Atheists, Agnostics, and Anti-theists of ModDB
Educational
A group for those without religion, as well as those who oppose it. Atheism and Agnosticism and Anti-theism.
crcoduck
(view original)
Post a comment
Description
man I hate Kirk Cameron
isnt that was evolution is though? its it changing from one species to another? aka macro-evolution
Yes and no. It doesn't work this way. For one, dinosaurs and reptiles parted was several 100 million years ago, so you won't see a "crocoduck". Instead, what you might see is for example, a population of ducks getting gradually longer, and pointier beaks to catch fish, if that would aid their survival. Evolution is very gradual, not sudden jumps. A new species may differ from the 'old' one just by not being able to produce fertile offspring with its ancestor-species.
Yes but its still quite an outrages idea of creatures becoming something entirely different. By the way there's tons of evidence of humans coexisting with dinosaurs. The bible actually mentions them you know? Their mentioned in the book of Job.
The Bible doesn't mentioned dinosaurs, and there is no evidence for humans living with dinosaurs. Unless you mean Birds.
It is not an outrageous idea. It just takes a lot of time.
Read the 41 chapter of Job. It discribes a creature that is large, deadly and dangerous. (sounds like a dragon or a dinosaur to me) and: ""Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox. What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly! Its tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are close-knit. Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like rods of iron. It ranks first among the works of God,
yet its Maker can approach it with his sword. The hills bring it their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby. Under the lotus plants it lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh. The lotuses conceal it in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround it." (Job 40:15-22 NIV) that is God speaking, and the creature which is discribed sounds like a herbivore dinosaur.
Or it could be just an elephant.
Sounds like an Elephant, Hippo, or Rhino to me.
Do any of them have a tail like a cedar? And sorry for using the NIV that translation has problems, KJV is better. Also have you even shearched up Job chapter 41? It's most likely too long to fit here.
If you actually look up the original translation you would see it isactually refering to the amimals ***** and not a tail
Nope it does not:
Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares. (Job 40:15-24 KJV)
I still see nothing except the fact that it has a tail and is strong that makes it a dinosaur. Why doesn't God just say, a big lizard-bird hybrid to make it simple then?
God was makeing a point by mentioning such a powerful creature like a dinosaur. He did just want to explain it nice and simply. By the way please read he next chaper, Job 41, it's supper interesiting since it takes about another creature that is extinct now.
And? This is irrelevant. Honestly, I find it gives too little information on this creature to even really tell what it is.
It clearly doesn't fit any modern creature so the creature that it discribes is extinct.
the orignal translation is more along the line of ***** like a cedar,
its suppose to be a gaint bll with a hude ****
Listen that's the KJV, if you got anything more "original" show it!
It says the tail SWAYS like a cedar. A cedar is a branch of a tree which just moves when hit by wind, just like a ****.
It's a hippo for sure -_-
Do hippo's have tails like cedars? Also the next chapter discribes a creature that can breath fire:) can you relate that to any modern day creature?
Well, there has been discussions of dinosaurs and man co-existing in the past. For example, there have been found footprints made same time by dinosaurs and humans. Bible.ca Well, it is an bible page i know lol, but that was just first page i came by lol. I don't expect anyone to beleave in that, but it overall dinosaur story raises questions.
Like, why is there so many tales of ''Dragons'' in cultures around the entire world (England, Indians, China etc.). I myself beleave that there is some truth buried in there, since there was no records of dinosaurs that time, nor excavating bones, but yet there are descriptions of giant lizards and reptiles etc. The stories told ages ago will change over time, but some base truth is still in the stories.
Wrong. Those footprints are dinosaur footprints, not human footprints.
Are you trying to say dragons are real? If they are, we will need to get the Dovahkiin. Lol, just joking. But seriously...
If we can't find actual evidence of these fire-breathing dragons, then doesn't this even make the Bible look less believable now that it is bringing in more mythical creatures? First it was unicorns, now dragons.
