"They did not put on clothes and start shaving by having their paws change into hands and fingers (as Darwin generally postulated), because they did not turn into Canis humanus."

For crying out loud, when did Darwin say that WOLVES are a common ancestor to humans? Good grief, man, you know as well as I know that Canines are a completely different "branch of the tree".

"This really is self-evident, and I deplore all of the time, money, and effort that goes into denying the obvious."

Yup. Bingo. Just what I was saying. Creationism is a "science stopper".

Why EXACTLY is it obvious? Because "changes are small", it "tends to revert to the original code", they "seem to have a master plan", and they don't "seem to go much beyond that"?

What is this magical "barrier" that prevents DNA from changing "too much"? How does it work? What is this "plan"? How can we figure this out?

Why am I asking these questions? Oh yea, BECAUSE IT'S NOT OBVIOUS.

What makes it obvious to you? Verses in the Bible?

Somebody doesn't know what somebody is talking about.

From the article "Mixing Mammals," appearing in Technology Review, professor Richard Behringer, a professor of molecular genetics at the university of Texas MD Cancer Center, says this about a DNA mouse/bat experiment, where mice had their legs slightly elongated through bat DNA insertion:


To have any chance of flying, mice would have to develop very different forelimbs, like those of bats, which are longer and have membranes stretched between the bones. Behringer says that he'd like to try replacing the limb enhancers in mice with those from other animals, such as whales or wallabies.

Charles Darwin contemplated the evolution of different kinds of limbs in On the Origin of Species. Starting with a BASIC LIMB PATTERN, "successive slight modifications," he wrote, eventually produce the various MAMMAL LIMBS we see today: HUMAN HANDS, bat wings, whale fins. [caps mine]

"We think what we've done is made one of those slight modifications," Behringer says. "Maybe during evolution you'd have a lot of those and the limb would get a lot longer, and maybe some of the tissue would be retained between digits, ultimately leading to the structures that would allow a bat to fly."


Yeah, and maybe if pigs had wings they could fly, too. Pig bats, you know. Why not? Hey, it COULD happen.

Of course, I'm sure you know far more than the good professor. Please contact him post haste and inform him that mammal limbs CANNOT change into human hands.
Kindly explain to him that he is being delusional. I'm sure he will appreciate your wisdom.

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

Replying to:

"They did not put on clothes and start shaving by having their paws change into hands and fingers (as Darwin generally postulated), because they did not turn into Canis humanus."

For crying out loud, when did Darwin say that WOLVES are a common ancestor to humans? Good grief, man, you know as well as I know that Canines are a completely different "branch of the tree".

"This really is self-evident, and I deplore all of the time, money, and effort that goes into denying the obvious."

Yup. Bingo. Just what I was saying. Creationism is a "science stopper".

Why EXACTLY is it obvious? Because "changes are small", it "tends to revert to the original code", they "seem to have a master plan", and they don't "seem to go much beyond that"?

What is this magical "barrier" that prevents DNA from changing "too much"? How does it work? What is this "plan"? How can we figure this out?

Why am I asking these questions? Oh yea, BECAUSE IT'S NOT OBVIOUS.

What makes it obvious to you? Verses in the Bible?

Certainly MAMMAL LIMBS come from a common ancestor. Agreed.

What I am pointing out is that WOLVES are not an ancestor of HUMANS.

Wolves and humans SHARE a common ancestor.

But humans did not evolve FROM wolves. To suggest such a thing is ridiculous. That is what I was pointing out what you suggested in your previous post.

Gee whiz. You guys have to stop twisting my statements.

"Yeah, and maybe if pigs had wings they could fly, too. Pig bats, you know. Why not? Hey, it COULD happen"

The pure ridiculousness of this statement shows me that you don't know a thing about common ancestry.

In regard to your comment:

"Certainly MAMMAL LIMBS come from a common ancestor. Agreed."



Yes, evolutionists may devise all sorts of stories and theories, but to believe them as fact without any observation, evidence, or any facts substantiating the claims, it's nothing but your faith, not science.

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

Replying to:

Certainly MAMMAL LIMBS come from a common ancestor. Agreed.

What I am pointing out is that WOLVES are not an ancestor of HUMANS.

Wolves and humans SHARE a common ancestor.

But humans did not evolve FROM wolves. To suggest such a thing is ridiculous. That is what I was pointing out what you suggested in your previous post.

Gee whiz. You guys have to stop twisting my statements.

"Yeah, and maybe if pigs had wings they could fly, too. Pig bats, you know. Why not? Hey, it COULD happen"

The pure ridiculousness of this statement shows me that you don't know a thing about common ancestry.