what's your thought on this

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to ProperKnob


Did you know there are about 9 to 10 million species of life, and your saying that the whole lot changed from one thing into another thing.

You see there has always been a horse, and a dog, and a cat, and a elephant, and a dolphin,....from the beginning of time.

Sometimes within 1 species, lets say the dog family, you find 500 dif ...[text shortened]... they teach it as science to the kids, and get their big fat pay check for being highly educated.

Listen, go read some books.

You pontificate about subjects that you clearly have no understanding about, be it science or religion.

The idiocy of your views can best be summed up by this gem of a statement -

You see there has always been a horse, and a dog, and a cat, and a elephant, and a dolphin,....from the beginning of time.

So pray tell, when was the beginning of time?

How did all these oxygen breating animals survive when there was little oxygen on our planet 'from the beginning of time'?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Listen, go read some books.

You pontificate about subjects that you clearly have no understanding about, be it science or religion.

The idiocy of your views can best be summed up by this gem of a statement -

[b]You see there has always been a horse, and a dog, and a cat, and a elephant, and a dolphin,....from the beginning of time. ...[text shortened]... ating animals survive when there was little oxygen on our planet 'from the beginning of time'?[/b]

to Proper Knob

One ounce of insight can defeat 10 tons of scientific speculative data.

Dear me, what can i do with you, your criticism of my gem of a statement, shows your ignorance!.......the statement (the beginning of time) is a poetic statement that people use candidly in conversation, for example a lover might say to his girlfreind, i will love you to the end of time, (but of course he wont)

So like a fool, you have taken my statement literally, so it turns out you are the idiot, ( sorry for using that word , but you did first )

And the reason you critisized me, is because you have nothing sensible to say, and you make a cheap shot at me , which has back fired in your red face.

vishva

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to thwitehead

A wolf is a dog, it belongs to the dog species, but people dont call it a dog, they call it a wolf.

So when the wolf (which is a dog really) mates with another dog, you get a dog, da da

vishva

It appears that you are correct that they are now classified as the same species - they are different subspecies.
So, lets change our example to that of a Wolf (Canis lupus ) and a Coyote (Canis latrans ) which are separate species but can mate and have offspring. What species is the offspring?

Originally posted by vishvahetu
So like a fool, you have taken my statement literally, so it turns out you are the idiot, ( sorry for using that word , but you did first )

If he totally misunderstood you, then it is not he that is the fool, but you, for your total failure to communicate followed by your attempt at blaming the reader for your poor communication skills.
So what did you mean by your statement? Could you put it in less poetic terms so as to be understood?

Originally posted by twhitehead
If he totally misunderstood you, then it is not he that is the fool, but you, for your total failure to communicate followed by your attempt at blaming the reader for your poor communication skills.
So what did you mean by your statement? Could you put it in less poetic terms so as to be understood?

to twhitehead

the statement is very clear, i said the bone diggers have falsely concuded that an human is morphing into something else because they didnt realise that even in the human species there are different types of human species, and they foud bones of 2 different types. ( thats clear communication )

vishva

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to twhitehead

the statement is very clear, i said the bone diggers have falsely concuded that an human is morphing into something else because they didnt realise that even in the human species there are different types of human species, and they foud bones of 2 different types. ( thats clear communication )

vishva

Except that is not the statement in question.
It is this statement that I want clarified:
You see there has always been a horse, and a dog, and a cat, and a elephant, and a dolphin,....from the beginning of time.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Except that is not the statement in question.
It is this statement that I want clarified:
[b]You see there has always been a horse, and a dog, and a cat, and a elephant, and a dolphin,....from the beginning of time. [/b]

to twhitehead

Theres always been a cat, a dog, a horse and so on, means that they didnt morph from something else like the evolutionist say they do......a horse has always been a horse and a cat has always been a cat.

vishva

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to twhitehead

Theres always been a cat, a dog, a horse and so on, means that they didnt morph from something else like the evolutionist say they do......a horse has always been a horse and a cat has always been a cat.

vishva

So can you answer his questions? He wanted to know when the 'beginning of time' was or at least when did these animals first appear on earth. And do you believe the earth once could not support such life forms?

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to twhitehead

Theres always been a cat, a dog, a horse and so on, means that they didnt morph from something else like the evolutionist say they do......a horse has always been a horse and a cat has always been a cat.

vishva

I am interested to know why you believe this? Why do you dismiss the theory of evolution? Do you know enough about the theory to say that it is wrong, or do you just not like the implications of it?
If a wolf can morph into a poodle, a sausage dog, a greyhound and a bulldog, why are you so adamant that they cannot morph into a different species? What do you believe is so special about the species boundary?

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to Proper Knob

One ounce of insight can defeat 10 tons of scientific speculative data.

Dear me, what can i do with you, your criticism of my gem of a statement, shows your ignorance!.......the statement (the beginning of time) is a poetic statement that people use candidly in conversation, for example a lover might say to his girlfreind, i will love ...[text shortened]... sible to say, and you make a cheap shot at me , which has back fired in your red face.

vishva

But you have failed to produce any insight, let alone one ounce.

You just come up with vague, silly statements and when questioned about them you either say i've not understood you or you just ignore them.

So let's start with your statement -

You see there has always been a horse, and a dog, and a cat, and a elephant, and a dolphin,....from the beginning of time.

First question, when was the beginning of time in your opinion?

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to twhitehead

the statement is very clear, i said the bone diggers have falsely concuded that an human is morphing into something else because they didnt realise that even in the human species there are different types of human species, and they foud bones of 2 different types. ( thats clear communication )

vishva

Don't you think that the fact that these different species have different species names suggest to you that in fact the 'bone diggers' recognise that they are different species?

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Don't you think that the fact that these different species have different species names suggest to you that in fact the 'bone diggers' recognise that they are different species?

to avalanchthecat

There looking at bones from 2 different species of humans, lets say pigmys and Newyorkers, and they wrongly assume that man is evolving, but he,s not.!....there has always been those 2 speices from way back. da da

vishva

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to avalanchthecat

There looking at bones from 2 different species of humans, lets say pigmys and Newyorkers, and they wrongly assume that man is evolving, but he,s not.!....there has always been those 2 speices from way back. da da

vishva

Which two species?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Which two species?

to ProperKnob

I am making a point, and it doesnt matter if i say Newyorker or Australian or Aboriginal,......the thing is to know what the point is, and i think you do.

It is obvious that a pygmy and a white corcasian American from New York, are different speices of humans.

vishva

Originally posted by vishvahetu
to ProperKnob

I am making a point, and it doesnt matter if i say Newyorker or Australian or Aboriginal,......the thing is to know what the point is, and i think you do.

It is obvious that a pygmy and a white corcasian American from New York, are different speices of humans.

vishva

no, that's wrong. if two multicellular organisms can mate and produce offspring that is viable in the sense that it can itself reproduce, then they are the same species.