Okay I laughed when I saw the skyrim reference, you just made my day! (I love skyrim!!!) anyways that's not the point of this comment, so dragons could have exist, chemically it's possible to "burn" stuff while being a creature. En.m.wikipedia.org so dragons could have been dinosaurs that had the ability to "breath fire" it's not that unlikely, also so many cultures all over the world know what a dragon is, (they never saw one in their life time but they know from their ansestors stories which might have been based on facts) Also where are unicorns mentioned in the bible?
Lol at Skyrim reference xD
But yes, i was just posting an possibility lol. As ElfFriend mentioned, stories start from somewhere, and i dont think people that had no contact whatsoever made up so similar things (Dragons or w.e mythical things) just by coincidence. So, there has to be some truth buried in there, even if it is altered over time (Cause we all know stories will change over time).
But we cant prove the dragons existed, because we cant create whole image after bones (like how did they look inside, what color skin etc.), we dont know that and we cant prove that as well. For all we know, T-Rex could have been breathing fire lol, but we cant prove it cause we dont know how the T-Rex interior was made up, we only know how it roughly looks by building skeleton. So, anything is possible.
Exacly, I agree entirely!
here is something that might help you understand
"The primary issue with this argument is that no academic with a post-doctorate degree in any relevant life science has ever claimed that evolution takes place in such an immediately obvious manner (that is, in a pseudo-Chimera-esque manner). In fact, all evolutionary biologists agree that evolution in such a manner (known as "genetic saltation") is so monumentally improbable that, for all intents and purposes, it is considered impossible. Any person with an adequate understanding of evolution (read: neither Comfort nor Cameron) will know that evolution does not occur in "leaps and bounds", as the crocoduck implies.
The above issues are compounded by the fact that the crocoduck is only accepted as a logical attempt to debunk evolution by Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron and their associates. It also brings up the logical question of having to find similar examples of saltation, say dolphigiraffes. Following that logic, we would have to find an example of saltation between the crocoduck and a dolphigiraffe (a crocoduckodolphigiraffe). It soon becomes clear that the crocoduck is simply an irrelevant, never-ending strawman.
"There is no reason evolution would require a crocoduck (or similar organism) for the theory to be valid. Even IF genetic saltation of this magnitude DID occur, there is yet another basic error made. Ducks did not descend from crocodiles and crocodiles did not descend from ducks, making such a union between the two species completely illogical. In fact, if a crocoduck *was* found, it would be evidence against evolution as we understand it rather than in support of it."
You make a good point I clearly see you studdied this. However if evolution is true we should be able to see creatures having improved genetics, so far I know that purebred dogs happen to have health issues. Clearly a solution is to not have purebred animals. However I also learned that humans have a bunch of defective genes in their DNA. So that causes a problem to the evolution theory because it is decent proof of stuff breaking down not improving. And the theory of evolution forces the idea of humans evolving out of apes. Which would imply imporvememt. So what happened that creatures were improving in the past while there is so many errors in human DNA today? Should humans be "improving" according to evolution? Also why have so many amazing wonders been build by ancient humans? The bible provides the answer for that. Cain build a city and named it after his son, cain's desendences were masters of metal works and of music. The tower of babel was built by people that had a common langue. (look at the technological advances since english became a common trade langue) there is proof of people being highly intelegent and loosing that information. I hate to add the fact that there were sorcerers in the Bible but it's true and it proves that people have been loosing information. Even though it's evil and it was probably good that such evil acts were lost. Some of it might have been good information. Acts covers sorcery in the bible, and it does so as if the fact was well known at that time without the need to specify what they were doing. People burned people that knew about herbs claiming that they were witches. That was unfortunate because now the drug companies sell very harmful medication when all that the patient should do is fast for a few days/weeks, or drink some herbs which don't have side effects. Fasting is actully mentioned in the bible, because God cares about human health.
Evolution is NOT improvement. It's change and adaptation to the environment.
But doesn't a monkey turning into a human imply that evolution is an improvement?
No, because the monkey creatures from which humans (and other apes) descended have several body attributes that humans don't have. These include a furcoat, a tail and hand-like feet.
Okay next time your lost in the jungle ask an ape for directions since what you just said is that they were better then us. So why did we become intelegent and they kept being dumb?
