Jump to content
IGNORED

What makes a transitional organism transitional?


The Barbarian

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  6
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  4,265
  • Content Per Day:  2.92
  • Reputation:   2,302
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  05/03/2020
  • Status:  Offline

@one.opinion I'm not sure why it's even relevant. Theory of evolution, or any other theory will stand or fall on its merit, not on the basis of an adherents religious conviction. Seems like a red herring or a veiled ad hominem.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, teddyv said:

Seems like a red herring or a veiled ad hominem.

No reason it couldn’t be both…

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  23
  • Topic Count:  28
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,159
  • Content Per Day:  2.03
  • Reputation:   2,513
  • Days Won:  8
  • Joined:  01/20/2016
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

No reason it couldn’t be both…

No reason evolution theory won't fall on it's own 'merits.'  It is just another religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

8 hours ago, Sparks said:

No reason evolution theory won't fall on it's own 'merits.'  It is just another religion.

Hmmm… yet somehow, despite all the Kent Hovinds out there, the molecular basis for evolution remains a fact and evidence for broader evolution only strengthens with time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  23
  • Topic Count:  28
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,159
  • Content Per Day:  2.03
  • Reputation:   2,513
  • Days Won:  8
  • Joined:  01/20/2016
  • Status:  Offline

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Hmmm… yet somehow, despite all the Kent Hovinds out there, the molecular basis for evolution remains a fact and evidence for broader evolution only strengthens with time.

The Kent Hovinds destroy your argument, every time.  You could learn a lot from Kent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, Sparks said:

The Kent Hovinds destroy your argument, every time.  You could learn a lot from Kent.

This is an empty boast, with nothing to back it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  23
  • Topic Count:  28
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,159
  • Content Per Day:  2.03
  • Reputation:   2,513
  • Days Won:  8
  • Joined:  01/20/2016
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, one.opinion said:

This is an empty boast, with nothing to back it up.

Said by the person who has never seen Kent debate.  :emot-nod:

Well, if you think you can beat Kent in a debate, I invite you to try.  He debates people online where your answers will be preserved.  Put your money where mouth is.  :emot-nod:

Kent has a few rules like equal time for the many he will debate at the same time, no invectives or ad hominems, but you and @teddyv should give it a try. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  15
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,731
  • Content Per Day:  3.54
  • Reputation:   3,522
  • Days Won:  12
  • Joined:  11/27/2019
  • Status:  Offline

8 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Hmmm… yet somehow, despite all the Kent Hovinds out there, the molecular basis for evolution remains a fact and evidence for broader evolution only strengthens with time.

You mean like the genetic degeneration that should have wiped out humanity long ago, if we had been around for as long as molecules-to-man evolution claims?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

37 minutes ago, David1701 said:

You mean like the genetic degeneration that should have wiped out humanity long ago, if we had been around for as long as molecules-to-man evolution claims?

As always, I'm happy to look at evidence with you. Let's have an evidence-based conversation about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Said by the person who has never seen Kent debate.

You said earlier that Hovind "destroyed my argument", whatever that means. That's an empty boast since I've never debated him, nor ever plan to.

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Well, if you think you can beat Kent in a debate

I have no idea if I can "beat" him in a debate. I'm not interested in "beating" anyone.

These "debates" usually boil down to who can talk the fastest and loudest and look the most proud while doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...