…There are many lessons in Nature, with her apparent tranquility and charm: but underlying this facade is a blood-bath of dog eat dog imperative for survival, and a rise of the "Individual" dominates social norms and necessities of the collective. A pyramid of predators crowned by the greatest threat to survival of the planet; the individual “Man” and his obsession with himself and his own ends!

Ian, what you don’t see when you are looking at your beloved spider is that it has built a sinister trap for insects, and that many innocent insects will die in it.

You won’t see that the male spiders have to risk their lives in order to mate with the much larger female, and that many of them do indeed die at the hands (hairy legs and fangs) of their mate, either before or after mating.

You won’t see that hundreds if not thousands of spiderlings will hatch after a mating, but that on average far less than one will survive to maturity. Indeed, only one female (and perhaps ten males!) needs to survive out of all the progeny of your spider throughout its life in order to maintain a stable population, and if even 1.1 survived on average, you would pretty soon have a population explosion of that species of spider.

You won’t see the wasps that catch spiders, paralyse them and entomb them in mud capsules as live food for their developing young.

You won’t see the falling leaves and strong winds and large insects that are of no use to your spider, all of which frequently damage if not destroy its web and necessitate rebuilding.

You won’t see the vicious competition between individuals if there happen to be a lot of them around with insufficient sites for nest building.

You won’t see what happens to them if they fail to catch enough food to cover their energy output with the constant repair and rebuilding of their webs.

You won’t see small birds pluck a sitting duck spider out of the centre of its nest and take it out of existence within the space of one second.

Nature is vicious.

We aren’t separate from it or different to it. As our society degrades and our population burgeons, we will not move further away from your idyllic view of nature… we will move closer to the real blood-bath dog-eat-dog nature of nature.

ian..nature is all about doG EATING DOg too
in case you missed it..survival of the fittest..seems a natural law[even if deludeD SCIENCE Types think it a science/proof.

so much more we could explain..re the spider[and its 8 spinnerets THAT DETERMINE THE QUALITY OF ITS SILKS]..BUT LETS GET BEHIND THE IMAGERY

man is king of the beasts/WE ARE HERE because ape raped a pig
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16038&page=0

WHY WE ARE HERE..is to judge..the fallen angels
sort the living from the dead/the gooD FROM THE CCC-RAP
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6262&page=0

ANYHOw..as posters have revealed..its not all nice/not all pretty
so i will try to expand/upon..why it is so.[see since the first living..there has been a energy souRCE/PLENTY..THAT CHANGES ENERGY/STATE..

much like VIA OZMosis..as spider eats spider
and life returns to the dirt/DUSTS FROM WHICH IT EMERGED.

please note how you had 'created'..a great but delusional imagining/upon the spider's web..but THEN OVERLAYED OVER EVEN THE ILLUSION..EVEN MORE VILE CRAP..we seem to do constantly to other..as we try to make sense of it all.

life is what we chose to make it
IM UNSURE WHERE TO TAKE MY REply..to resolve the crap..or expose the eternal beauty of energy changing state..that sees the dust of past creation..YET BECOME THE CLAY FOR ALL FUTURE LIVING

NEVER FORGET WE ARE ETERNAL SPIRITS/UNDERGOING A CRAPPY OR HAPPY BEING
GETTING BACK 7 FOLD..THAT WE Put in..yet it all comes out crap[thats why we love starting things..but then cut and run/leaving the learning undONE.

Diver Dan, your comment is right on the money. Humans are nature's most despicable creature. A nuclear war is needed to get rid of them, every single one!

I read yesterday on ICH about soldiers in a war tearing the children of their enemies apart while they screamed. Smaller children had their heads dashed against steel stanchions.

Humans! Noble and intelligent? No way!

Nature is of course a realm in which everything including human beings gets eaten by someting else sooner or later. Nevertheless we have no choice but to live in this realm with real feeling-intelligence.
This essay provides a unique Understanding of what is going on prior to all of the carnage - the universal BUZZ
http://sacredcamelgardens.com/wordpress/wisdom/contemplative-state-exaltation

“I gave thanks for my good fortune in knowing on which side of the tree I prefer to sit.”

I wonder does the spider have arrogance? I wonder does the spider need to describe all the world’s atrocities and distance themselves from them as if such behaviour could never come from them. Such arrogance only comes from ignorance about one’s own human nature. You may have never indulged in a violent act in your life it does not follow that you have done no harm. There are many ways to do harm – such harm that can have worse effects than violence. Have you never bullied anyone, treated anyone unjustly, manipulated relationships to protect your own interests, never been dishonest, never lied to the detriment of other people?

There are thousands of homes in Australian suburbia where ‘ordinary’ people emotionally abuse their children every day. Such constant abuse can have such a devastating effect that it cripples those people for the rest of their lives just as assuredly as does the violence to children in Syria or the separation of children in detention camps.

A ‘holier than thou’ attitude already makes you part of the problem. Unless you can see the aggression and injustice in your own life you will go on being part of the problem every day at home, at work, in society. If you want the world to be more like nature then you need to understand your own human nature and how to eliminate all the unnatural things you do such as placing yourself above others.

You are not arrogant? Then what is the point of your article?

I wrote:

> You won’t see the vicious competition between individuals if there happen to be a lot of them around with insufficient sites for nest building. <

‘Nest’?? Should have been ‘web’ of course! Sheesh!

.

<< Humans are nature's most despicable creature >>

I don’t think so, David G. All the traits that we humans have that we consider to be bad are abundantly evident in nature, and indeed are necessary in nature for individuals and whole species to survive.

We just happen to have the power to do it all on a much larger scale.

.

Daffy, in reference to the article via your link: I think that the concept of contemplation in any animal with a less-developed brain than a chimpanzee or at least any primate, cetaceans and perhaps the smartest of canines, felines and birds, is just bizarre.

Lizards, insects, fish, etc….. do they contemplate? Surely not!

Contemplation necessitates thinking, does it not?

Even the ‘smartest’ animals cannot really think, and can only contemplate to the most rudimentary level, if at all!

Ian you claim "I'm not naive", then write this fairyland stuff.

Ludwig gives you the facts in spades.

You are like my youngest daughter. The one who has wild magpies eating out of her fingers. The one who adopted a kitten to prevent it being put down. The one who is so upset by the little patch of feathers when that now grown kitten has torn apart another bird, that my wife wants me to clean them up before she sees them.

The facts mate are that your pretty killing machine, the spiders web will kill more in its short life, than most people will in a century, just like that one kitten saved will kill dozens of other creatures in it's lifetime.

It is just this unreal dreaming that leads to much hurt & damage.

the erudite Luddite/quote..<<..Lizards, insects, fish, etc…..
do they contemplate? Surely not!

Contemplation necessitates thinking, does it not?>>

no thought required
i cant stop my THINKING..[LIKE YOU]..LUDWIG]
but pleasE..ALLOW THAT WHEN NOT HUNTING FOOD..or rather aFter fuly satiating..their hunger..WHAT ELSE TO DO..BUT CONTEMPLATE..

our contentment..AT ITS PEAH..PIR HINGER SATISFIED..NOW CONTENT..to just sit/watching THE WORLD..GO BY

not thinking..[mindlessness..beasts
are EXPERT AT THIS/MANY HUMANS ADEPT TO IT TOO

[by reliving past joys]..how the hunt went as planned..or even just filly sated just sitting/watching..UNTHINKINGLY..AS g.the world go by..cause there is no other distracting need calling for meetin

<<..>>Even the ‘smartest’ animals cannot really think,>>

PROOF?

<< and can only contemplate
to the most rudimentary level, if at all!..>>

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=contemplate+synonym&

i wouLD GO BACK..AND DO THE RESEARCH
BUT..IM GOING BACK TO Contemplating my past words
just as any thinking life..contemplates..before it Masticates /ruminates..in LIFES MANY LEVELS OF POSSABle comtemplations

There is vicious competition between all living things. Nature is a constant life or death struggle.

Disney and idiotic crocodile whisperers are about entertainment, but profit first.

If anyone wants to know about nature at work there are those feral pigs eating the turtles in North Qld, the foxes pulling lambs out of their mothers and the packs of wild dogs that are common everywhere and tear the udders and leg ligaments from cows for fun. Rule .243Win works.

Humans are capable of wondrous things. It is only the few who do wrong. They should not be protected from the punishment they deserve and understand, and before the attempted rehabilitation which most of them scorn anyhow.

<<the emotions that animals seldom suffer – greed, hatred, anger, envy.>>

But animals don't experience serenity either.

First, in order to leave the natural state of unconscious, instinct-driven inertia, man must apply his will-power to achieve results. Unfortunately, greed, hatred, anger and envy are the by-products of wilfulness.

It's only once one had enough and is consciously through with wilfulness that one gains serenity. While outwardly the behaviour of a serene person may look similar to the natural state, their actual experience is totally different - unlike animals, they are fully conscious, fully aware, but without desires and aggression.

Ludwig

‘You won’t see that the male spiders have to risk their lives in order to mate with the much larger female, and that many of them do indeed die at the hands (hairy legs and fangs) of their mate, either before or after mating.’

Oh, for goodness sake! When are we ever going to put that ridiculous myth to rest?

Tales of the cannibalistic female spider eating her mate has grown way out of all proportion to the truth – a bit like all that highly dubious ‘research’ purporting to show that women commit as much domestic violence as men do.

Cannibalism in spiders only occurs in exceptional cases, and even then, only in some species, mainly the Latrodectus. Among those rare exceptions, spider offspring are also known to kill their mothers with similar frequency to females killing their mates. Males are also known to kill females.

But, hey, don’t let that get in the way of a good deadlier-than-the-male myth.

And while we’re on this thread about the ‘human’ propensity for violence, just take a look at which gender is committing all that violence. It ain’t the women.

"And while we’re on this thread about the ‘human’ propensity for violence, just take a look at which gender is committing all that violence. It ain’t the women."

Since you brought it up. Just take a look at which gender is responsible for all that aggression or does that not matter. As I said in my earlier post there are people who can inflict just as much damage to both children and adults without lifting a finger. Those people include women as much as men. Violence is one form of aggression - not by any means the only form or even the worst form.

The Bambi view of nature: isn't it nice. Darwin should be stapled to the forehead of every fool who venerates nature as though it is some magical force which casts a benevolent, protective net over humanity.

The other side of the coin are the misanthropists who hate their own kind and support nature so humanity will no longer despoil nature. The misanthrope takes idiocy to new levels.

Everything which is good, decent, humane and interesting in life comes by keeping nature at bay through technology and cheap, reliable energy.

The misanthropes and their allies the greens would take humanity to a time when nature was not kept at bay, when life was miserable and short and brutish.

Misanthropes are despicable. If they hate humanity so much they should show the way by ridding the world of themselves.

"It ain’t the women"

Women don't mind voting for wars. They voted overwhelmingly for Menzies, and did not oppose the conscription of 19 yr old males for Vietnam.

If women were the way you imagine them to be they would have voted against conscripting young men who did not have the vote themselves and were below drinking age, to die in a jungle. You've won the DoB lottery, here is your uniform and assault rifle, see you later maybe.

Out of kindness I did not mention the conflicts in between WW2 and Vietnam.

Come to think about it, women were not too bad at handing out white feathers to shame men into battle.

Maybe women have a fine sense of self preservation and regard men as disposable. That would also explain the disgusting, dirty and dangerous work men do that educated middle class feminists don't have on their bucket list. "A leg-up to a management job NOW! Oh and one on the Board for later".

LOL

Sure Killarney, cannibalistic female spiders are not common in the spider world. Only a very small number of species do it.

Ok, so you’ve had a go at that point in isolation. Does that mean you agree with everything else I have said? What about the overall tenet of my post, do you have any probs with it?

