Debate : 9022


Off-Topic / Debate / 9022	9021 \| 9023

Subject:	Re: A whole new debate.
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Thu, 25 Jan 2001 05:42:03 GMT
Viewed:	146 times

Tim Culberson wrote: > If you do not believe in Creationism (http://www.m-w.com lookup > "creationism"), please anser the following question. > > Where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there if > your theory is right? Billions! Not a handful of questionable > transitions. Why don't we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all > living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both? > (from http://www.creationscience.com/quest.shtml) http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html (Question/answer pair #5) It links to Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html Fossil Hominid The Evidence for Human Evolution ttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/ And a discussion of Punctuated Equilibria http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/punc-eq.html

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: A whole new debate.
(...) And since you gave me a few huge websites to dig up the information I'll return the favor: (URL) links to: "What does the fossil record teach us about Evolution" (URL) there fossil evidence of 'missing links' between humans and apes? Did (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		A whole new debate.
No matter what Jon or I say, it seems the only thing anyone wants to argue is whether or not we understand what science is. Although we have both on more than one occasion asked for someone to cite a _specific_ example of why the Creation theory (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

8 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search