[Replying to "A species could not exist unless it reproduced."]
Exactly That is why evolution is impossible
10 comments
No.
That's why we find fossils of creatures that don't exist now (or for a very long time) and we don't find fossils of things that exist now from a long time ago.
As George Carlin (my savior) said "Over 90% of every creature that ever lived on this planet doesn't exist anymore"
No.
That's why we find fossils of creatures that don't exist now (or for a very long time) and we don't find fossils of things that exist now from a long time ago.
As George Carlin (my savior) said "Over 90% of every creature that ever lived on this planet doesn't exist anymore"
Look at a rainbow. This bit is yellow, and that bit is red. But in between are many, many different shades of yellow, yellow-orange, orange, etc. WE DECIDE which bit we call yellow and which we call red, and in the same way WE DECIDE which fossil creature we call a human and which we call an ape. WE DEFINE the species, but just like the rainbow, there's a continuum (big word: look it up) in between.
“Exactly That is why evolution is impossible”
OOOOOOH! I get it.
You’re saying that members of a species only have members of the species as offspring. And that a tiger will not give birth to a cheetah.
This is one of those ‘true, however…’ statements. You’re right, but completely ignoring how evolution actually works. So, a pointless objection and certainly not disproof of evolutionary theory.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.