So evolution, this debate has been done over and over again. I guess it doesn’t hurt to go over it again. I previously had a lengthy debate with James on this, at one point in the debate James had lost it and I had to call the debate off as he could not intellectually defend himself. So anyway lets get the ball rolling, however before do that let me mention that I do not proofread my posts and my grammar sucks so there will be typographical errors in this post, and I do not want someone pointing that out to be – I also happen to be a dyslexic. Now, firstly any propagator of the theory of evolution always states that life started in the water, which is a pretty strong hypothesis however like all theories it has its pitfalls. The majority of the earth is covered in water here is an image of the earth taken view space: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! now anyone can see this is factual claim. I would like to ask the propagators and the proliferators of the theory of evolution why would land animals (Side note: for the sake of argument we will also let humans fall into this category) which were originally in the sea as the theory of evolution states put themselves at a serious and catastrophic disadvantage if true that animals originally evolved out of fish like creatures. Why would animals evolve out of the sea and start colonizing the land? This does not seem to make any sense – now I have herd the argument over and over again that the land was better for the animals as there was abundant of food and less threat, this argument is weak at best for the reason that. Adaptation to the new environment would have had to been rapid, what happens if you take a fish out of the see and put it on the land? (Done thinking?) It dies we all know evolution takes a very long time and this adaptation would had to be abrupt which would contradict evolution at a none microscopic level throughout the world we would see fossil evidence we would see abrupt changes in the fossil record, yet we don’t. Even so, why would animals move out of the sea where there were abundant recourses? Why move onto the land where there was danger natural disasters the climate ect, ect. Also, why would the evidence appear to be in one zone? I.e. Africa? Furthermore, we would also see fossils that are going through a transition and are caught in the middle, just because something is “evolving” into another species doesn’t mean it can’t die why do we not find this in the fossil record?
Evolution is just an idea created by man to explain the unexplainable. In actuality, there is just a long list of creatures that Chuck Norris allows to live.
You also happen to be uneducated in even the basics of biology and evolution, a religiously brainwashed and indoctrinated child, and a bothersome loathsome annoying troll who is incapable of, and unwilling to, conducting a logical argument. For all these reasons, I strongly urge people to not waste their time “debating” with this established troll.
Whether I am a troll or not I still have an argument. Me being a troll doesn't nullify my argument. Oh and by the way... You are a precociously babbling subhuman and a maladjusted, enema-addicted cacophonous catastrophe
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I COULD ELABORATE... but that should be clear enough... -MT
Evolution is simply a myth the Flying Spaghetti Monster allows us to entertain for His own amusement. The amusing part being, nobody who believes in evolution is alllowed into His heaven (complete with stripper factory and beer volcano)!
You don’t have an argument in the first place, fool. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Nothing that you’ve said even remotely resembles the theory of evolution. It’s simply your own uneducated fantasy strawman version. There’s nothing to discuss.
muslim if you have discussed this before then you would know that scientists treat evolution and abiogenesis as two different topics
The theory of evolution is the equivalent of the "earth is flat" theory; just modernized. You just have to train yourself to see and recognize bullshit for what it is. The true fact is that humans will never know, quantitatively speaking, their state of affairs because that type of knowledge is impossible. It is impossible because there is no such thing as time travel and no one was alive to record these events taking place (maybe Chuck Norris). So, any theory is just speculation, even evolution.
All we ever have is speculation, confirmed to a greater or lesser degree. Evolution is speculation confirmed to a high degree.
I believe it is thought that those creatures first because amphibious (i.e. lived both in the sea and on land) so that they could lay their eggs where predators could not get at them. Natural disasters (rare) are not as serious a threat as other animals eating your eggs/newborns (probably numerous and actively seeking). The next step would be the development of species that could make use of land based plant life. The rest is l'histoire.
