ID and Probability calculations

[Newbirth]

That's because it takes millions of years.

what part of, you have had millions of years do you not understand? Today is ten million years from ten million years ago.

 

[Newbirth]

You said in post #499 Temujin believed in magic, the magic of a fish turning into a mammal.

of course he does.

Temujin said in post #494 it wasn't magic if there was enough time.

But there was enough time...today is twenty million years from twenty million years ago..how much more time does he need? We are yet to see fish evolve into mammals.

That's all my post was commenting on. Nothing about whether fish actually did evolve into mammals, just about Whether Temujin said that it would be magic or not, given enough time.

Sir the time has already passed, evolutionists believe the earth is over 4 billion years old, how much more time do you need?

 

[Newbirth]

You believe a story with talking animals and a ludicrously short timescale is true? Of course I want to sell you a bridge.

But I am not buying nor is anyone who believes in a story with talking animals and a short timescale. No one believes you because you don't have the bridge to sell that you claim to have. Here is the thing. You believe in a 4.5 billion-year-old spinning ball in space and you believe you have a bridge to sell. Go figure...Do you see the pattern? You believe in things that don't exist.

 

[JNelson]

You showed nothing. You claimed the dates were in error, but provided no evidence to support your claim.

And yet you haven’t shown any evidence for your claims. All the dating methods have many assumptions which is why you get all these supposed old ages.

Another claim without evidence. Science has ample evidence from astronomy and geology that the earth is about 5 billion years old. Biological evidence is not needed to show that an old earth is correct.

I consider 6,000 years to be old.

No you are not proving anything. You are trying to use a literal interpretation of Genesis. You have not even shown us that the literal YEC interpretation is correct; there are many other interpretations of Genesis available within Christianity, all of which are claimed to be correct.

Wow, humans disagree with each other, who would’ve thought? Can you prove that all scientists agree with each other on everything?

Says the poster who accepts the literal truth of a story with a talking serpent and, later, a talking donkey and a talking bush.

Say the one who believes in the magical fairytale where frogs become humans.

Hmmm, I have this bridge I can sell you...

Is that the magical bridge where a rabbit crosses it and becomes a single moose?

 

[Newbirth]

Your very distant ancestors, like mine, were fish.

I said to speak for yourself.

You and I are the same species, I suspect.

No, you are an Aquaman.

Yes, they did.

so why are they not evolving anymore? Today is 50 million years from fifty years ago. You are telling me that none of those fishes evolved from fifty million years ago or forty million years or twenty million years?

Which missing ancestor do you want?

The ones that you cannot find.

You do realise that the God of the gaps argument is one of the silliest in the creationist armoury?

I don't have a God of the gaps argument.

The question has been answered thousands of times.

No, it has not. Today is thirty million years from thirty million years ago. How long does it take for your fish to evolve into a mammal?

It is cliche of the ignorant rube who thinks he has discovered a killer question.

No, it is not. You think that you have dodged the question. Every day is the beginning of a million years or 2 million years or 3 million years. Every day is also one million or 2 million or 3 million years from 1,2,or3 million years ago. Since you claim evolution is continually taking place, time is not an issue...We ought to be seeing new species evolving.

 

[JNelson]

Read "Climbing Mount Improbable"

Are you a library clerk?

 

[Eightcrackers]

what part of, you have had millions of years do you not understand? Today is ten million years from ten million years ago.

You can't see something happen in real time that takes millions of years.

Since you claim evolution is continually taking place, time is not an issue...We ought to be seeing new species evolving.

You can't see something happen in real time that takes millions of years.

"If Pluto has completed millions of orbits, why have we never seen one"

is equally inane.

 

[Temujin]

of course he does.

But there was enough time...today is twenty million years from twenty million years ago..how much more time does he need? We are yet to see fish evolve into mammals.

We have. Fish have evolved into mammals. You missed it. It happened millions of years ago.

Sir the time has already passed, evolutionists believe the earth is over 4 billion years old, how much more time do you need?

It's already happened, hundreds of millions of years ago.

 

[Temujin]

I said to speak for yourself.

No, you are an Aquaman.

so why are they not evolving anymore? Today is 50 million years from fifty years ago. You are telling me that none of those fishes evolved from fifty million years ago or forty million years or twenty million years?

The ones that you cannot find.

I don't have a God of the gaps argument.

No, it has not. Today is thirty million years from thirty million years ago. How long does it take for your fish to evolve into a mammal?

No, it is not. You think that you have dodged the question. Every day is the beginning of a million years or 2 million years or 3 million years. Every day is also one million or 2 million or 3 million years from 1,2,or3 million years ago. Since you claim evolution is continually taking place, time is not an issue...We ought to be seeing new species evolving.

We can see human beings evolving. https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/humans-are-evolving-an-extra-artery-in-the-arm/
If you are expecting to see Ping! A new species, then you need to go back to basics.

 

[rossum]

If you are expecting to see Ping! A new species, then you need to go back to basics.