I might also point out that wasps that catch and paralyse spiders are in the tiny minority in the wasp world.

And likewise with birds that eat spiders straight off the middle of the classic spiral-type webs.

But there is certainly nothing unusual about 99.9% of all offspring of spiders (and most other arthropods) being eaten or otherwise perishing before they get to maturity.

In short, the tenet of my post is rock solid. Mother Nature is a vicious dog-eat-dog entity…. totally different to the image portrayed by Ian Nance.

<< …take a look at which gender is committing all that violence. It ain’t the women. >>

Come on, it isn’t anywhere near that black and white, as others have pointed out.

There is no doubt that ' nature' certainly has the propensity for violence in our world.
Take the shark problems we apparently have here in the West. Three young men have been killed in the past 2years ....a truly awful death I would imagine.

Humans can be just as deadly of course. Take all those poor men who were killed by 'one-punch' or cowards punch by other drunken men. Also an awful waste of life.

Then we can look at the many women killed every year in domestic violence incidences.
Where is the huge outcry over their deaths?
Is being killed by your husband, partner or ex-partner any less violent than the other deaths mentioned above?
If not, why not?

http://www.mamamia.com.au/domestic-violence-2/charlie-pickering-chat-priorities/

Diver Dan,

>A pyramid of predators crowned by the greatest threat to survival of the planet; the individual “Man” and his obsession with himself and his own ends!<

Right on the money, Diver!
And, for those who quite obviously fail to appreciate the underlying sentiment, Diver is expressing an abiding respect for nature.
And, contrary to the interpretation of some, Diver's view is not misanthropic, but is rather suggesting a view that mankind may only find ultimate fulfillment by embracing nature, by becoming a benevolent contributor to its preservation, acting in concert with it, as part of it, and not as its frenzied destructive opponent.

For those who look, but fail to see, life without nature could only be a cold and dismal existence, devoid of almost everything that makes life truly interesting and challenging. (Though that would appear to be fine with many who selfishly wish only to revel in their cloistered play pens, immune from any external distractions, just like so many automatons, emulating the little emoticons in their favourite game on the iPad. (And, perhaps like cohenite, who appears to fear nature, and can only see a need to 'keep it at bay'.)

How far is "Man" willing to go, in the 'conquest' of nature? And, at what ultimate cost?
But of course, this is a moot question, because the powers that be, and not 'individual man', are intent on pushing the 'growth machine' forward with injudicious haste, and just who is to stop them? Bob Brown?

Shame on all who can only see trees as 'obstacles' or lumber, non-domesticated animals as competition or 'game', waterways as irrigation or hydroelectric potential, and insects or arachnids as merely 'gnats'.
(They need to get out more, into the 'real world'.)

Nature can certainly be hazardous, but, what are 'we', wimps afraid of our own shadows?
(And, what is breeding our most serious threats - mutated viruses? "We" are!)

Ludwig

Nature is a fine-tuned survival machine without any moral centre. The fact that many animals and insects have to die as a result of their place in the food chain is of no interest to nature.

Similarly, beings that live in ways that are out of kilter with nature’s laws inevitably degenerate into non-natural and self-destructive behaviour – domesticated animals, captive animals and humans living in high-density population centres or isolated towns and villages with in-bred populations.

Again, this is of no interest to nature. If humans don’t kill themselves off through climate change, overpopulation or nuclear war, nature dictates that they’ll find some other way.

On the male violence issue, sadly it IS a case of ‘black and white’. Human males overwhelmingly commit the greater majority of violence against women, children, other men, animals and nature. And I’m not interested in endless quibbling about the minority exceptions - as other posters here are trying to do.

I really enjoyed the read Ian until I read the posts and we humans pushed reality down your throat. I still think that nature can at least allow us a reprieve from the everyday media barrage of violence, chaos and aggression. Thanks for the reminder.

The most dangerous spider's web can now be found in the Ukraine. It is a very big web and has many nations involved. Another huge web can be found in the Middle East and again it has entangled many nations.

And who is building these webs? The U.S. of course, it and its band of thugs and criminals who seek world control.

If you've not started on your nuclear shelter under the Hills Hoist, it's too late now, I'm afraid.

Time has run out!

HI boomer..we all go through stages
but we ALL ARE AN accumulation..OF our ways of living

http://www.macroevolution.net/karyotype.html

No one supposes that all the individuals of the same species are cast in the very same mould. These individual differences are highly important for us, as they afford materials for natural selection to accumulate, in the same manner as man can accumulate in any given direction individual differences in his domesticated productions.

—Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species

anyhow..i thought i had nutted out this living..bio organism/we all are a part of...[i now see the universe as an amoebae]..SUNS AS nucleolus and planets as electrons ETC

U SEE..how the angels FALL from the heavens and played games
with gametes..i eveN SEE THEM JUST FOR FUN/MAKING man..'like is;

THE MORe..we graSP..THE WAY THE JOKE WAS PLAYED
the funnier IT GETS
http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins.html

and the thiNG IS the godless reALLY GRASP THE JOKE
but those with the heart..were right all along

http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-section-6.html

Killarney : On the male violence issue, sadly it IS a case of ‘black and white’. Human males overwhelmingly commit the greater majority of violence against women, children, other men, animals and nature. And I’m not interested in endless quibbling about the minority exceptions - as other posters here are trying to do.

Of course men are more violent than women because they are in general bigger and stronger than women which is why they get sent into combat in wars. It is an accident of nature that men are bigger than women if it were the other way around women would be the more violent gender. You do not get points for stating the obvious. Why would you feel the need to state the obvious? Perhaps you are trying to hurt men by making them feel ashamed of their physical advantage when no shame is appropriate. Trying to emotionally knobble men in this way is indeed an act of aggression.

Maybe you feel the need to hurt men for something which is not their fault (i.e. their size and strength) because you feel powerless not in regard to your physical disadvantage in relation to all men but in your emotional disadvantage to some men or one man in particular. Emotional inequality is your responsibility but perhaps it is easier to try and hurt men than to accept your responsibility for your own emotional weakness.

Nature is in a fine balance, and the more we ride roughshod over it, the sooner it will bite us in the hind end.
But, nature is not directly vindictive, but is only caught in a constant battle to adapt to 'natural' or 'un-natural' change, and such adaptation can and does produce unexpected (and unintended) consequences.
'We' are such a consequence; and the rest of nature is paying a heavy price for this eventuality.

The ultimate meaning of life? To tend the garden with care; or to ransack mercilessly until there is nothing left truly 'worth' saving?

The most dangerous spider's web can now be found in the Ukraine.
david G,
yes, the lefties have infiltrated the Ukraine & stirred up those who believe joining the West means instant wealth & good living. The East Germans fell into the same trap.
Africans pour across the Mediteranean to follow that fabel.

we know nature can be a hard mistress
yet its IMPORTANT to juxtapose the nurture inherent/in nature.

LARGELY..NATURE..is far more into the nurture.
seeds come back to liFe trees grow..NEW LEAVES TO END HER SHIVER..grasses go to seed..EDIBLE WEED AND SOMEHOW..EVERY LIVING THING MEETS ITS NEED.

WE MAY WALK MOSTLY SAFELY..ANYWHERE OUR FEET FIND FIRM FOOTING
in nature there is no plundering/blundering or even polution..we NEED BUT CHOSE OUR PATH..LET THEM FIND OUR way..

ALthough we may have fears of spiders OR SNAKES LEECHES OR even..drop-BEARS..we see that nature provides PROVISIONING FOR ALL..To but seek a feed is to find..TRULY..ONCE ..you have TASTED OFF HER FREE BOUNTY..IS TO KNOW THe taste of freedom.

yes THERE IS MUCH TO FEAR..[in our minds]
BUT IN THE REALITY..OUT THERE..IN BOSOM..OF OUR MOTHER NURTURE..

WE JUST NEED TAKE CARE..KNOWING
Everything is just as its meant to be..'out there'..but you cant feel it..till you find the will to love it....IT BEGINS AND ENDS..BY THE PERCEPTIONS..we form/within.

where to begin..simply by not judging
natures timing is by the reason/necessity/immediacy and season..ITS NOT beyond human reasoning...[FOR EVERY 'Survival'..of the fittest.. is the mother nurture..[parental love/care].. that sustained US ALL OUR LIFE/LIVING..till we achieved our HUMANITY...

[WHICH WE AFFIRM..SIMPLY BY TRUSTING ..our own
living loving nurture nature/humanity humanely.]

sorry it needed to be rebalanced.

phanto

'Of course men are more violent than women because they are in general bigger and stronger ...'

That comment should be dipped in gold and placed on the mantelpiece.

The last time I checked, being bigger and stronger than the person you beat up, rape, kill etc is not an acceptable defence, either in a court of law or in the court of life.

Surely you can do better than that.

boomer

'I really enjoyed the read Ian until I read the posts and we humans pushed reality down your throat.'

Yeah, we did get a bit carried away with the ugly reality bits. And I agree with you and the author that nothing beats nature in providing that much needed respite from the craziness of a non-natural existence.

Killarney and her PC advocacy 'research' numbers. What a crock of the proverbial.

Feminism, more specifically the middle class educated feminists who have been riding the victim gravy train for years, desperately need domestic violence.

However it has emerged that domestic violence is a two-way street and merely blaming 'men' gets it wrong on two counts: first it is only some men, just as it is only some women; and secondly, as already mentioned women are participants as well.

It is very regrettable that for decades some educated middle class women have been able to divert government money away from the real researchers who employ scientific method to arrive at their conclusions, to create jolly nice little earners for themselves in academia, consultancy, NGOs and in mainstream government agencies to wage a gender war. Years later of course there is no improvement and in fact they are claiming things are far worse than ever imagined. Meanwhile the medical, social worker and other professionals from the traditional mainstream helping professions continue to be starved for money.

Worse, there is even more competition and lack of coordination of practical research effort and resulting services. Mental health for instance is starved of funds. Youth services, similarly $$ starved. But hey, as long as the Grrls of the Office of Women with Status and similar outfits are able to network in publicly funded knees-ups, er sorry, make that 'networking' and conferencing.

Slowly it dawns even on the women who were the soldiers for feminism back in the Seventies, Eighties and later that the feminist gurus and leaders they trusted have always hijacked the movement for their own benefit. It is very obvious in employment for instance where the attitude of the educated middle feminists towards their 'lesser' working class women is 'Let them eat cake' and it shows. There are plenty of examples from women retirements from senior political roles over recent years. A lifetime of fat super for some and no jobs and stand in line for others.

tbc..

contd..

So Killarney, which group do you fit into? Are you still the foot soldier waging that war, or are you now comfy on a gold handshake from the public service and still swinging from the public teat? Maybe you could take a drive some day to view those women feminism always claimed to represent, but cynically misled and abused instead. BTW, the feminists still sneer at breastfeeding too. Incredible.

Feminists always reminded of a blindfolded person describing an elephant. No prize for guessing which end those Western educated middle class feminists remained at. But they do tell women in other countries what to do and they always know what is best for them too.

