh, and meanwhile, how many of the 101 or so papers on observed instances of speciation in my current collection, do I have to bring here to nail this creationist lie?
Birds' scales are found mainly on the toes and metatarsus, but may be found further up on the ankle in some birds. The scales and scutes of birds were thought to be homologous to those of reptiles,[4] but are now agreed to have evolved independently, being degenerate feathers.[5][6]
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 2 guests