Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:

Cindy <truth@nospam.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message

Cindy <truth@nospam.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message

No need to even look at the fossil record to realize that seals
are a living transitional form of animal which evolved from land
animals which dove back into the sea to catch their food.

Of course not! One day a dog dove into the sea and gave birth to a
baby seal, what need of any proof or evidence, or any missing link
between them?

The seals can't actually mate and give birth in the water yet,
that's why they're a perfect example of a living transitional
species like so many fundies want to see in the fossil record.
At some point in time, if some of them manage to figure out how
to mate in the water and raise their pups without ever having to
set foot or flipper on land, they'll become in the same class as the
dolphins and manatees and whales, who no longer need to return
to land to mate or rear offspring.
Is that really too impossible of a scenario to believe?

No more so than imagining that if rabbits and kangaroos and
frogs keep hopping up away from the ground, then one day
they'll sprout wings and be able to fly away...

You obviously don't understand how evolution works, that's why
you keep mocking it. Why not slow down a bit and try to actually
learn something about it?

She daren't.

So she says these stupid things which only serve to show the world she
is is an idiot, imagining she is making a point.

She imagines the whole house of cards will come tumbling down - in
spite of the fact that maybe 40% of the US population are educated
Christians who manage to reconcile evolution with their religion.
They're obviously not literalists though.

"snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1108238475.206251.264280@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Cindy wrote:

"Elroy Willis" <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:f7is019d66nfhist5tjakjvaajg8lboanu@4ax.com...

Cindy <truth@nospam.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message

Cindy <truth@nospam.com> wrote in alt.atheism

I cited it as an example of the fact that both whether you

believe

in God or in your own intelligence and life apart from

IOW:

those who cite Creation or Evolution as the beginning of

life

can most

often agree on micro-evolution (change within a species),

where

they

disagree is macro-evolution,(one species evolving into

another).

Seals are a perfect living example of this, imo. Some

call

them sea dogs, since they bark like dogs and look pretty

like

dogs except for flippers instead of legs. They're mostly

aquatic,

but need to return to land to breed and raise their pups.

No need to even look at the fossil record to realize that

seals

are a living transitional form of animal which evolved from

land

animals which dove back into the sea to catch their food.

Of course not! One day a dog dove into the sea and gave birth

to

a

baby seal, what need of any proof or evidence, or any missing

link

between them?

The seals can't actually mate and give birth in the water yet,
that's why they're a perfect example of a living transitional

species

like so many fundies want to see in the fossil record.

At some point in time, if some of them manage to figure out how
to mate in the water and raise their pups without ever having

set foot or flipper on land, they'll become in the same class

the

dolphins and manatees and whales, who no longer need to return
to land to mate or rear offspring.

Is that really too impossible of a scenario to believe?

No more so than imagining that if rabbits and kangaroos and frogs

keep

hopping up away from the ground, then one day they'll sprout

and

be able to fly away...

Have you heard it said the Elephant didn't always have a trunk?
http://snipurl.com/ElephantTrunk


"It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind


The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"


The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"


The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"


The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
" 'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"


The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"


The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"


And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

Moral:


So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!"

author: John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)

~ Cindy

Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com

the joke is on cindy. although rabbits and kangaroos do not use

hopping

to get away from the ground, and therefore will not evolve wings,

many

frogs have gained adaptations that enable them to glide from tree

tree. this is likely the same scenario that eventually led to wings

in

all other animals that have them.

Likely? maybe? possibly? aren't these words evidence that there is no
concrete proof? What kinda belief is based on that?

Does anyone beside's me notice that facts and evidence are lacking
here?


~ Cindy