More Strong Evidence for Evolution: Anatomical Vestiges

[Redress]

can you tell me of another species that is always sticking its tongue out?

Teenage girls.

 

[Kobie]

Teenage girls.

Gene Simmons. Who is probably his own species of STD-resistant human.

 

[Buck Ewer]

Snakes dont eat dust for sustenance that is true BUT you think when the snakes crawl and they are sticking out their tongues as they all commonly do, no dust ever gets on that tongue?

So tell me this how did the authors of Bible know that snakes at one time did not crawl as they do now. You have to admit it awful funny that the bible mentioned this and it is PROVEN FACT that they at one time did not crawl. Think it was a lucky guess?

also crawling and slithering are the same thing. here is a link to a thesaurus Crawl - Synonyms and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

crawl
verb
1
to move slowly with the body close to the ground <the time we had to crawl through a narrow passageway from one cave to another>
Synonyms belly, creep, grovel, slide, slither, snake, worm, wriggle


But hey your Theory of evolution states that they the serpent first developed limbs and then De-evolved them. makes no since But hey lets be honest you think we came from apes.

Snakes lick out their tongues to sample the air. They can taste the air in stereo. That is why their tongues are forked to determine what direction a smell is coming from. The lips are form fitted to the diameter of the tongue so that noting gets ingested they wouldn't want to ingest ...( dust). Same mechanisms as lizards have indicating evolutionary common ancestry. Beautiful adaptations that took millions of years to evolve... like your thumbs...
BTW evolution is not a theory ...it is well understood and well accepted biological mechanism.
Creationism is not a theory either ...It is a fantasy.

 

[votemout]

It is something your source claims does not exist, a fossil of a transitional species.

No they claim that is what it is, they also said it was an extinct species.

what I dont understand is they claim that frog had more of a spine then todays current frogs. meaning that the frog got smaller through the years makes no sense.


Evolution claims we started from single cells then how did the frog get smaller?

 

[Buck Ewer]

Kobie they are saying snakes had legs,which I agree with. But in their theory of evolution that would mean the snakes had to evolve the limbs first and then De-evolve them again. makes no since.

I just pulled the verse from the bible that also proved that snakes at one time did not crawl. But i will ask you how did the authors of the bible know that snakes at one time did not crawl. was it a lucky guess?

Ok ...that is twice now that you have said " makes no since"
Are you trying to say makes no sense?
Google " legless lizards" and learn something...you are embarrassing yourself.
HowStuffWorks "What's the difference between a snake and a legless lizard?"

 

[The Mark]

:lamo

You really believe this evolution BS dont you?


Got any proof of this?

There's always the possibility that god created the evolutionary process.

Ever think of that?

 

[ecofarm]

Evolution claims we started from single cells then how did the frog get smaller?

:lamo

 

[The Mark]

Evolution claims we started from single cells then how did the frog get smaller?

How big are single cells?

Where are these microscopic frogs, I've never heard of em'.

 

[Redress]

No they claim that is what it is, they also said it was an extinct species.

what I dont understand is they claim that frog had more of a spine then todays current frogs. meaning that the frog got smaller through the years makes no sense.


Evolution claims we started from single cells then how did the frog get smaller?

Look up for example insular dwarfism.

 

[Kobie]

No they claim that is what it is, they also said it was an extinct species.

what I dont understand is they claim that frog had more of a spine then todays current frogs. meaning that the frog got smaller through the years makes no sense.


Evolution claims we started from single cells then how did the frog get smaller?

So you think that evolution just means animals get bigger?

That specific species of frog ("frog" is nof a species) evolved to be smaller to help it survive in its environment. That's what evolution IS -- the development of traits that are advantageous to a species' survival in its ecological niche. Being smaller has certain biological advantages -- needing less food to survive, for example.

By your rationale, if the point of evolution was just to get bigger, then there would be no more single-celled organisms.

 

[Buck Ewer]

snakes are not reptiles? interesting.

So according to your thinking then if a human evolved with lets say a few less fingers and toes then they would no longer be considered human huh?


well whatever we have reptiles with legs now and snakes with no legs now also what has evolved?


whatever i just love it when science proves the bible to be correct. I love it even more when atheists try to deny the facts.

The buybull is not correct ..scientifically or otherwise. It is a collection of bronze age fables and superstitions.
Again you are embarrassing yourself.

 

[Paschendale]

Would love to see staunch evolutionists apply the theory to flyers. So far no one can satisfactorily answer my question of how birds evolved. There are skeletal vestiges of intermediate species that have some feathers, but so what? How does that translate from being on the ground to being an aerial species, when evolution takes millions of years? There is no practical reason for that random mutation. It's not like generations of creatures spent their days jumping off cliffs until one day one of them grew some feathers and a million years later we have birds

Gliding. It's a very handy transitional adaptation before full-fledged flight.

Should i trust people that think we came from apes?

What have you got against apes? I think they're pretty nice people.

That's the great thing about science, you don't have to trust people, or anything. All you have to do is look at the evidence and you can see the truth for yourself. Though, this only works if you are willing.

It works whether one is willing or not. The facts don't change based on our feelings about them. I think this is an important difference between science and faith. Science always works. Faith only works if you decide it does beforehand.

The desire to decide right and wrong for oneself tempted Eve. Same as Lucifer. The whole deal is about establishing God's sovereignty.

That sounds like something to be lauded, not condemned. Especially by Americans. That's kind of our national ideal.

I did not come from no apes sorry.

