NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't think you said what you meant to say there, buddy. :)

Creationism, by it's very nature, is NOT a scientific theory, surely?

Shh! We should keep everyone on their toes!

I don't think you said what you meant to say there, buddy. :)

Creationism, by it's very nature, is NOT a scientific theory, surely?
Thank you kind sir :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

Thank you kind sir :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

Just thought I'd give you a quick heads-up, in case a roaming Creationist should happen upon it and make peculiar assumptions. :)

:fluffle:

Just thought I'd give you a quick heads-up, in case a roaming Creationist should happen upon it and make peculiar assumptions. :)

:fluffle:
And we wouldent want that happening ... could be months before my typo was done being quoted :P

And we wouldent want that happening ... could be months before my typo was done being quoted :P

You spoiled all the fun!

Let's just let this thread die in peace...





Shit, this bumps it, doesn't it?

No it isn't. See post above.



As far as I'm aware, the first birds came from feathered dinosaurs. Now, I've not looked into this, but as far as I'm concerned, it's not that big a leap. Said dinosaurs develop feathers. With these feathers on their arms, they can flap (perhaps glide) providing some kind of advantage. And so on and so forth. I very much doubt that they had to "grow" new limbs.



I've always been taught that there exist "insertion" mutations, wherein the genetic code is added to by one base. Seems like that would increase it...



I don't have the time or the knowledge to answer these, but I will tell you that 1->5 is Big Bang theory (or anything else) and has nothing to do with Evolution. Question 6 is Abiogenesis (sp?), again, it is outwith the bounds of the Theory of Evolution.

I apologise if the above quotes have already been refuted; I've not followed this thread as closely as I might have.

That long bit has been answered.