ON THEBEatch..i know i shouldn't..get into responding TO OFF TOPIC TROLLS..but its getting a BIT..SILLY..this attack on our fair sex..but like you i have a lot of anger..TO MANY..[AND THAT WASNT OUR ORIGONAL NATURE..

society made us so..DELIBERATELY..so we are
stuck in the fight mode..unable to take flight.

nature spectacularly..gives is everything for free[but in society..every thing has costS]..AND LONG TIME AGO..LETS LOOK AT THE FEET..OF THIS HOMO/GREEN/FEMINIST SCAM..SOCIETY[AND YES YOU HAve bought well and truly into.

mate recall ww2..and how woman were unchanged from the sink
to take over all the jobs men used to do..while govt sent youth[young men off yet again..to die..in BUT ONE OF THE MANY BANKers wars

well war ended..and jonny came marching home..directly into his job
and the media taught everyone..how woman could live 'the happy days'
yet again..govt governed..AND DONE DEAls for mates..sent the states coffers broke

in time they realized the tax burdens needed two wages..SO ONCE AGAIN THE MEDIA MACHINE..WENT in..with this..feminism/stuff..to divide and con..as usual..and govt got the extra..tax PAYERS THE BOOKS NEEDED.

in time..govt needed.other issues..to be red*herrings while govts sENT US DEEPER..AND DEEPER..INTO DEBT..[BUILDING THEIR..MATES STUFF FOR THEM]..THINK OF STADIUMS/PORTS/BILLION'S THERE EACH

/THINK OF EXPO 88..THINK OF..GIVING AWAY..A TENNIS CENTER/A RACE HORSE TRAINING VENUE..GIVING HALF A BILLION..To a magnesium plant..in gladstone etc etc

then it came to..building..GAS-pipes/ports SATADIUMS..and fixing the wires and poles..yet govt..finds more to spend..on its mates[at..one stage it was 65 billion/heading to 85 billion..as barnaby tried..to reveal.

anyhow/tODAY..its now..been reported..[no DOUDT..WRONGLy]..its 35 billion..so majicly..its falleN.BY HALF..YET..THEY still t..alk of selling power..to pay for more..stadium.

we seen..at the last election..the micro parties[the ultimate frUITS..of divide and STEAL BLIND]..WE ARE SO DIVIDED..WE ONLY have two choices..FIGHT OR FLIGHT

AND THE FIGHTING CAUSES THE FIGHTING
mate..i dont know you..nor your WIFE.[OR/WAS..IT MUM?][BUT..I HATE HE..SHE..CHANGED YOU MAN]

MATE..YOU CHANGED.,.YOUR VERY NATURE
AND IT.Scares us girls..because while..your fighting us..govt keeps raping us all/..till they build...their last stadium..with our last cent

on the bichy..
mate..please think..why your attacking us
and not..the real cause of your pain..the govt boys
[pub-lick/SIR-vice]..two party divide..and rule..slush*fund/club

one under god,

You are just being mean. Killarney doesn't get out much at all and bounces between very narrow rails. It would be the act of a complete cad not to give her the attention she craves and fulsomely too.

The human condition is best studied through comedy. However, Killarney identifies as a western feminist, which always rules that option out.

WE..NEED CATCH UP ON WHATS REALLY GOING ON
THEY NEED US DIVIDED..as long as we fight each other
they can do AS THEY PLEASE

http://rss.infowars.com/20140228_Fri_Alex.mp3
http://xml.nfowars.net/Alex.rss

NEW SHOW BEGINS EACH weekday morning arround 8 am
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/podcast.php

http://whatreallyhappened.com/podcasts/hourtitle1.m3u

http://whatreallyhappened.com/

we have to stop fighting shadows
its time to man-up..by example..sukking it up..AS WE ALLWAYS HAVE.

WE ARE INCAPABLE OF RUNNING...thus cAN ONLY FIGHT/OUR OWN INNER DEMONS

under one god

'getting a BIT..SILLY..this attack on our fair sex'

Women are not the fair sex and never were. Nature never deemed it thus. It was the creation of so-called civilised, 'advanced' societies that drew the line between the genders and declared that one must follow a violent path and hog all the power and the other to be the ineffectual nurturers and God's police.

My previous comments about male violence was that men DO most the violence, not that they ARE violent (inherently speaking). Pity the responses took the latter - and more lazy - interpretation.

As I said in a previous post, Nature couldn't care less what we end up doing to ourselves or whether or not feminism is a good or a bad thing. Nature just keeps on keeping on.

For the time being, as the author says (or at least to paraphrase), appreciate the natural world while we still have it.

Killarney "My previous comments about male violence was that men DO most the violence, not that they ARE violent (inherently speaking). Pity the responses took the latter - and more lazy - interpretation."

Killarney, some of our more 'negative' respondents never let the truth get in the way of a good dig at the few women who frequent this site.

None of them took a lazy interpretation of the undeniable fact that men cause and inflict far more violence on other men, women and children than women do.

They just took the boringly predictable aggressive stance....as usual.

Killarney, "It was the creation of so-called civilised, 'advanced' societies that drew the line between the genders and declared that one must follow a violent path and hog all the power and the other to be the ineffectual nurturers and God's police"

That conclusion is challenged by the evidence given in the article linked to below,

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/bennelong-papers/2013/05/the-long-bloody-history-of-aboriginal-violence/

Ludwig says all that needs to be said on the topic... "We aren’t separate from Nature or different to it. As our society degrades and our population burgeons, we will not move further away from your idyllic view of nature… we will move closer to the real blood-bath dog-eat-dog nature of nature."

Susie talks about male violence while hundreds of thousands of woman have their babies slaughtered. Face it Susie the human heart is corrupt both descendants of Adam and Eve.

lest/we*forget..sexual-violence..[emphasize THE EX..]

ITS..WORTH LOOKING..AT..how/..we developed[evolved]..from..the holy spirit/nature..[natural/nurture]..into unnatural..nature..[how.we went/from humane..into human...[via..The..evolution/backcross..of first..living being..

in the..beginning..[infinite/SPIRIT]..formed in/the primeval chaos..CALLED the deep..[FINITE/MATTER]..

out of..the joining..of these two..extremes
forces..[e]..from either/world..[in the..great*void]...MAY..[as]. ENERGY..MANIFEST..or divest...[CHANGE STATE]..from/one..into..the other...{PROSPECTIVE/PROGRESSIVE/EVOLUTION.}

[sprit>matter../..matter>spirit]..good>bad/visa-versa..human>humane/humane>hUMAN..[IE ENERGY*..*CHANGING FORM/..STATE]..BUT NOT*..PRIME FUNCTION..[THINK LIKE..OSMOSIS/LEAVING..BEHIND..DROSS]....CONSTANTLY evolving/revolving/devolving..naturalism.

THAT MATTER..MAY DIVEST..ITS COLD/
AND..SPIRIT..MAY RADIATE..ITS WARMTH

..And when..the rime/OF-TIME..and the blowing/BREATH..of the warmth..met*..so that it..thawed..and dripped,..[changed state]..there was..a quickening [life/NATURALIS..[e]..from these flowing drops..[LIFE-FORMS]...[e]

due/to the power..[APPLIED-ENERGY]..HELD/..IN STASIS...[FORM..VIA FUNCTION]..of the source..holy]..of the heat,[spirit[]..and it..became the form...[in form.and function..in spirit and matter..by karmic...co-creation/ENTER co-creator..materialiS/loki..[more amoebae THAN..MAN]

the first..MATERIALIST/fORMS..WERE THE BEASTS
IN TIME//LOKI..[SHAPE/SIFTER]..DID HIS THING..with the jotnar..[beasts/..'gods'.]

the Jötnar..are given..some of..the most
important..roles..in the..Yearning./.LEARNING'S..of this/world.

Many giants..play..small/bit/parts..[thus]...can..greatly influence...the natural world;..they could even..equate with..A WORKING Relationship with Nature..[edit]..AS THE nature..of their being..quantifying that inherent..of natures/nurture..as gods [beasts]..of nature...leave/the learning.

ALONG COMES LOKI..Loki's relation..with the*gods[beasts]..varies by source...Loki sometimes assists..the gods and sometimes..causes problems/degrees..of handicap]..for them...[Loki is a shape shifter..and in separate incidents..he appears in the form of a salmon,..mare,..seal,..a fly,..[A PIG..]..and possibly..an elderly woman...[HIGH-PRIESTESS../johns mum]

Loki's positive relations..with the gods end...with his/role in engineering...the death..of the..CREATED/LIFE-FORMS..OF god Baldr...Loki is..eventually bound..by the gods..[HUNG BY THE INTESTINES..OF HIS last miss creation]

this can be presumed..to have occurred..[RE-OCCUred].pre the flood/when many..of lokies..[transmutation/FALSE GODS]..CROSSED OVER...

Loki is foretold..to slip free..from his bonds..and to..fight against the gods..among the forces of the jötnar,.at which time he will encounter..the good of Heimdallr..and the two will ssss..lay each other...why?

its funny really..much we attributed..to gods creation
might well be due to loki...Calling the gods arrogant,..Loki asks why they are...unable to speak,..and demands that they assign him a seat and a place...for him at the feast,..or tell*..him to leave.

The gods declare that Loki..deserves a horrible death if he cannot find a scheme...that will cause.the builder..to forfeit his payment, and..threaten to attack him...

Loki,..afraid,..swears oaths..that he will devise..a scheme to cause the builder..to forfeit the payment,..REWARDS..whatever..it may cost..HIM/himself..[CONFOUND/..THE WISE][WITH..LOL...GODLESS SCIENCES]

HENCE..WRITE Your own ending.
[im feeling..silly writing..to myself..YET AGAIN.]
http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16038&page=0

YOU MAY HEAR SOMEWHERE..some day..the saying
that pain..is fear..leaving the body..[to enter into the mind]

ITS FUNNY HOW..the last bIt got left off..
BUT SUCH IS THE NATURE..that nurture our humane Nature [nurture]

ANYHOW..SEE WHERE THE Pain..begins
SEE WHERE IT CAN...BUT RARELY ENDS..the nature of pains..AFFIRMING EVER MORE PAIN..PAIN BEGETS PAIN..AGAIN AND AGAIN...ITS INSANE BUT WE SO LOVE Giving it to others...to share our pain...IS TO DOUBLE ITS further CAUSAL FRUITING
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=pain+is+the+perception+of+convergent+neural+pathway

WHY DOES TALkING seem so much about pain
ITS UN-NATURAL I TELLS YA..IN NATURE WE HIDE OUR PAIN
IN NURTURE OUR DUTY IS TO RELEASE IT..TO SET IT FEE FROM BODY AS MUCH AS MIND[IN THE FLESH AND THE SPIRIT..REMEMBERING THE LESSER ADDRESSES THE GREATER..hoping the greater can end it/but the greater is its cause for we are equal..I CANNOT SUFFER FOR YOU WITHOUT DEPENDENCY..

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=cain+is+neanderthal&
Going by the circumstances of the story then, it appears Cain would have had plenty of time, and plenty of opportunity to marry a sister or a relative. As mentioned earlier, the answer isn’t hard to come by, but we probably don’t like the answer. Marry a sister? Let’s all give a collective….Ewww. Nevertheless, if Cain had left and settled in Nod, taking a sister with him, OR if he had settled in Nod but traveled back later to find a wife, either way the very short statement about Cain’s wife having a child would be true. Take note, Genesis does NOT say he met his wife in Nod, but that she gave birth to a son while they lived in Nod. That’s it.

Another thing that often comes as a surprise is that in the Bible, marrying a close relative isn’t even a big deal. And in fact, marrying a sister was not forbidden by God in the Bible for the first few thousand years. Abraham’s wife, you may be interested to know, was also his half-sister.

Today, of course, this would result in high rates of birth defects because of mutational errors that have built up in human DNA over time. However, again appealing to the circumstances of the story, if God created man in the beginning with no DNA damage at all, then DNA mutations would have been almost non-existent in the first few generations. Crazy as it sounds to us, marrying a close relative would not have had the problems we have today thanks to thousands of years of mutations in the DNA.

Besides, she [Sarah, Abraham's wife] really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife. -Genesis 20:12

OUG,

That last is a somewhat unusual post - from someone who, purportedly, (from many previous posts) does not believe in 'evolution'?
(And who exhibits a rather different and somewhat unique writing style.)

