How can you claim wings are useless?

There are thousands of examples in nature of winged (and effective)
creatures.

Geese would never be able to migrate with out them. Eagles have other
enhancements that work with their wings to enable them to see prey at
altitude.

Vultures are able to smell at great distances so they may take (theres
that word again) wing and detect their food from the air.

I could go on an on but to do so would take away from the original
purpose of this thread.

I believe that evolution was created so that the earth would be able to
support life in all of its many places.

and I fully believe it works for other planets in this solar system we
just havn't explored them enough to know.

Uh. If you've been reading my posts- you should already know I meant
wings that weren't capable of allowing flight.

And I don't think it likely there is life in the solar system. It's
possible for Venus, Mars, and -maybe- Europa. But not very likely for
any of them. Not impossible, a one in thousands chance, but not
impossible.


However, in the rest of the trillions of stars in the univers,
surrounded by countless more planets and moons. It's innevitable. Even
if only one in a million worlds will have life.... that's still millions
of worlds with natural life.


And who knows, amongst those millions of living worlds- there may be
species like us, expanding and making life livable on the dead worlds.

Poetnartist wrote:
“The only way wings can "evolve" is if they do it in a single
generation. Period.”

Says who?

Check some of the space science web sites. there is a good one called 9
planets with it crossed out to read 8 planets.

there are at least 4 of the moons around the outer planets that show
signs of possible life.

Abra- you're forgetting- yours is an "affirmative" theory. You have to
prove me wrong. I place my challenges. Unless your theory can prove it's
still true under all conditions, it's not a true theory.


In fact, I could pose ANY claim. I could claim that "fur is
evolutionarily detrimental"- and you'd have to prove it is not. Of
course, that's an easy one. What I've posed, you've not explained. And
until someone can, that means the theory is incomplete and, therefor,
innacurate.

Oh- and the "signs" in the outer system aren't signs of life. They're
signs of tectonic behavior and liquid water. Which would give life a
chance of existing.


But it's not actually evidence of life.


Of course, if not in this solar system, then alien life is out there
somewhere else, so it's really only a matter of time.

Poetnartist wrote:
“Abra- you're forgetting- yours is an "affirmative" theory. You have to
prove me wrong. I place my challenges. Unless your theory can prove it's
still true under all conditions, it's not a true theory.”

I’m not out to prove anything. I just post for the sake of those who
would like to understand. You give me opportunities to show how bogus
many people’s misunderstanding of evolution can be.

As far as I’m concerned the evidence for evolutions stands on its own.
It’s extremely compelling for anyone who genuinely understands it on
every level from biology, to chemistry, to physics.

As far as I’m concerned you may as well be arguing that the world is
flat.

Can I prove to you that the world is a ball and that it revolves around
the sun? No I can’t. All I can do is show you all the compelling
evidence for it and it’s up to you to be compelled by that evidence.

I don’t care whether you believe in evolution or not. It’s your loss if
you reject it. You’ll simply miss out on understanding how god does
things. No skin off my nose.

What I find hilarious is that you’ll argue against evolution claiming
that it can’t be ‘proven’ and then turn around and run to a embrace a
superstitious dogma that has absolutely no proof at all. How silly is
that?

I don’t care what you believe. I see the beauty in evolution. It’s a
wondrous thing that god has done. I stand in awe of the fact that we,
as humans, were actually able to discover this truth of how god works.
We used the brains that god gave us to make this discovery and I see
this as a very beautiful thing.

The people who refuse to accept it will necessarily come around
eventually. It’s inevitable. Just like they finally came around to
accepting that the earth wasn’t the center of the universe. It’s just a
matter of time.

Do you honestly believe that the vast majority of intelligent scientists
on earth have embraced a bogus theory and placed it into textbooks on a
mere hunch?

Scientist are not in cahoots to pull the wool over societies eyes. On
the contrary scientists are in fierce competition to prove each other
WRONG! If the theory of evolution has survived as long as it has and
has been as well-accepted as it has been by the scientific community you
can bet your bottom dollar that they have considered every argument that
you gave in this thread and totally rejected those arguments as being
totally worthless and/or irrelevant.

So please be my guest to believe whatever you’d like to believe.
Evolution stands on it’s own as a well-established and extremely
compelling theory of science. To reject it in favor of completely
unproven superstitious dogma is nothing short of intellectual suicide.

But if that’s what you want to do, it’s your life. I’m not going to try
to convince you otherwise.

I was just trying to help you understand it.

Nice post abra

my faith tells me that

Science and Religion must agree.

else one or both of them are wrong.

Created evolution (for me) is the only way I can see for this to be true
in this case because there are compelling reasons for both theories to
be right (each in its own way).

You're still not addressing my questions. I'm sorry you don't have an
answer, but don't play it off like I'm wrong.


I have no problem with evolution as a tool. I'm just saying that
evolution, alone, could not have created certain traits on earth. Winged
flight is one major example (except maybe in the case of insects). But
in anything else.

adventurebegins.....say's it all right there cheers to you
sir!

Poetnartist wrote:
“You're still not addressing my questions. I'm sorry you don't have an
answer, but don't play it off like I'm wrong.”

I don’t know who you posted this for, but I think I addressed every
question you brought up quite well.

To claim that I didn’t have answers for your questions is absurd.

You simply make outrageous claims that are based on nothing but your own
wild imagination and expect people to explain them away.

Like wings must necessarily evolve fully in one generation. That’s a
bogus assumption to start with. It needs no explanation. It’s simply
wrong. There is no reason for you to even make such claim must less
expect someone to explain it away. The explanation is simple - it’s a
bogus question!

Understanding how wings could have evolved over time is not a problem
for me. The fact that it might be hard for you as an individual to grasp
does not make me question the theory of evolution.

So my answer to you is that it’s simply incorrect to believe that flight
would need to evolve over a single generation. Your unwarranted
assumption is simply wrong. That *is* the answer to your question.

Abra,
this man would argue the hindleg off a donkey just for the sake of
arguement. He says very little using a lot of words for it. Talking
about Poet here

Hello Invisible...I see you...

The way I see it Poet has given any who choose to read any threads he
posts in, ample opportunity to be educated by the well learned,
intelligent, articulate posters who take the time to show him many of
veiws, although right for him, are quite unrealistic for others...






Psstt..(In a word, he makes us look good...)

I love to look good once in a while

You know, I knew some people on the debate team who had no interest in
truth, no concern for really hearing and understanding other's points of
view - they just wanted to WIN, and applied their entire intellect
towards that goal. It was all about verbal manipulation and maneuvering
- and when they were -wrong-, they did their best to create the
'appearance of being right'

With all things, it is good to have opposing veiws, other trains of
thoughts...it gives all a chance to grow, when respect is shown to all
opinions, and an interest in understanding the logic of an opposing
veiw....people learn things, and sometimes even expand on their
opinions.

That is the point, "when respect is shown to other opinions"

In real debate, if someone shouts me down because I don't have the same
opinion as him, I leave.

Same here

Ok, now you're just being insulting.


I asked a real, valid question. I want a real, valid answer. It's just
that simple.

Okay I am back about the lowland gorillas. Today in USA Today, a gorilla
showed us her tongue and a contorted face she learned from watching
humans watch her.. i had to laugh....she had the expression quite right,
the tongue just so, with hands strategically placed to frame the affect.
Like I said, go monkeys.