Evolution happens. That's a fact.

reply to post by yeti101


Pics or it didn't happen !

You know that old chessnut and I'm still having trouble with triceratops ?

Wouldn't there be some great big gigantic bird fossils if they evolved from the dinos ?

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by SpearMint

 

Can you please at least try to use your brain here. Having wings, they can fly. This opens up a whole new world of places to live, as well as depending on different food sources. Being higher up is warmer, as well as feathers for insulation and places to shelter. There are probably many other factors at play too. You're arguing with science here... you're making yourself look silly.

If i look silly ? It must be in someone elses eyes besides my own and I don't give a rats ass about that my fellow member. Shudder to think.

So what you're saying now is you know how the dinos went extinct ? Or atleast you know it wasn't a meteor strike.
Right ?

edit on 23-5-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

Ok you're obviously not paying attention to anything I say, I give up on you. You're not the learning type...

Originally posted by intrptr

Originally posted by SpearMint

 

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by SpearMint

 

There is no such thing as de-evolution. It can't happen, evolution is always moving forward.

Then we can strike the 2nd law of thermodynamics? God luck with that. Everything is wearing out. The thing about life systems is that they hold back the second law for a time but eventually...

What are you talking about? De-evolution can't happen, time moves forward. Even if something were to lose features, that's still evolution.

What am I talking about? You never heard of Entropy? All physical systems are in a continual state of decay. Thats the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It makes it impossible for life to "evolve" as you put it. You might as well say, "Life happens." Evolution can't explain away physics.

This is not a difficult concept. I'll try to give you an example; let's say the DNA is an information storage system, much like the hard drive in your computer. Both are subject to deterioration. Let's take a HD full of data with a stable lifespan of 30 years, now what do you do before the HD expires? You buy a new HD and copy your data there. Another 30 years, repeat the process. New medium, same data. Compare this to DNA and consider your entropy problem solved...

Originally posted by votan
reply to post by SpearMint

 

adaptation is evolution?? what??

Hereditary adaptation is evolution. But no, adaptation is not the same as evolution.

reply to post by randyvs


cameras weren't invented back then but the fossil record tells us the story

reply to post by randyvs


Ever heard of archeopteryx? Not all dinosaurs were big you know....

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by randyvs

 

fossils are better than pics

Alright, we've reached an agreement.

Of course they are my good man.

reply to post by yeti101


Nothing will get through to him, he's too arrogant in his beliefs and unwilling to accept anything.

I don't know if this is due to lack of knowledge or just plain ignorance, but it's tiring.

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
reply to post by randyvs

 

Ever heard of archeopteryx? Not all dinosaurs were big you know....

Course I know that ! Well that's what I've been led to believe anyway. so what you're saying now is only certain sizes qualify as candidates for evolution ?

If I get you right ?

Spear

Nothing will get through to him, he's too arrogant in his beliefs and unwilling to accept anything.

You're wrong ! I'm trying to capture exactly what this theory is saying if you haven't noticed. By the way the same can be said of you.

Sorry if I'm skeptical of what you believe to be true.

reply to post by randyvs


hey i edited it :p

Originally posted by randyvs

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
reply to post by randyvs

 

Ever heard of archeopteryx? Not all dinosaurs were big you know....

Course I know that ! Well that's what I've been led to believe anyway. so what you're saying now is only certain sizes qualify as candidates for evolution ?

If I get you right ?

That's not what he said at all. Jesus...

Whats this talk of adaptation, micro-evolution..like its not evolution... It is part of the overall evolution, these micro evolution, and some adaptation are things we can notice in our lifetime, but all these accumulates and produce the overall change in structure..

i think some of you think evolution is like from A to B in like 10,000 yrs.. NO! i doubt even a noticeable, significant adaptation would occur that fast.

I seen few mention about Wolves to dog is adaptation and they are the same species, and i bet at the same times you would disagree that humans and apes shared same ancestry. Wolves to dogs is just the start, and apes to humans are just long way ahead.

Maybe If dogs kept domesticated for longer time in the future, they would start showing characteristic changes, maybe this will make them lose the strength in their legs because they don't hunt anymore, the canine teeth might be shorter because they don't rip out meat from preys, eventually their face structures change to accommodate to human interactions and maybe their intelligence might increase and one thing will lead to another and you might have intelligent dog that might "talk" back to you but of course,. it will take millions of years and the right adaptation path for this evolutionary process to take.

Micro Evolution, Adaptation, are all part of overall evolution.. stop picking and choosing because you want to agree to the fact but don't want to admit that evolutionist are right. That would definitely make magical man from happy land mad!

I'd just ignore this randy guy.
No offense man, but you sound like a troll. Before taking part in topics of this complexicity I'd suggest you do some proper background research. Maybe you have, but you kinda come out sounding like you know nothing about even the basics of the topics discussed.

reply to post by randyvs


Ok, but you're completely misinterpreting everything anyone says.

reply to post by Kryom

I'd just ignore this randy guy.
No offense man, but you sound like a troll. Before taking part in topics of this complexicity I'd suggest you do some proper background research. Maybe you have, but you kinda come out sounding like you know nothing about even the basics of the topics discussed.

Well that would be a good reason for all the question marks I suppose, or perhaps I'm just coming off that way for a reason I've already stated ?

No one has asked me to goaway yet ?

Originally posted by randyvs

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
reply to post by randyvs

 

Ever heard of archeopteryx? Not all dinosaurs were big you know....

Course I know that ! Well that's what I've been led to believe anyway. so what you're saying now is only certain sizes qualify as candidates for evolution ?

If I get you right ?

I don't recall writing that anywhere in my post at all.

Tell me, is it fun twisting the words of others in order to make yourself look like an idiot or are you just a really bad troll?

Originally posted by SpearMint
reply to post by randyvs

 

Ok, but you're completely misinterpreting everything anyone says.

No all I've done is ask questions. That's really it.

Originally posted by randyvs

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
reply to post by randyvs

 

Ever heard of archeopteryx? Not all dinosaurs were big you know....

Course I know that ! Well that's what I've been led to believe anyway. so what you're saying now is only certain sizes qualify as candidates for evolution ?

Actually, It could be a possibility that the small dinosaurs had better chance to evolve due to them not being on the top of the food chain and need of alternate food source over a long period of time unlike their T-Rex cousins who were happy being on the top.

The small ones probably started gliding in the air with webbed wing like structures to consume fruits or tree dwelling animals, and eventually started producing feathers. Of course these are just speculation of what we seen from records and fossils

reply to post by 1littlewolf

Tell me, is it fun twisting the words of others in order to make yourself look like an idiot or are you just a really bad troll?

In noway did I twist your words Mon. I merely deduced that you must be saying something along side of what you originally said.

For me that's what I got from it.

reply to post by luciddream

Actually, It could be a possibility that the small dinosaurs had better chance to evolve due to them not being on the top of the food chain and need of alternate food source over a long period of time unlike their T-Rex cousins who were happy being on the top.

Hey thanks for the answer.