Split personality?

(And of course, in any event, not all 'mutations' are deleterious. How else would 'modern' species have successfully evolved from their more 'archaic' predecessors - such as the horse from the likes eohippus, or modern birds from the likes of archeopteryx, or Homo Sapiens from Homo X, as also descended from a much earlier anthropoid ape predecessor?)

'Humans' suffering DNA mutation (positive and/or negative), but only since God created Adam and Eve? And, I suppose a mere 6,000 years ago?

Better luck next time.

SALTY/QUOTE.<<..from/someone..who,/does\not..believe in..'evolution'?>>

i always/held with..micro-evolution..its..the macro/evolution..[into new genus]..vIA MICRO-EVOLUTIONS..i have..grave doubts about..[see i know..that two wongs..only breed wongs..not nongs..

the delusion.that mom /and\pop..cheeta..'EVOLVED'..INTO HOMO-MAN..IS JUST not scientifically..FALSIFIABLE...sci[NOT ABLE..TO scientifically/..BE VALIDATED/THUS..ITS A THEORY..NOT A SCIENCE]

YEARS AGO..i thought..to re-create..the dodo..via two unrelated geNUS
[IE..VIA EXTREME/OUT CROSS..but my science/peers..assured me..it would at best/result only...in sterile/hybrid mules..but*

*the other day..i came across..a new thesis..of the accent..OF MAN...THAT CREATED/THE FIRST ADAM/EVE..VIA AN OUTCROSS..BETWEEN APE AND MAN..THAT MUST BE*..FERTILE..as here we stand.

see..many geneS..ARE/IN DIFFERENT/..LOCI..ON THE CHROMOSOMAL/MATTER
AS PREVIOUSLY POSTED..at the two/other threadS..HAMMY XMASS
and evolution/weekend
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16038&page=0 http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15995&page=0

THERE[and..maybe here]..I..BEEN TRYING..TO JOIN TOGETHER.THE DOTS..of the..chimp/pig-hybred theory..
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-section-6.html#diffs

[THAT WOULD..GIVE THE NEW DNA Combination's..[needed to 'create'..new..hetro/homo-genus]..NOT ABLE..TO/BE ACHIEVED..IN MICRO EVOLUTION..HOMOGENIZES

as you..would kNOW..THE TWO-STRAND DNA...structure..HELPS NEUTRALISE THOSE..TRANSCRIPTION/MUTATION/CROSSOVER/ERRORS..as darwin stated..re the columbia wildtype/held in isolation..would retain*the wildtype genotype..as well as..the the appearance..of its wildtype.

BUT..WHEN WE GET..CROSS/BREEDS..[FERTILE/cross-breeds]..THATS A WHOLE NEW BALL-GAME..THE DUDES THEORY.EXPLAINS..THE DUCK/BILLED..platypus.. and the egg laying mammals..with no logical evolutionary stePs..TILL YOU NOTE A KIWI BEAK/Tongue..on the echidna..and get a clue of the placentaL ANCESTOR..THAT RAPED THE DUCK..

WHO LAYED A WHOLE CLUTCH..OF YOUNG/WHO SOMEHOW RETAINED FERTILITY..AS F1..AND THEN SORTED INTO NEW genus/via f2/F3 ETC..[which then..is a macro evolution..[WHICH/micro evolution either sorts out..into a new genus..or dies out]

i was missled..by taxonomic/divisions/rules..who created genus/as a species barrier..BUT chimps..raping pigs..is yet that step too far..for everyone...

[but more..and more/that looks where..its going[hence the cain/LINK..IT SEEMS NATURE..IS SEX OBSESSED[who woulda thunk it]

so..its not..'mutations'..for them..to have/PHENOTYPE-affect[into new homogenious genus]..needs/MATCHED//CHROMOSONAL-PAIRING..of the same changes..[or else..they/BY..micro-evolution]and..natural repair process..would negate/the mutation/or..natural RE*selection/..and or recombination..let it die.

<<..not all 'mutations' are deleterious.....>>..of course..some are so slight..yet others huge..they kill..but mutations largely..injure THUS..dont ENDURE..And..CANT cant OF THEMSELVES..evolve..INTO NEW genus

think..[GOOGILIANS OF FRUITFLY 'MUTATIONS'..HAve yet only prODUCED...FRUIT-FLIES]..MUTATED/FRuit-flies

animals BREED..AFTER THEIR OWN..GENOMIC/KIND
EXCEPT..WHEN WE GET HYBRID fertility

<<>How else would..'modern'..species..evolve>>
..*THINK..WHY YOU AVOID..*GENUS..[A/PROPER/SCIENCE-TERM?]

any given species/.can only,MiCRO/EVOLVE..WITHIN..ITS GENOME-DNA/QUOTA/

thats/why..im studying/up..on the pig hybred..[NOT/MUTATION]..E-VOLUTION..OF HYBRID-MAN THEORY..ITS..THE ONLY/THING..RADICAL ENOUGH..to escape/the curse..of cain/genus-gen..OR MAKE..A GENUS PLATYPUSSY..OR AN EGG-LAYING MAMMAL..OR..A FISH..WITH HIPS/LEGS..

by/some..sexY-'loki'....sticking..HIS MICRO-EVOLVED/BIt UPON/FERTILE..'SOIL'.
http://www.macroevolution.net/mammalian-hybrids.html

ps/WHERE/does..bible say..6000-years?

Forget it OUG, Evolution is a fact, proven beyond all reasonable doubt, and those who try to suggest that all species were/are/have-been 'created' out of thin air, or by some magical 'design' (design from what to what, and if not from thin air then from what, dust?) ARE either very badly misguided or simply delusional.

Fear what you may believe without substantiation, because truth lives in a solid castle built on demonstrable evidence, whilst 'faith' in unsubstantiated dogma or 'tradition' is a construct of someone's imagination designed to quell individual inquisitiveness and thereby to hold the gullible and misguided as hostages to their fear of the unknown or the unattainable.

Knowledge is power; superstition is variously a yoke or a balm to the mass-ignorance of the uneducated and the downtrodden.

Magicians can pull rabbits out of a hat, but to think God wastes his/her time pulling new species out of a hat to sprinkle them across this Earth is an insult to God's purpose (whatever 'God's purpose' may eventually prove to be).

No-one can prove or disprove the existence or nature of God, but we can demonstrate and 'prove' the physical mechanism of species' evolution and we can trace the logical and undeniable path of much of this evolution from past to present species through investigation of millions of years of fossilized geological records.
Anyhow, why would anyone want to believe that God wouldn't have chosen natural 'evolution' as the logical and most effective means to populate and perpetuate His/Her 'garden'?

Ain't nature wonderful - thanks be to 'God'.

salty..<<..No-one can prove or disprove the existence>>

fair enough

BUT AS FAR AS PROVING..HIS MATURe<<..or nature of God, but we can demonstrate and 'prove' the physical mechanism of species' evolution>>

yes species evolve..within their genus boundRY
WITHIN EXTREEMS AS SAY WITNESSEd by a dog..as big as a rat..to as big as a deer/within that limit..within the genus cannis..sure

but never/not ever..has a dog brED A CAT
OR A RAT BREAD A LIZARD..NOR A LIZARD A RAT..[not ever has science reported this/NOT IN RECORD..NOR IN MYTH

..NEVER HAS A FRUITFLY BEGOTTEN A FLEA

FOR Good reason..lets saY..you really could..DO AS YOIU SAY<<..and we can trace the logical and undeniable path of much of this evolution from past to present species through investigation of millions of years of fossilized geological records.>>

you would know that fossils are assessed by taxonomy[and taxonomy]..has been refuted[it turns out dna is finding many ways..to to rome[meaning many 'mutations'..make a GIVEN FEATURE/..THUS THE LINKAGES Built oF phenotype rather than genes mutant/genotypes]..ITS Invalid scientific proof of linkage[tO/WIT..EVOLUTION]mate

just cause two horns look the same IN THEIR MINUTIA
dont mean one evolved the other/you say you goT PROOF?

PRESENT..JUST ONE CASE WHERE PURE BREEDING SPECIES/EVolved a\into a new genus..[not ever reported nor recorded=a huge fail/faith not fact

present fact
name the first living THING AT THE ROOT OF YA REFUTED TREE of life
that root must begin with the non LIFE..OR ITS FRAUD

WHAT NON LIFE..LIES At the root of thE TREe
THAT RECOMBINED BY WHAT MEANS INTO WHAT FIRST LIFE GENUS

PRESENT YA PROOF[SOMEONE SOLd ya on a lie mate
using pretty pictures that this looks like that/but it didnt work..like that
if yOU TRY TO EXPLAIN..I WILL EXPLAIN HOW IT REALLY HAPPENS..IS BY SPIRIT WILLING ITS BEING VIA THE BEST Logical path available to the energy otf the beings in heaven/hell[the deep]..BUT I KNOW YOU GOT NUTHin..like all the rest

you may be THE FIRST TO NOT RUN AWAY
but i doudt it.

2B/CTD..ASP

<<..Anyhow,..to populate.and perpetuate.His/Her'..garden'?>>

so far..you got..a gOOD BEGINNING..GOD=LIFE/FROM\LIFE
god only wants..what we..his kids want..and once...we can agree..on what we really want..HE MUST GIVE IT TO US LOGICALLY..[so the story makes..'sense'

<<Ain't..nature wonderful-thanks be.to..'God'.>>

SO TRUE..SO
IN THE BEGINNING..WAS GOD..LOGIC..SELF-aware logic
who thought..[sought/simply]]..to know/thyself..like we all dO..

SO..WHAT DID GOD..CAUSE TO OCCUR

SCIENCE..SAYS A MUD BUBBLE..BUT THE MEMBRANE
..FULLY IS A MEM-BRAIN..it has two inwards..facing cells within cells hells bells..here i am explaining your story/for you

try explaining mine..[how 12 spirits]..FROM HEAVEN/HELL NEED GET of one mind..to input change via logic[ie get a ape frustrated..with a deformed penus.,..

that..first/visualized/realized..step-only..[that alone]..took 12 ANGELS AND DEMONS..TO ACHIEVE..[pre/the fall]..THEN THE DEMON/RAPED THE PIG/HERSELF PREPARED BY MICRO EVOLUTION/LUST DEMONS..THAT ADAM AND EVE create the..adam/of science..that spirit..yet again create the eve

i should stick/with..the known known..wrote in stone/fossils
please reveal..in the life made stone..WHERE THE FIRST LIVING CEL IS MADE..INTO STONE

science..so far says a mud bubble..full OF DNA..OK NOW YOU
HOW Did..that first mud cell..divide..[what was its name..what was its firsT LIVING..CELL FORMS NAME.[genus species.whatever ya got salty]

WHATEVER YA GOT..IF NOT..PRESENTED..IS FAITH
faith in a lie..

if you..cant REPEAT IT..ITS A THEORY
[THATS SNAK-Oil/a lie

first name names..THEN GIVE UP
WORD THAT EXPLAINS What remains

god put life .into a mud bubble
[gee what primitive/TRIBE..hasnt said tHAT..

you claim..proof/present it/..NAME/PROCESS SPECIFIC-nameS
ALTY..PLEASE..TOGETHER WE CAN FIGURE THINGS OUT..name names..[search terms..we can figure it out/..you refute mine..i refute yours/

this cant be done..by only one
willing soul..normally..even in heaven/helL IT WOULD TAKE 12 [PLuS]..[1]=13...

but here..we can do it..with just two..
CAUSE/CLEARLY/BETWEEN US..WE GOT MORE HERE..THAN TWO.

[SO WHAT DOES..this EVOLVING/SCIENCE SAY?]

