I've never fully understood the fossil argument, fossils don't seem to prove anything. The only thing fossils show is that an animal that used to exist looked like this and it died. Just because they're similar doesn't mean they had a common ancestor, that could just as easily be proof for a common designer. If it's a good design why not reuse it in another animal?
If we've observed changes in animals that inherit genes related to their appearance, it's completely logical to infer that a fossil of an animal with the same traits is an ancestor.
At least it makes more sense than a bearded dude created it. It has proof too.
Hey I was just mentioning what I heard, not that big a deal.
It's a big deal because no one gives a stuff if you can't prove something.
If it's some sort of alternative way of drawing the Geologic time scale, that doesn't help the argument much. The Geologic time scale doesn't have any proof either. If you dig down, as people have, it doesn't correlate with the column. However, some say it does and some say it just doesn't. And as long as people are debating about it and I can't go and dig myself to see who's right, I can't take the geologic time scale as fact.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/relativist-fallacy.htmlDumbass.
no, because nothing has ever been observed to change into a different kind of animal. Changing to another species is fact, that happens all the times in dogs. But if you have proof that something can produce something else totally different, a different kind of animal, that would be evidence.
Your stupidity is showing blatantly.
1. Dogs don't change species. Canis Lupis
IS a species.
2. Things change to different kinds of animals all the time. The peppered moth is an example. Just because it didn't change into a different species doesn't matter. stuff like that doesn't happen in a period of 50 years and natural selection doesn't imply that it does.
My understanding of it, is that through natural selection organisms have gradually changed from one type of organism to another starting with whatever was produced by the primordial soup eventually leading to the diversity we have today. And that would require organisms to change from one kind of animal to another over time. But from what we have observed, that has never happened.
That's not how natural selection occurs at all.
Re-read my link or shut the forget up.
You have literally no idea what you're talking about and you're spouting the same incorrect jargen since you entered the thread. Read the loving link I sent to you about natural selection and then summarize it for me, or just shut the forget up.