Depends on what you mean by improvement. And we did not decend from monkeys. We decended from - and still are - Apes. Key difference: Monkeys have tails, Apes don't.
In fact we lost genes to makes us humans. For one we lost the genes that inhibit cerebral growth in chimpanzees and other apes, which is what makes our brains humongous.
Wow fascinating! But this doesn't explain how complex life could evolve from singlecelled creatures.
no it is just change, the idea of evolution as improvement has not seen as serious for about a hundred years.
catch up to the times please
yet evolution needs to improve not deteriorate, why else had singlecelled creatures become something extremely complex? also as far as i have learned evolution is being taught as an improving system. (i might be wrong since i haven't learned much evolution)
No, that is _WRONG_. Evolution is NOT improvement or deterioration, it's change. That's all that is. The reason single-celled organisms became more complex is because more complex creatures survive better, and thus pass on their genes more.
You answered the why, but you didn't even mention the how. Anyways change can't possibly be good and you say it's not bad either then what is it? Something's changing so it can't just be called change.
Yes, it is just change. Change in such a way, that the species can reproduce and survive better. That's the only "better" there is in Evolution.
As for the how: Natural Selection and Genetic Mutation.
Okay except don't you think that a human is better then a bacteria? Which one can change the environment to fit their needs? Which one can think? Which one would you rather be?
Define better.
Bacteria are better than humans in the sense that they reproduce more, for example.
Better I don't know I left that for you to interpet based on my next few sentences.
monkeys don't agrue nonsense and use Logical fallacies in arguements.
I would say its the opposite of an improvement
monkeys arnt dumbasses
So like I said next time your lost in the jungle ask a monkey for directions.
Well, that'll probably work better than asking directions from God.
If that's what you believe then fine, I would disagree, And we could take this to pm, since all this debating is driving certain people crazy. Also how can asking a monkey a better idea then praying? God answers prays, also he gave the stars so that we can see where we're going so that would be like getting lost with a compass that you don't/know how to use.
continueing...
here I will now try & explain this part.
during the jurrssic period (which was something like 190 million years ago) there were some small troodon or raptor like dinosaurs living in the area that will eventually become north america nd norhern asia.
as the jurrasic ended the earth began to cool done from it time of high temps and began to form ice caps in northern latitudes. now these troodon like dinos would have been fast active warm blooded animals which were well suited to the warm climates but as it cooled they came under stress. somewhere in this time of change one ittle dino had a mutation that caused his water tight scales to be somewhat divided instead of flat. for sme reason this animal was more popular with the lady dinos than the smooth scale dinos, over a million years the divisions in the scale became more pronounced till they started to become like proto feathers. these proto fathers couldnt make them, they act more like downy fur which hlp the litle dinos survive in the colder climate and reproduce. over a fewmore million years these little dinos started to use them to attracr mates. separation of population and specialzation caused new variaties of this little dino to show up. as they specialized to there niches they got more and more differen till they became different spiecies of litte dino. ove millions of yers some got bigger some got smaller,some of them got larger feathers which eventually some learned to use to glide and over millions of years of evolution to fly these became what we now call birds. birds are nothing more than heavily specialized little dinos that had an odd scale mutation hundreds of millions of years ago that helped he to thrive because it was usefull at the time. there ae no transition fossils because there is no transition just a slow process of sex and babies with minor mutations that can very very slowly change everything.
This process occurs with all life on this planet. everything from bacteria to human beings. it is random and sex driven passing on traits that help reproduction sometime for the better sometimes for the worst.
an example of this with humans would be that male humans try and find mates that they see as attractive. these traits will be passed down after proctreation and make more babies with these traits. if you look at the skulls of early modern humans (**** saipens saipens) they are differnet in shape and look from skulls from 1000 years age, and those look different then those 100 years ago and of those of humans right now. recently read a study in a credible scientific journal that dicussed this with early and late polonyisan skulls and thier rocker jaws which are only found in those of polonysian decent.I have also had a book on research into the skulls of europeans from the late stoneage tothe modern day, I will try and find the name of it for you (thouh all my stuff is mess up, moving back to college).