MUDDBUBBLE..minerals...now the,,FIRST/EVER/LIVING-Cell/cell divides..name the beginning/NON GENUS]....and..its kid....I GIVE THAT that will validate the first change OF GENUS STATE[from inanimate..into lifE

NAME NAMES/WHICH..20 Essentials..to life
INANIMATE..gave the first life..

[aside]/joke..by the 13..[funny enough..only/the 13 th sperm gets in oNLY..CAUSE THE 12 STRETCH..THE TAughtness..of the egg mem-brain..[sadly even fertilization..of the egg/loOKS..LIKE MASS RAPE/BY 12 SPERM/

YET..ONLY..THE 13 SPERM..MAKES THE LIFE.
FROM/DUST THOU ART/unto dust..thee SHALT RETURN.
BUT ADD/BUT..ONE REPENTANT-tear..SEE/NOW..god draws near

THE Basis of pig chimp thesis
INTRODUCTION: A NEW THEORY
http://www.macroevolution.net/stabilization-theory.html

http://www.macroevolution.net/table-of-contents.html
http://www.macroevolution.net/stabilization-processes.html

Why the author chose to create an alternative theory of evolution and his approach to doing so. Read on >>
http://www.macroevolution.net/introduction.html
1: ON SPECIES
http://www.macroevolution.net/Definition-of-Species.html
This section discusses some of the serious problems biologists have had with defining species, a word at the heart of modern evolutionary thought.

* 1.0 Introduction. A brief explanation of why the word species needs to be dealt with before any real progress can be made in evolutionary thought. http://www.macroevolution.net/Definition-of-Species.html

*
thomas aquinas
1.1 On the origin of the word species. Species was originally a word used by philosophers, for whom it had a much clearer meaning than it has for scientists today. http://www.macroevolution.net/species.html

* 1.2 The natural order. An account of how scientists inherited the term species from the schoolmen of the medieval era. http://www.macroevolution.net/natural-order.html

* 1.3 Hybrids and immutability. Read how early naturalists thought of hybrid sterility as the essential factor maintaining the natural order. Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-animals.html

* 1.4 Carolus Linnaeus rejects creationism. Read how Linnaeus was the first major naturalist to break with the idea of immutability and how he proposed one of the first evolutionary theories.
Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/carolus-linnaeus.html

* 1.5 Creationism versus hybridization. How creationists responded to Linnaeus' theory Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/creationism.html

* 1.6 Binomial nomenclature. An explanation of what it means to be "treated as a species." Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/binomial-nomenclature-theory.html

* 1.7. The "essence" criterion. John Locke's cogent critique of "species." Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/essentialism.html

* 1.8 Definitions of species. A discussion of the various concepts of "species." Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/definitions-of-species.html

* 1.9 Reproductive isolation: A vague criterion. Why reproductive isolation can never serve as a satisfactory basis for defining species. Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html

* 1.10 Species: Resolving the problem. A simple way to resolve the species question. Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/species-classification.html

2: ON HYBRIDIZATION
http://www.macroevolution.net/definition-of-hybrid.html

Dear OUG, (Johan),

Sorry ol' son, you just have to get over it. God's plan has obviously been to use 'natural' species-evolution to clothe and populate this marvellous construction we call 'Earth' - to make His envisioned 'Garden of Eden' a glowing reality.
Microbes, plants, animals, near-animals, near-plants, all in glorious array for 'us', the current height of evolutionary development, to explore, to enjoy, to marvel at, and to try to explain.
And, what a magical scheme, to add just a tiny touch of 'life' into the primordial 'soup' of methane atmosphere over dark and lifeless oceans splashing on shores of iron and crusted minerals, and then to sit back and watch the greatest inexplicable 'miracle' blossom and grow into an abundance so numerous and so diverse as to stagger the senses.
Ah, what splendor, what a 'miracle'! C'est 'La Vie'; This is Life!

Tall men, short men, dark, fair, round-eyed, oval-eyed, curly and straight haired, migrating, adapting, exploring and savoring the myriad ecosystems and startling bio-diversity of this tiny speck in the infinite cosmos.

Lucky-dip Lottery; we have a winner!
Enjoy, appreciate, preserve! (For 'God's' sake.)
(And, for heaven's sake, take time to stop and smell the roses.)
Future-Eaters beware; we have just one shot, and we had better get it right. Or else?

dEAR SALTY/its a game/loaded with spin/and deliberated dumbing down
[a godless agenda]

<<..So when we see Evolutionists playing fast and loose with words,
confusing "similar" and "identical",..THUS..we see he is only copying what..other propagandists do,..in obscuring the two completely different meanings.

Human and Chimp DNA is NOT 96% IDENTICAL,
and the percentage is NOT based on checking the entire Humane Genome.

Human and Chimp DNA is an estimated 96% SIMILAR,
and the percentage is based on checking ABOUT 1% of the Human Genome.

YOU BOUGHT INTO THE SPIN
thus miss the real means of how god done it.

These various types of stabilization processes are all well-known, well-understood ways of producing new types of organisms.
http://www.macroevolution.net/chapter-4-conclusion.html

This section also pointed out that many such forms have been, or are currently being, treated as species. Most, but not all, of these processes depend upon hybridization.

It was also explained how such processes, through their repeated occurrence can generate entire complexes of related forms (e.g., agamic complexes, polyploid complexes). Concrete examples were given of each of these various types of stabilization processes. So stabilization processes are observed facts, not theoretical mechanisms. They provide proof of evolutionary change..by outcross/hybreds..rather than wITH-in species..MICRO-'evolution'

http://www.macroevolution.net/chapter-5-int.html
The previous section explained how saltation can occur via various well-known genetic processes. This section (i.e., Section 5), and the two that follow (Section 6 and Section 7) attempt to assess the evolutionary significance of saltation and explain why it is reasonable to suppose that the evolutionary production of new forms of life is typically saltatory, not gradual, as traditional evolutionary theory suggests.

http://www.macroevolution.net/recombinational-stabilization.html
Recombinant derivatives produced from interchromoset hybridization have all the qualities usually expected of "species" because they represent chromotypes that are distinct from *either of the parental chromotypes.
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-infertility.html

we musT NOT FORGET..MANY CLAIMING..'SCIENCE'..
REALLY DONT 'GET' THE SCIENCE..but they got faith..others do..[wrongly]..it seem its all on faith..in god or a science 'man'[doing his job..tricking people away from THE LIVING LOVING GOOD/GOD..CREATING/SUSTAINING THE LIVING..OUR VERY BEING.

stabilization theory..provides a much more..satisfactory explanation than does neo-Darwinian theory.

Hybrid infertility:..Reduction in the quality and/or number of gametes produced by a hybrid..(in comparison..with its parents..
Hybrid inviability:..Impairment..of a hybrid's ability..to survive (in comparison with its parents).

A frequently encountered explanation..of the pervasiveness of hybrid infertility.*suggests that natural selection..acts directly to increase..reproductive..*isolation...EDIT..

This process,..known as.."reinforcement",..supposedly occurs when the two somasets..come back into contact..("secondary..[f2/3..4/5th..100th?..contact").

At this stage,..natural selection.is said to favor those individuals that mate..with their own kind...Thus,.it is said,..reproductive isolation..*eventually becomes complete,..as hybrids*..become less viable and fertile.

Reinforcement,.however,..is controversial(Butlin 2005)..Even those who accept..the idea of reinforcement..would admit many biologists do not accept it...BECAUSE..Selection for infertile,..inviable offspring
is,..in fact,.a contradiction..in terms...only/overuled..by survival/of..fittest..

YET..[survivors..designed..advantageous adaption/BY SURVIVING]

natural selection..is a process favoring
traits..that help,.not hinder,..the..production of offspring...Indeed,..no explanation,..accounting in terms of natural selection,..for the general finding that hybrids..are typically of reduced fertility..is accepted by all biologists...[YET..OFFER BETTER SURVIVAL][HYBRED-VIGOR..PHYSIOLOGICAL ADVANTAGE..[BIPEDALISM?]

hybridism..[AS FAST..AS OPPORTUNISTIC/as disaster cometh]

An explicit presentation..of the D-M model..would require the introduction..of a number of technical concepts...But non-geneticists can simply ignore..such technicalities....EDIT..

The process..there described..produces two genetically distinct populations...Coyne and Orr say..it is.."entirely possible,"..if individuals from those two populations interbred,..that the resulting hybrids.."could be sterile"..[or rUN/RAMPANT..VIA..AN ADVANTAGE/THUS SURVIVE]

However,..there is really no reason..for us to expect such hybrids to be sterile...Since the D-M model..is supposed to explain a general phenomenon..(hybrid sterility),..it should identify a general causative mechanism.[EDITED]

The same reasoning..applies to the D-M model. True...It describes a process that could..produce sterile hybrids..But its proponents fail to explain..why we should expect it to do so.

If it were somehow true..that two distinct types gained an advantage by producing sterile offspring together,..then we would expect natural selection..to favor the production of sterile..We would therefore expect sterility..generally to be a trait of hybrids.

However,..the D-M model eschews selection;..and it specifies no other causative mechanism.Neo-Darwinians fail to explain how these additional genetic differences..would cause the production of sterile offspring with disrupted meiosis..and few viable gametes.

They also fail to explain..why we should expect..genetically distinct populations..to produce/hybrids..infertile..OR NOT.
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-infertility.html

IF APE..IS ALL/UB..SO/BE-IT/SOWN
YE/REAPEST/THAT..YE SOW.

Dear OUG, (Johan),

Man did not walk with dinosaurs, nor view the transition of forerunner species emerging from the marine and/or aquatic environment onto the 'land'; Man could not have survived the catastrophe which caused the extinction of the dinosaurs; Man is said to be 'in God's image' - but which? Those who abide by the Golden Rule, or those who run amok and kill, maim, rape, torture, enslave, and destroy?

God would not have 'purposely' created such an unreliable creature as Man (even from some sense of 'play'), and, since God is infallible, and can not be known by Man, it is quite impossible for Man to be in His 'image' - excepting through a spurious interpretation by some that God is 'within' Man (per the 'soul'), though, given the general 'nature' of Man, very many must be devoid of a 'soul' and devoid of any concept/pretext of 'God' ('within' or otherwise).

God could not have 'created' ALL within 6 days (of any 'duration') - unless He created it 'piecemeal' over 4 billion years, a 'new' species here, wiping out a defunct species there, chucking in an ice-age here and there (to 'test' individual adaptability, or for 'what the heck' reasons). Such an active God, in a demonstrably 'near-godless' world?
'Creationism' is obviously a 'crock'.

All your machinations about hybrids and genetic theory/science DEMONSTRATE that species viability can only be assured through like-with-like fertilization, AND that new species development can ONLY be achieved through genetic mutation enabling resultant within-species retention and propagation of 'beneficial' physical/physiological 'adaptations' - with 'dominant' beneficial mutations eventually leading to new-species evolution (and subsequent inability to produce viable offspring from cross-fertilization - to maintain the essential 'integrity' of such new species).

So, why would God have fashioned genetic mutation as part and parcel of almost every species, if not to enable species' evolution? And, with survival of the fittest ('natural selection') as the consequent 'differentiating' mechanism to 'test' worthiness and to enable inherent 'adaptability' to changing circumstances?

I say again, if there is a God, species 'evolution' was and is His plan, not Man's.

