Who Is Your Creator message forum

 

Index > General > Who Is Your Creator message forum > Re: You should be able to handle both series and all of them at the same time.
Forum: Who Is Your Creator message forum
This forum is locked and posting is not allowed
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: You should be able to handle both series and all of them at the same time.

In regard to your comment:

"For example, your continued assertion that Pakicetus was nothing but a terrestrial mammal and not a whale does not address the reality that there are a number of characteristics that like it to the artiodactyls (they descended from) and to later cetaceans. Pakicetus stands at the water's edge and the whales that followed changed as they went into that water."


Are you aware that one could make a case that even a human has "characteristics that like it to the artiodactyls and later cetaceans"?

The point is that Thewissen, Williams, Roe, and Hussain recognized the truth when they found it.

"Pakecetids were terrestrial mammals, no more amphilbious than a tapir."
'Skeletons of terrestrial cetaceans and the relationship of whales to artiodactyles'
J.G.M. Thewissen, E.M. Williams, L.J. Roe, S.T. Hussain
Nature/Vol 413 / 20 September 2001 / www.nature.com

Since you obviously believe that this is not really what they meant to say and we are taking it "out-of-context," be specific and tell us what they really meant to say and what it really means.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Your 'argument' against bird transitional fossils was to quote Storrs Olson on the National Geographic's fossil scandal with the heading "Bird Origin Fantasy". Not really much of an argument when you consider that there are a number of real transitional fossils.

That is the problem with creationism. You can't really defeat evolution by arguing against the isolated fossil. Evolution provides many transitionals for both whales and birds. To refute these evolutionary sequences, you must address all of the members of the sequence and explain why they appeared when and where they did on the basis of a theorhetical construct.

For example, your continued assertion that Pakicetus was nothing but a terrestrial mammal and not a whale does not address the reality that there are a number of characteristics that like it to the artiodactyls (they descended from) and to later cetaceans. Pakicetus stands at the water's edge and the whales that followed changed as they went into that water.

Email  
Not in your wildest dreams. - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 9:54pm
We have fossil whales. - by Arneson - Aug 29, 2007 8:46am
Sherwin seems a bit shady on dates here. - by Arneson - Aug 29, 2007 8:51am
Whale evolution fantasy - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 29, 2007 12:24pm
Sorry to hear about your dad. - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 3:32pm
Be specific - No drama necessary - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 30, 2007 3:21pm
Re: Be specific - No drama necessary - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 3:31pm
Is there something new? - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 30, 2007 4:22pm
One example from today - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 10:24pm
You could try something new? - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 10:28pm