• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Recent content by micah1116

  1. M

    Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evol...

    Re: Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evo I never addressed it because I thought it was a silly arguement that doesn't make any sense. How can showing me a picture of white and black be evidence for evolution? Am I missing something here? Are you argueing that you can't get...
  2. M

    Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evol...

    Re: Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evo Yeah, All 94 of them, have any transitions showing them losing these bones and going from 300 to 206?
  3. M

    Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evol...

    Re: Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evo Acanthostega is more than likely nothing more than a giant salamder, it's nothing like a fish, it's a reptile. It's has the exact same appearance as a giant salamander, not a fish. If you wish, you can go to nephilimfree's webiste...
  4. M

    Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evol...

    Re: Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evo You've not provided evidence that this process you think occurs, actually does. You are unable to show me an observable example of evolution occuring without structural change. So everything looks exactly the same, has the same...
  5. M

    Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evol...

    Re: Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evo In one sentence you said a bacteria and a mite are structurally different, and then the next sentence you said evolution doesn't require structural change! You guys crack me up :lol: Why can't you guys just provide what I've asked...
  6. M

    Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evol...

    Re: Debate Analysis: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evo I keep getting comments from people trying to tell me that new structures are not needed for evolutionary change, and this is exactly what Squawk said as well. Can ANYONE defend this arguement? It's the most rediculous thing I've...
  7. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    First, I'd like to thank Squawk for debating me, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on the creation vs evolution topic. I'm still not convinced that there is a shred of real evidence supporting evolution, all that I saw you present were assumptions, not actual observed science that...
  8. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    Are there any structural differences between a lion and a tiger? I never said to show me different kinds interbreeding, I said to show me organisms with different structure interbreeding. I defined kind. Your avoiding the issue, infact ants date back to 60 million years according to you guys...
  9. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    oops! I must have clicked the quote button sometime during the course of typing and it quote your whole post. I'll rewrite the post, but if you could, don't delete my post until I write a new one, so I can just copy and paste what I've already written.
  10. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    Are there any structural differences between a lion and a tiger? I never said to show me different kinds interbreeding, I said to show me organisms with different structure interbreeding. I defined kind. Your avoiding the issue, infact ants date back to 60 million years according to you guys...
  11. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    The best I can do is to tell you that kind is based on morphology. To see if this holds us, can you give me an example of two organisms that are structurally different that can interbreed? I'm not really sure what your trying to say here. Why would we not expect to see new structures arising...
  12. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    Classification can be difficult, and really being able to say exactly what a kind of species is, isn't the most important thing, rather establishing whether ogansims can change structurally. It's simple though, look at a wolf and a domestic dog, they have all the same structures. An african wild...
  13. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    No, I told you exactly what a kind is, it's based on morphology. An anaconda and a garden snake aren't related, just as a love bird and a parrot aren't related. It would be like saying that all fish are related, which is ofcourse what you believe. There are basic general families of life. Have...
  14. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    First, I just spent over an hour writing a very lengthy response, and when I submitted it, it said I was a participant in the debate or something like that and I lost the entire post I worked on! I'm really angry about it! Do you know what might have happened squawk? With that being said, I'll...
  15. M

    Debate: Does evidence support neo-darwinian evolution

    I'll define kind, I guess I forgot about it. Kind is based on morphology. For example wolves and dogs are the same kind, they all have the exact same structures, and have all the same bones in the same locations, and the same number of bones. Where are these transitions showing the number of...
Back
Top