SALTY..<<..Man did not walk with dinosaurs,>>
NO COMMENT..but
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=fossilized+shoe+print&

OK PERSONALLY I CANT SEE the shoe
BUT IF A SHOE..[200 MILLION Years old]..then who nows..WHAT THEY SAW

ONE SURE THING..NO MAN/NOR SCIENTIST..'SAW'..<<<<..nor view the transition of forerunner species emerging from the marine and/or aquatic environment onto the 'land';>>

as the CASE FOR THAT IS SLOPPY
ie all mammals descend from the fresh water frog..[name of bIG EGG IN GREEk/Latin..or some other taxonomic fib..see page 2
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7192/pdf/nature06936.pdf

<<..Man could not have survived the catastrophe which caused the extinction of the dinosaurs;>>

Clearly 7 families survived the flood
as FOR THE Science proof OF A METEOR/WHO IS TO KNOW THAT MAY HAVE BEEN LONG BEFORE[BUT I PERSONALLY FEEL THE TOWER OF BABBLE..or mosus when they had bunches of grapes it took TWO MEN To carry[who KNOWS WHAT THE FALLEN ANGELS DUN>

<<..Man is said to be..'in God's..image'-but which?>>
thin more that we are a reflection..of god..[his mirror image
regardless of SEX RACE OR beastly INCLINATION]..THE UNI-VERSE IS IN GODS IMAGE TOO..and it resembles AN Amoeba..or a nipple..[or a cell[a dark CENTER..in a CIRCLE OF AFFECT..YOU BARE TWO OF HIS FACES..ON YA BREAST[IN EVERy eye]..circles/WITHIN\CIRCLES.

<<..God would not have 'purposely' created such an unreliable creature as Man ..even from some sense of 'play'),>>

that's..opinion/not fact..BUT THE Truth is..god seeks to know/thyself[love thyself]..we seek to love THIS Image of self[as do the beasts]..but then you got those lovers who take even loving..that bit too far[but that infinite variable LOVE has some awsum fruits

<<..and, since God is infallible,>>

you just revealed he isnt..but yes its easier to assume infallibility LEST WE UPSET THE ALL LOVING ALL GOOD

<<..and can not be known by Man,>>
the bible advises we cannot look UPON HIS FAce directly
BUT WE CAN LOOK AT EACH-OTHERS FACE..And see our creator good under the flesh..sustaining the FLESH ITS living

[TRY SERIOUSLY LOOKING INTO SOMEONES EYES..and saY YOUR NOT FEELING GOD LOOKING RIGHT BACK[WITH LOVE GRATITUDE Confusion amusement pain..THERE IN FRONT OF YOU..seeing you..in fact..looking right bacK AT YOU..any living eYE WILL DO

SALTY/QUOTE..<<..that God..is..'within'/Man..(per.the 'soul'),>>

please..to clarify..first..in this life/*/man..HOUSES GODS LIVING SPIRIT..IN..our\FLESH/BLOOD BODY..TO ACHIEVE..OUR MANY/AND VARIED LOVES

AFTER/THE FLESH..DIES..[ADVANCED LIFE-FORMS..HAVE BUILT THEIR SOUL/BODY..[OR ASTRA-BODY]..OR SOUL ESSENCE..that/is oUR BODY..TILL WE CLEANS..OUR SOUL/FORM..TO REVEAL..OUR TRUE LIGHT body..[and gods light within-IT]..this..the soul/BODY..is..in the image..OF THE TRUE INNER BEING..WE ARE..

[IN HELL..MANY REVEAL/THEIR TRUE-FORM..IS BEASTLY..BUT WE CAN OVERCOME..OUR BASE NATURE..OR.EVEN RETURN..[RE-BIRTH]..IN THAT FORM..[THAT MEETS/OUR NEED]

<<>..very/many..must be devoid..of a..'soul'>>
i can seE..WHY SOME think so..BUT..THE SMALLEST THINGS.we do for other[KINDNESS]..HAVE SUCH/GREAT FRUITS..[sOME..CLOUD THEIR SOUL FORMS WITH ANGER/vengeful..AND HURTFUL Emotions...others clarify their/soul-aura MUCH MORE..EASY

YOU MAY/have heard..THAT DEMons..can 0nly..buy/your soul..[youR WORKS/DEEDS]..because your living-spirit/belongs..to god...<<..and devoid..of any..concept/pretext of 'God'..('within' or otherwise)>>..you REFUSE GODS-GRACE...

Effectively give-over
your soul/for dust..[unreality/miscreated/illusion]..[see..lamb island thread]

<<..God could/not have..'created'..ALL within 6 days..(of any 'duration')>>

GOD LIVES..ONE CONTINUAL/ETERNAL..'DAY'..[DAYS;..A primative CONCEPTS..MAN..CAN COMPREHEND\...[i see/the..'days thing]..as a measure..by which god..explains the 'changes'[FROM Darkness/INTO LIGHT..

FROM AETHER/LIQUID DEEP..INTO SOLID/Matter appearing..
dead matter..becoming living is..easy three days..[to record]..three changes..[periods]..days/millenia..who cares

please state..where the biBLE..SAYS WE ARE 7 DAys old
THE DAys of creation..that science measures..in billionths of a second..are changes..God calls 'DAYS]..whether IT..LASTED A BILLIONTH..OF A SECOND..TO 12/BILLION YEARS

<<>.unless..He created it..'piecemeal' over 4 billion years,>>

god dun all..his creation..in 6 days
since then..its been his..creation/intelligently modifying,,gods creation..as it wills..[every action//having its karma]

<<>>science DEMONSTRATE..that species/viability..canonly be assured through....like-with-like fertilization,>>..SURE..FINCHES BREED FINCHES/RATS BREED RATS..NO..cat EVER..BRED A fly..[EVOLUTION OF GENUS..IS THE LI

<<>>AND that/new species..development..can ONLY..be..achieved through genetic-mutation..>>

SADLY..THERE IS NO..mutation..that adds*the EXTRA needed/dna-MATERIAL.....unless there is..a....radical/random re-ASSORTMENT..OF NEW DNA..THAT RETAINS VIABILITY..[ITS..in the PAGES..Explained]

but..IF YOU SAY..[INSIST][..ERROR DUN IT..KNOW
THAT ONLY..VERY FEW..MUTATED/ERRORS ADD IMPROVEMENT./BY FAR MOST MUTATIONS..CAUSE Illness etc..[mutation is common[o..e in every 200 CELL DIVISIONS..HAS A MUTATION]..BUT VIA..HAVING DOUBLE STRANDS OF DNA..THEY GO Unnoticed...even/get..repaired.

you need..provide/the extra dna..where does\that..come from
but..please..its clear..you havnt read the info
http://www.christianforums.com/t7713309/

DNA-EXCHANGE..<<..enabling resultant within-species retention and propagation of 'beneficial' physical/physiological 'adaptations'>>
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-infertility.html
ITS..SO MUCH MORE..THAN JUST DNA..THE right\stuff..needs be produced in..the right sequences..[like the platypus..has 10 sex chromosomes..to switch on..the Correct bio-STIMULI E/PROVISIONING..AT THE RIGHT/STAGES
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7192/pdf/nature06936.pdf

<<..with 'dominant'..beneficial mutations..eventually leading to new-species evolution>>

http://tolweb.org/Terrestrial_Vertebrates/14952

(AGAIN..GODS ONLY PLAN..IS be
the way/means..FOR WHATever WE WISH]

2:salty/passions..
*HYBRIDIZATION..nOT EVOLUTION.
http://www.macroevolution.net/definition-of-hybrid.html
THE/VERY..LATEST..'find'
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/files/2014/03/70117-1024x799.jpg
the..chiCKEN..FROM HELL..
[CASSOWARY/CROCODILE Cross..hybred]

'Chicken from Hell'..skeleton sheds light..on...A 250-kilogram 'chicken from hell'.with features similar to the cassowary is the
latest dinosaur..discovery by US scientists.. w
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2014/03/19/giant-chicken-from-hell-is-new-dinosaur-species/

i would say..look at THE DRAWINGS/CARTOONS..
..BUT AFTER..YOU SEEN THem//you believe..the spin..[SEEING/=\BELIEVING]

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/features/the-platypus-unravelled/

But the clue...[10 sex chromosomes..REveal/
I see..gods hand...in the little things..the mundane..common..AS MUCH AS..iN...THE RARE..unique..AND..'EXCLUSIVE'

INTRODUCTION:.A NEW..evolution-THEORY
http://www.macroevolution.net/table-of-contents.html
Why the author chose to create an alternative theory of evolution
http://www.macroevolution.net/introduction.html

1:..ON SPECIES
http://www.macroevolution.net/Definition-of-Species.html
This section discusses..some of the serious problems..biologists have had with defining species,..a word at the heart of modern evolutionary thought.

*1.0..Introduction...A brief explanation of why..the word species needs to be dealt with..before any real progress..can be made in evolutionary thought. http://www.macroevolution.net/Definition-of-Species.html

*thomas aquinas
1.1...On the origin..of the word species..Species....was originally a word used..by philosophers,..for whom..it had..a much clearer meaning than it has..for scientists today. http://www.macroevolution.net/species.html

*1.2..The natural order...An account of how..scientists inherited the term species..from the schoolmen..of the medieval era. http://www.macroevolution.net/natural-order.html

*1.3..Hybrids and immutability. Read how early naturalists thought of hybrid sterility as the essential factor maintaining the natural order. Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-animals.html

*1.4..Carolus Linnaeus rejects creationism...Read how Linnaeus was the first...major naturalist to break..with the idea of immutability and how he proposed..one of the first evolutionary theories.
http://www.macroevolution.net/carolus-linnaeus.html

*1.5 Creationism versus hybridization...How creationists..responded to Linnaeus'..theory http://www.macroevolution.net/creationism.html

*1.6...Binomial nomenclature....An explanation.of what it means to be "treated..as a species." http://www.macroevolution.net/binomial-nomenclature-theory.html

*1.7...The "essence" criterion...John Locke's cogent critique..of "species." http://www.macroevolution.net/essentialism.html

*..1.8..Definitions of species...A discussion of the various concepts of "species." Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/definitions-of-species.html

* 1.9..Reproductive isolation:..A vague criterion..Why reproductive isolation..can never serve as a satisfactory basis..for defining species. http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html

* 1.10..Species:..Resolving the problem...A simple way to resolve the species question...Read on http://www.macroevolution.net/species-classification.html

...WHY?..
mind conditioning../done\upon kids..
[propaganda..to subvert/state/SCIENCE..INTO GOD/PLACEBO.
Elysium..vs World War Z,..setting the agenda and mass mind control..

Ruth Hull..<<Movies and literature inspire..and program the masses to love,..to hate,..to believe disbelieve..to sin..and to spin..to protect or to kill.>>
http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/elysium-vs-world-war-z-setting-agenda.html

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=elysium+AGENDA+21

http://thecommonsenseshow.com/tag/agenda-21-2/page/3/
http://rss.infowars.com/20140320_Thu_Alex.mp3

ANYHOW I GOT TO THINKING..why do we need all this 'complicatED'..NAME CALLING
BUT to hide a lie..[my thinking was why cant the scxience call A FLEA A FLEA
BUT THEN THAT WOULD BECOME TOO CLEAR/THEY GOT NOTHING

like if a flea..bounces into a mosquito
THEIR taxonomy would look alike/but tyhe reality more cleaR/THE LIE MORE EASY SEEN THROUGH
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=plain+lanGUAGE+TREE+OF+LIFE&i

it woulD BE NICE TO NOT HAVE TO LOOK UP COMMON NAME 'TRE OF LIFE
BUT THEN Again im reminded..the bible got it first
NOT ONLY THE TREE OF LIFE..BUT THE TREE OK KNOWLEDGE..of good bad as well.

ITS JUST TOO NEAT
AND that those knowing its wrong..still remain mute
find mE A 'TRE OF LIFE''..IN PLAIN WORD..I wil show the theory is built on bubbles in the clay..ITS CALL a great idea..till you try to divide the first CLAY CELL..ITS LIKELY SAID BETTER THAN I COULd here

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message861599/pg1

THE NON CHANGING FACE..OF NATURE

EXTRACTED/FROM..LINK

All fossils are of complete animals and plants,
not works in progress "under construction".