If you are at the right place and the right time, you can: see Lyko (2017). A single mutation in a sexually reproducing crayfish species produced a new parthenogenetically reproducing crayfish species, reproductively isolated from its ancestor. The change probably happened in the 1990s or thereabouts.

 

[rossum]

All the dating methods have many assumptions which is why you get all these supposed old ages.

Your sources are lying to you, again. YEC is so scientifically bad that all YEC has to support its claims is lies. That is why their websites lie to you so often.

Scientific dating methods have far fewer assumptions than your sources are telling you. For example, isochron dating methods can determine the initial amount of daughter product in a sample as well as its date. Did you sources mention that? If they didn't, then they are lying to you.

I consider 6,000 years to be old.

You are wrong there. The Sumerian King List shows that the earth has been around for a lot longer than 6,000 years. If you are going to treat a text from the Ancient Near East as good evidence, then I will do the same. King En-men-lu-ana ruled for 43,200 years and there were other kings who reigned for over 30,000 years. Naturally, you accept the truth of this document because it mentions the Flood, between king Ubara-Tutu (reigned 18,600 years) and king Jushur (reigned 1,200 years).

Your 6,000 year old earth is wrong, and I have ancient writings to prove it.

 

[Newbirth]

We can see human beings evolving. https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/humans-are-evolving-an-extra-artery-in-the-arm/
If you are expecting to see Ping! A new species, then you need to go back to basics.

You can see human beings evolving into what?

 

[Temujin]

You can see human beings evolving into what?

Slightly different humans. What is your obsession with speciation?

 

[Newbirth]

We have. Fish have evolved into mammals.

Which fish evolved into which mammal and why aren't fishes still evolving into humans since there are still fish species from millions of years ago?

You missed it. It happened millions of years ago.

Then you missed it also. You were not there a million years to confirm it were you?

It's already happened, hundreds of millions of years ago.

That is like saying you saw evolution happen hundreds of millions of years ago but it is not happening anymore.

 

[Newbirth]

Slightly different humans. What is your obsession with speciation?

Where? And how is slightly different humans anything close to fishes evolving to mammals? Mammals are not slightly different fishes, are they?

 

[Newbirth]

You can't see something happen in real time that takes millions of years.

Well, today is the tenth million year from ten million years ago. Why do we have to wait ten million years from today?

You can't see something happen in real time that takes millions of years.

Of course, you can. Today in real-time is also the 15 millionth year from 15 million years ago. Are you saying that nothing evolved in 15 million years?

"If Pluto has completed millions of orbits, why have we never seen one"is equally inane.

If God created the universe why have we not seen him create it, would also be equally inane.

 

[Newbirth]

You are wrong there. The Sumerian King List shows that the earth has been around for a lot longer than 6,000 years. If you are going to treat a text from the Ancient Near East as good evidence, then I will do the same.

Are you saying that you accept it all as good evisence?

King En-men-lu-ana ruled for 43,200 years and there were other kings who reigned for over 30,000 years.

So you are saying that you accept as good evidence men lived for over 40,000 years, is that correct?

Naturally, you accept the truth of this document because it mentions the Flood, between king Ubara-Tutu (reigned 18,600 years) and king Jushur (reigned 1,200 years).

Now you are saying that you accept the flood that wiped out the entire earth..

Your 6,000 year old earth is wrong, and I have ancient writings to prove it.

If you accept these things then your evolution theory would be wrong and the same ancient writings prove it.

 

[rossum]

Which fish evolved into which mammal and why aren't fishes still evolving into humans since there are still fish species from millions of years ago?

You need to learn about the existence of ecological niches. It is very difficult to fill an already filled ecological niche. The "intelligent land animal" niche is already filled by humans. Any fish-man newly emerged from the water would not be able to compete with humans and would not survive -- just see any old horror movie like "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms".

For a lot of evolution, you need something like the dino-killer meteor, which opens up a lot of ecological niches by killing the species that currently inhabit those niches.

Yet more new stuff for you to learn I'm afraid.

 

[rossum]

Are you saying that you accept it all as good evisence?

The first word in that sentence was "If".

So you are saying that you accept as good evidence men lived for over 40,000 years, is that correct?

Just as you are saying that you accept Genesis as good evidence that men lived for over 700 years.

Those numbers, in the King List and the Bible (as well as in Chinese royal lists) are evidence that mythological histories exaggerated the age to which men lived, especially of significant men like kings and tribal ancestors.

Now you are saying that you accept the flood that wiped out the entire earth..

No, I am accepting a large local flood in ancient Mesopotamia. That is what the King List, the Epic of Gilgamesh and Genesis are talking about; a very large flood in the region form which all three texts originated.

You can easily see that ancient texts, such as the King List, are not to be taken literally. You need to apply that insight to other texts from the same area and the same time.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Well, today is the tenth million year from ten million years ago. Why do we have to wait ten million years from today?

Because that's how long it takes for one species to transition into another.