We've already been over this. No, you didn't. You and me and apes came from a common ancestor.

Anteaters.

You think the snake sticking his tongue out (which it does not do to eat, but for sensory purposes) somehow validates the biblical story and thus disproves evolution?

Dogs, too.

 

[ecofarm]

I don't even know what the hell this means.

He wants to know why all the lizards have not evolved into snakes yet.

:lamo

Next question: Then why do other primates still exist?

 

[votemout]

Anteaters.

You think the snake sticking his tongue out (which it does not do to eat, but for sensory purposes) somehow validates the biblical story and thus disproves evolution?

No I said that scientist have proven that snakes originally head legs, and that it just proves the bible is accurate.

Like i said i love it when science proves the bible to be accurate.

 

[blarg]

snakes are known to be the descendants of four-legged reptiles.


Which would explain why God said to the snake.

So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.

when their not swimming gliding or moving in trees and then theirs all the different species of snakes so that's a lot of evolution right their

 

[Kobie]

No I said that scientist have proven that snakes originally head legs, and that it just proves the bible is accurate.

Like i said i love it when science proves the bible to be accurate.

No, science has not proven that. We've been over this, numerous times.

 

[Buck Ewer]

Would love to see staunch evolutionists apply the theory to flyers. So far no one can satisfactorily answer my question of how birds evolved. There are skeletal vestiges of intermediate species that have some feathers, but so what? How does that translate from being on the ground to being an aerial species, when evolution takes millions of years? There is no practical reason for that random mutation. It's not like generations of creatures spent their days jumping off cliffs until one day one of them grew some feathers and a million years later we have birds

Evolution of birds - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This evolutionary transition is well understood by paleontologists and ornithologists alike.
Stick to dogmatic declarations ...you are making a fool of yourself.

 

[blarg]

Snakes dont eat dust for sustenance that is true BUT you think when the snakes crawl and they are sticking out their tongues as they all commonly do, no dust ever gets on that tongue?

So tell me this how did the authors of Bible know that snakes at one time did not crawl as they do now. You have to admit it awful funny that the bible mentioned this and it is PROVEN FACT that they at one time did not crawl. Think it was a lucky guess?

also crawling and slithering are the same thing. here is a link to a thesaurus Crawl - Synonyms and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

crawl
verb
1
to move slowly with the body close to the ground <the time we had to crawl through a narrow passageway from one cave to another>
Synonyms belly, creep, grovel, slide, slither, snake, worm, wriggle


But hey your Theory of evolution states that they the serpent first developed limbs and then De-evolved them. makes no since But hey lets be honest you think we came from apes.

um why cant snakes with less or no legs not out compete their relatives with legs?

 

[blarg]

Evolution is a theory and a joke. I am not going to study something that they even admit is a theory.

yea yea how is cursing something a curse if nothings changes? makes no sense .

how is not having legs and slithering a curse for snakes? when did snakes talk?

 

[Buck Ewer]

I dont believe evolution theory.

It is not, as you insist, a question of belief.
It is a question of understanding.

 

[blarg]

Should i trust people that think we came from apes?

before you trust the ones that say we came directly from dust and a guys rib

 

[votemout]

So you think that evolution just means animals get bigger?

That specific species of frog ("frog" is nof a species) evolved to be smaller to help it survive in its environment. That's what evolution IS -- the development of traits that are advantageous to a species' survival in its ecological niche. Being smaller has certain biological advantages -- needing less food to survive, for example.

By your rationale, if the point of evolution was just to get bigger, then there would be no more single-celled organisms.

Not what i said, But maybe you can explain why they Blew past there Now compact size and had to de evolve to their now smaller size.

you now the scientist also claimed oil was a fossil fuel turns out that was all bunk as well.

scientist are often wrong.

Discovery backs theory oil not ‘fossil fuel’

 

[What if...?]

What The Fossil Records Show

Throughout the 1900’s Scientists continually studied the fossil records to try and determine if the theory of evolution was really the “fact of evolution”. If the theory of evolution were fact, then the fossil records would clearly show the gradual transformation over long periods of time that Darwin spoke of. But despite intense research for over 150 years since the theory of evolution was proposed, no instances of a transitional form have been found in the fossil records. What the fossil records do show is each life form suddenly appearing, full blown, without any apparent relationship to what we went before it. Why evolutionists look the other way and call this a lie is incredible .These few quotes on the subject speak for themselves !

As an example , if the theory of evolution were true , then the fossil records would ALWAYS show a smooth transition from one life form to another, such that it would be difficult to tell where invertebrates ended, and vertebrates began. Though this is NOT always the case. Instead , fully formed life forms have been discovered to suddenly jump into fossil record seemingly from nowhere , with illogical gaps before them where their ancestors should be. Many evolutionist do not dispute this fact , while other look the other way.

So you posit there are fossils for every animal that has ever existed?

There aren't, and nobody ever said there was.

Do you really believe god let satan modify his creation to the point it appears the planet is billions of years old and evolution occurred?

Because thats what would have had to have happened.

 

[What if...?]

Great a skeleton of an extinct frog proves what exactly? that animals have become extinct!

Are Dobermans in the bible? Poodles? Basset hounds?

Did they exist prior to the 17th century?

 

[What if...?]

They dont are you sure? I already addressed this earlier you did not read it did you?

Ever seen a snake constantly sticking its tongue out while they are crawling along? think dust ever gets on that tongue?

can you tell me of another species that is always sticking its tongue out?

Creationists.