That is why we can give each distinct plant or animal a name.

If evolution's continuous..*morphing were really going on, every fossil would show change underway..*throughout the creature, with parts in various stages of completion...[For every successful change there should be many more that lead to nothing.]

if..The whole process is random trial and error, without direction.

IF/So every plant and animal, living or fossil, should be covered inside and out with useless growths and have parts under construction.

It is a grotesque image,
and just what the theory of evolution really predicts.

Even Charles Darwin had a glimpse of the problem in his day.

He wrote in his book On the Origin of Species: "The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on Earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links?

Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my DARWINIAN/MICRO-EVOLVING CHANGES/*theory."

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message861599/pg1 "As more and more genes were sequenced, it became clear that the patterns of relatedness could only be explained if bacteria and archaea were routinely swapping genetic material with other species - often across huge taxonomic distances".

" 'There's promiscuous exchange of genetic information across diverse groups,' says Michael Rose, an evolutionary biologist at the University of California, Irvine."

"As early as 1993, some were proposing that for bacteria and archaea the tree of life was more like a web.

In 1999, Doolittle made the provocative claim that 'the history of life cannot properly be represented as a tree'.11

'The tree of life is not something that exists in nature, it's a way that humans classify nature,' he says."

"Recent research suggests that the evolution of animals and plants isn't exactly tree-like either."

"A team at the University of Texas at Arlington found a peculiar chunk of DNA in the genomes of eight animals - the mouse, rat, bushbaby, little brown bat, tenrec, opossum, anole lizard and African clawed frog - but not in 25 others, including humans, elephants, chickens and fish.

This patchy distribution suggests that the sequence must have entered each genome independently by horizontal transfer."24
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-infertility.html
"HGT [horizontal gene transfer] has been documented in insects, fish and plants, and a few years ago a piece of snake DNA was found in cows."

"Biologist Michael Syvanen of the University of California, Davis... compared 2000 genes that are common to humans, frogs, sea squirts, sea urchins, fruit flies and nematodes.

In theory, he should have been able to use the gene sequences to construct an evolutionary tree showing the relationships between the six animals. He failed."

"The problem was that different genes told contradictory evolutionary stories."

Dear OUG,

Spurious, spurious. Red herrings abounding.

Firstly, the author in that link of yours (godlikeproductions...) is a dyed-in-the-wool 'nong' (or, 'Twit', if you would prefer), harping on about conspiracies, and with a distinctly unhelpful (and unhealthy) predilection for 'cherry picking' information, and for the dissemination of misinformation and unsubstantiated 'rumour mongering'.

As for the rest of your non-argument, there is plenty of evidence of 'useless' evolution - or rather, the 'abandonment' of unhelpful evolutionary traits - such as the presence of 'vestigial' appendages in many species - including vestigial toes in a cow's foot, dew claws in dogs, and the occasional birth of a human infant with a vestigial tail. (Consult any reliable source and you will find many examples of such 'evolution'. Maybe try: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_vestigial_organ#slide=1)

Want to see proof of evolution? Just look at the skeletal structure of a whale, and compare it to that of an elephant, rhino or human.
Whales obviously 'evolved' from a land-dwelling mammal - since all mammals can only have evolved from land-dwelling forerunner species, unless you may be fool enough to think that such an identical degree of 'parallel evolution' is likely to have occurred in both ocean and land environments. And, don't stop at whales, look also at the skeletal structures of dolphins and seals.
Also, do you find any fish-like creatures inhabiting the land? Didn't think so.

TBC>

Continued:

As for finding identical DNA strands in different, non-related, species: Why should it be strange that different species have, at some stage in their evolution, occasioned upon a genetic mutation which has also occurred, quite naturally, and quite by chance, in various other non-related species? Trial and error is, after all, the nub and the essence of evolution.

As for current efforts, or trials, to emulate evolution by selective breeding: It should not be forgotten that the evolution of species has taken many millions of years. It has been a long, and interminably slow process, and has relied upon actual genetic mutation, and the long-haul testing of every such mutation. Cross-breeding of wheat, or of any other plant, may at best produce a new 'strain', but would take many millions of such crosses over millions of 'generations' to luck upon a variant so different to the original as to represent a genuine new species. (And, for any variant to be correctly classified as a new 'species', it must be capable of reproduction and long-term survival without external interference or assistance. One unique 'lab rat' does not a species make.)

The fossil record DOES record evolution, from amphibian to reptile, from reptile to mammal, and so on, with many 'intermediate' forms being found and recorded. Why is there not a 'total' record? If you examine the conditions under which fossils have been 'preserved' for us to find it will be clear why there are in fact so few for us to find, rather than why there aren't more.

Open your eyes and your mind and the truth will astound you.
Stick your head in the sand and life will pass you by.

saltyquote..<<..So,..why would God..have fashioned..genetic mutation as..part and parce.l of almost..every species,..if not..to enable species'..evolution?>>

dear salty..god repAIRS/NOT MUTATES
its not..via mutation/THAt we..get great..evolutionary jumps..BUT MAYBE..BY THINGS..LIKE HGT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

but..lets go back...to your according..[micr-]evolution..to mutation
[ITS TOO..EASY TO ROLL/OF.. THE TONGUE..UNTHINKINGLY]..mutation basically is error/..AND THERE/ARE..SO MANY MEANS...THAT mutated errors..get fixed ..thats why/species mating..with/the same species survive..billions OF YEARS...[VIRTUALLY UNCHANGED/but..by MAKINGS/OR BEAKS..as REVEALED..BY MANY/sub-species][within/GENUS]
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=mutation+repair+mechanisms&

BUT..Why bother..your not intresTED..IN ACTUALLY LOOKING..AT INFO
and...im over pointing out the error/of your unlinked personifications..at the people..whos links..i post..[that/you..cant;refute/thus..insult]

then you..put up..TWO VESTIDual/s..no doudt to try tO REFute..the 'nongs words[darwin?..

<<..IF/So every plant..and animal,..living or fossil,..should be covered inside..and out...with useless growths and have parts under construction.>>..PRESENTING TWO/REFUTES NOTHING.

<<>>It..is a..grotesque image,
and..just what the..theory of evolution..*really predicts.

Even Charles Darwin...had a glimpse of the problem..in his day.

He wrote/in his book..On the Origin of Species:.."The number of intermediate varieties..which have formerly existed..on Earth*must be truly enormous.>>[MORE/THAN..two?

fact IS..THERE..SHOULD BE..TRILLIONS..PF MICRo-MUTATIONS..[AND THERE ARE..MANY MUTATIONAL ERRORS..IN Each of us]..but thanks be..to repair mechanisms..YOU WOULD NEVER GUESS..[AS darwin himself SAID..RE PIGEONS..BEING IN A GENERALIST POPULATION..FOR a thousand years would SIMPLY HOMOGENIZE..BACK INTO Wildtype blue rockdove
http://www.angelfire.com/ga/huntleyloft/BlueQuestion.html

BUT ITS CLEAr youR IGNORING THAT YOU CANT REFUTE
to refute pathetic points like DEW CLAWS..WHEN BY YOUR OWN THEORY EVERyone should have imperfection..AS WE ALL MICRO EVOLVE INTO SUPER APES..mutated dna is bull..READ THE SELF REPAIR MECHANISMS..ANYHOW HAVE A NICE LIFE.

YOU GOT FAITH..not knowing..as reveaLED BY YOUR LACK OF SIMPOLY NAMING NAMES And revealing the first life from non life..and the first single cell..GENUS..FIRST MULTICELL GENUS

LAST FISH/Genus..reveal either..or the scaled MAMMAL..OR A FURRY FISH
WHAT WAS THAT FIRST..WARM BOOOD FISH.../LIZARD THING Without shoulder blades..that BRED..A..COLD/BLOOD SALAMANDER..THAT BRED...A FROG THAT BRED A BIRD..that bred all mammals

or that wolf/like mammal..that became..LOL..a whale[MEARLY BECAUSE A WHAlE MAKEs..claim to a pelvis..THE INSANITY/OF THE STEPS..HAVE HUGE GAPS

AS A PLAIN COMMON name..[TREE]..woulD REVEAL/THUS THE USE..OF SECRET WORDS..THAT CONCEAL..,huge Gaps..IN UA/THEORY

name..what mammal.WAS BEFORE THE WHALE[GO ON LOOK ..AT THE DAMM THING
REALISE HOW INSANE..THE THINGS ARE..THAT YOU SAY/name-call over.

OUG,

Whale evolution is one of the most accurately recorded examples of evolution we have and yet, when Saltpetre raises it with you, what’s your response?

<<or that wolf/like mammal..that became..LOL..a whale[MEARLY BECAUSE A WHAlE MAKEs..claim to a pelvis …>>

Merely?

This is how dishonest you are on this topic. You paint a false picture of the story. According to you, some scientists looked at the whale’s pelvis and said, “Ya know what? I reckon this this evolved from a… um… a… a… a WOLF-like creature. Yes, yes, that sounds good!”

What about the vestigial legs? What about the toe bones in the flippers?

Then you use the tiresome old ‘gaps’ argument…

<<THE INSANITY/OF THE STEPS..HAVE HUGE GAPS>>

Very small gaps, as there naturally would be.

We could take a photo of a particular person every day of their life and there’s still going to be gaps. That doesn’t prove that the photos are of different people. Fossilisation is an extremely unlikely occurrence and yet you creationists still complain of gaps found in some remarkably smooth transitions recorded in the strata. Worse still, creationists are so shifty and dishonest that, every time a gap is filled, they simply point to the two smaller gaps either side of that newly discovered fossil and then gloat that there are now two gaps instead of one.

Regarding to whale evolution, we have Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, Dalanistes, Rodhocetus, Takracetus, Gaviocetus, Dorudon, Basilosaurus, Mysticetes, etc…

Here’s a challenge for you, OUG… Try explaining why evolution makes such accurate predictions as to where we should find transitional fossils if it’s all such a crock. Why is it that a “fraudulent” science (as you would have us believe) is able to make such accurate predictions that we can know where to find (and end up finding) the transitional fossils that we need to find in order to complete the evolutionary picture? That’s some very careful placement of fossils laid down by an apparently very deceiving and misleading god of yours.

Here’s a little video for you that demonstrates the absurdity of your creationist position… http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=65c_1243098435

Enjoy.

AJ..PLEASE//lets focus..just on your whale tale
please put up how 'it really ha[p[end'..according to your theory
what specific cow like wolf like mannel/became a whale...[for what reason]

lets begin with what mammal became which whale
oe present the science..[it cant be that hard..if its true]
tell it with pictures if you like...if you cant..back up the theory[as clearly SALTY CANT NEITHER/NOR PERICULES..but hey lets give it a try

so fish became a wolf like cow mammal
that became which whale specifically[ignoring the obvious/size Differences]

HERE LET ME HELP YOU GET STARTED
PLEASE PICK AND CHOSE WHICH YOU PRESENT AS YOUR PROOF
[I WILL NED FOSSILS AND NAMES..like i did last time..a few bone fragments aint going to fix it this time..[its easy to take these things on 'faith'..and thats sadly all you lot have got

but please mate/your one of the more intelligent here
[i had so much expectation for salty/but clearly he has had a look at the 'proof' and decided like me its childish fantasy..thus taught to us as kids/but unlike santa claws or the ester rabbit...you guys believe itto the grave.

TO BEGIN WITH ..PICK A CHART ANY CHART
LOOK AT HOW THIS TURNED INTO THAT..in micro STEPS..That somehow didnt make the cut..[into the fossil record]..think..please..of the steps to ,Make the first INTO THE SECOND..[ALL THE Discarded/lost/omitted/VESTIGIAL/LOL...[so all these 'critters have mammal sex/..YOU CAN INFORM..penus/vagina compatibility/dna?..WHAT SHRUNK THE LIMBS..BUT GIGANTIC-AZISED EVERYTHING ELSE.

i look forward to sorting it out once and for all..[for once]
please note the scale..[size of these critters]..how come the 'advantages'..didnt help survuiVAL..IS THE WHALE [WHICH WHALE]..RELATED TO SEALS OTTERS OR JUST COWS AND WOLVES?

Dear OUG,

"And God created Light, that some might see, for themselves. But, for others He created a Blind Spot, so that they might forever be confused, and for these He created a Book of nice stories, beautifully and poetically composed and translated into many Languages (which He also created), so as to give them comfort in their confusion."
But the Good Book proved to be too complicated for many - due in large part to errors in translation and to poetic license exercised by many of the chosen scribes (or because they misheard or misunderstood His Message, or just didn't Believe hard enough) - which resulted in many Tribes with many interpretations of the Word; and so, confusion reigned, and was and is destined to reign, for some, through the millennia and unto the very ending of Time (which God also created, and which could end at any moment, at His Absolute discretion).

Now, I'm not putting-down the Good Book, just the misuse and abuse to which it has been put, and unfortunately continues to be put to this present day.

To topic: Nature is fantastic. Enjoy it, revel in it, and let those who wish to explain it and wish to unravel the mystery of its 'creation' or its 'evolution' do so in peace. The future preservation of nature rests with the endeavours of such inquiry, so these truth-seekers deserve our full support and encouragement. Without them, the Future-Eaters may simply reap and pillage unhindered until nature is left in such disarray as to be unrecognizable and in dire peril of complete collapse. The destruction is well underway, and the more we quibble the more we enable the unfettered degradation of the only things which really give life meaning, the Natural World which we inhabit, and the mysteries which it has yet to reveal.

The future is in our hands.

AJ Philips,

Fantastic! (And, loved the video.)

YOU..ARE CORRECT/OF COURSE SALTY
nature needs only study..not less..and the future focus will be on restoring the lost civilisations..rebuilding restoring preserving..entertaining each other/paying all the local taxes when we are living localy..reliving the truth of our ancestors through rose coloured glasses

but first we need know the truth..of how things went wrong/why so much percfection looks so 'good'..[yet acts according to its environment as much as nature

i meant..earlier..to post a search link
anyhow that led to this

http://www.evolutionevidence.org/evidence/progressions/

SOMEHOW IT JUST HAS A LOT OF EVOLUTION IMAGRY/THAT INCLUDES SO MANY DRAWINGS/NOT PHOTOS..IT SHOWS AN EXAMPLE [FOR EXAMPLE]..OF THE EVOLUTION/OF SEAgull..
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/zimmergulls2.gif

and evolution of dog
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Genealogy-of-the-dog-low-res-1024x467.jpg

with proof/wolf/wildtype
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/evolutiontimeline.jpg
ie true evolution..[near the end]
it has for example the philangies evolution/link
AND HAVINg just seen them all..i now back track..to post lins/here
as i make my points/refute if you will..

SOME/SALAMANDER/EVOLVING SALAMANDERS
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ranges_map.jpg

teosonite/evolving into corn
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/corn_looks_very__c.jpg

evolution..of stickle back
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/081010100457-large.jpg

is this a law..or the law
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Progressions-copy2.jpg

ok..there is the whale evolution
from a hippo...http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/whale_evo.jpg

here is one with their skelitons

http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/evolution-of-whale-590x1024.jpg

here/is the whale from a coyote..by skull..
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/nostrilevol1.jpg

here are some ankle bones/pronghorn/whale
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/artiodactyl-ankle-bone-in-whale.png

GOTTA LOVE THE TITLE OF THIS ONE
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/i-b73f4a0119695665fc8924a810f69df5-baleen-tree-small.jpg

http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2006/08/15/the-origin-of-the-ridiculous/

here pictures of reduction..of hindlimbs
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/4-1024x731.jpg

THE THING IS I HAD SO MUCH OF THIS CCCC RAP FOR TOO LONG
JUST NAME NAMES /OR EVEN 'PICTURES''..OF WHAT YOU RECKON EVOLVED WHAT/BY LITTLE STEPS
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/evidence/progressions/

IT WOULD BE SO MUCH MORE EASY ACCEPTING THE GODLESS LIE
BUT THat..hasnt even been begun to be understood/thus CLAIMING Science is like pre-ejaculation..if your happy with that good on you

im not
i just want the truth
im not responsible for what demonseed our ape grandpappy did sew in a sow...but thank god he did so..[i couldnt have dun it..what sort of wolf goes and rapes a walruss anyhow?..are you wolf or hippo?..OR TITMOUSE...WHATS TO FEAR FROM THE TRUTH..NO BABY HAS THE GUILT OF EITHER PARENT[ARNT..ALL BABIES SOO CUTE]..ewven the deformed barst ards/harvard-hybreds..[we aint no pure bred ape..butt high breed with the pig/thats why we love our muck..good luck]

Dear OUG,

Evolution is really quite simple.
We start with a simple single-celled organism - a bacterium or amoeba for example.
Single cells reproduce or propagate by simple cell-division, mitosis, in which the cell nucleus, containing simple DNA or RNA, divides into two identical nuclei, and then the whole cell divides into two identical 'daughter' cells, each containing one of the identical nuclei.
Complexity began initially with proliferation of a multitude of different single-celled organisms, many of which remain relatively unchanged to this day.
Now, some (or perhaps only one) of these different early forms would have arisen initially by chance, from a collision or aggregation of organic molecules which 'fit'; or by 'design' if you are so inclined. Thence, trying the 'fit' of various organic and inorganic molecules would have led, over time, to improvements which enhanced the survival and propagation of this, or these, cells.
Note, these cells have to 'eat' to survive (and to propagate), and they do so by absorbing nutrients (minerals/ions, organic molecules, amino-acids, lipids, protein) found in their 'environment'; or by absorbing CO2, minerals/ions and sunlight, in the case of single-celled plants.

Since there are such commonalities in structure and composition (ectoplasm, nucleus, DNA, RNA, mitochondria) shared by the multiple varieties of single-celled organisms found in the environment, it is most likely that many, or most, of the persistent early varieties arose initially by simple DNA/RNA 'mutation' of the few, or the one original, 'chance' organism(s).

TBC>

Continued:

All life, however complex, is composed of single cells, though many of these cells have taken specialized forms in the more complex multi-celled organisms, such as ourselves, and these cells replicate themselves (as in 'renewal') by cell division, mitosis, just as their early forerunners did, and in doing so can be subject to an occasional mistake, or 'mutation', just as their early forerunners were.

Cell division errors, mutations, can be potentially beneficial - perhaps producing a more effective blood, brain, or kidney cell; and some deleterious - such as cancerous cells or 'faulty' blood, brain or kidney cells. We, as with all life, are subject to 'aging'.

The most dramatic cell mutations occur during sexual reproduction, cell meiosis, in which haploid cells are produced (containing only half of the DNA contained in a normal cell), as in a sperm or an ovum, and which must then be 'mated' with its corresponding other 'half' to produce a living viable 'whole' embryonic cell.

It is the marvel of sexual reproduction which is responsible not only for the multitudinous 'variety' arising in the higher, complex life-forms such as ourselves and other mammals and chordates, and for the variety seen in many flowering plants, but, most importantly, for those occasional mutations which have, over time, given rise to divergent evolutionary paths which have produced so many new and different species.

PS. Whales and Hippos may have had a common ancestor, but 'evolved' separately - as your linked chart did in fact display.

dear salty/thank-you for that..11 TH GRADE...Version of evolution
if you did that..from your own memory..congratulations..FOR KNOWING THE SPIN...MIXED WITH THE SCIENCE..?[direct from a TEXTBOOK/unattributed]

but the question.was name names/in plain speak
NOT JUST..A RE-STATEMENt..of creed..taught by rote/BY ONE WHO HASNT BRED A THING/and never even studied the amoeba/which is much MORE THAN A proto life...

gods evolution..is reflected in nature
[god was first..a single cell..amoeba..]

people forget HOW amazing..even..an..ameoba is

the issue of amoeba
an omnipresent little beast....unchanged from the beginning]
-
in researching our ameba..i found only more about
how imposable macro-evolution is

http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/Creation/creation-not-evolution-4.htm

<<..The common amoeba..is found..in fresh/water ponds>>

salty.water..not till later..
[needs biological-salts..from-life][launa/flora]
thus first life..[flora]..must?have..been in...alkaline/freshwater?

<<ameba..ranges in size..from an invisible microscopic animal.to one that reaches..a diameter of about half..a millimeter,..visible to the naked eye..as a tiny..white/speck.

Each ameba..is a little mass of gelatinous protoplasm,..containing many granules..and droplets...The protoplasm..is covered with a delicate*..cell membrane.

In many ways..this strange little creature..bears witness to its Creator.

(1)The Ameba..is gifted...with many Strange Abilities..for a Microscopic/Animal...

It..can crawl;
it can breathe..(though..it has no lungs..or gills);

it.can distinguish..inert particles..from the minute plants.and animals..on which it feeds;>>..

ok..first came plants..got it..[fixtures]
then..movement/fauna..[fungibles]

..<<..it can thrust out..
its jelly-like body..*at any point to lay hold..of its food;

it can digest..and absorb..its food;

though..it has no feet,
it crawls..by projecting.."pseudopods."

Such a..strange little creature..could not.."just happen.
"One cannot fail..to see..in these abilities..the Hand of the Creator.

The Ameba..moves around.by means of "Ameboid movement,"..projecting a "pseudopod"(..false foot).from any part..of its body...Because of this..it changes shape..when it moves..or engulfs food,

hence.its name.."ameba"
(derived from..a Greek word..meaning..."change").

The "legs"..of an ameba..are temporary,..and soon flow..back into its body,..when it stops moving..or completes the ingestion..of food particles.

This is totally different..from the muscular movements..of higher animals...Who designed it?

Moreover,.if the amoeba is about to "swallow"..an active organism,
the pseudopods..are thrown out widely..and do not touch*.or irritate the pre..* before it has been surrounded;

but..when the ameba..is about to ingest..a quiescent object,such as a single algal cell,..the pseudopods surround the cell..very closely.

Apparently the amoeba..can "think"
even though..it has no brain

so logus/logic..came
before..even..the first fauna/cell?

2B CTD

REGARDLESS...LETS SEE WHAT YOU GOT..<<>.PS...Whales and Hippos may have had a common ancestor,..but..'evolved'.separately.as your linked chart..did in fact display..>>

yeah the chart..i linked to..unlike THE NAMING OF Specific names as requested/but lets LOOK AT THAT DAMN BEAST..THAT SPLIT..ITS GENES INTO NEAR DIRECT ANCESTOR TO A HIPPO..and essentially a wolf[canus]

SO THIS AMASSING SINGULAR-'ANCESTOR'..THAT BIRTHED NOT ONLY THE HIPPO/BUT THE WOLf that became A...PLEASE PROVIDE THE PLAiN SPEAK PLEASE

its said..THAT IF YOu know what your talking of..you canb explain IT/IT'S CLEAR many got NO IDEA WHAT THEIR SAYING[SURE THEY GET THE 'SCIENCE'..of biology..OR EVOLUTION OF SPECIES/BUT THEN CARRY THAT INTO MACRO EVOLUTION INTO GENUS..WHERE ONE amassing critter becomes a hippo/and a wolf

ITS YOU LOT THat got this oNE SELL DID IT ALL
A SEED THAT GREW INTO A TREE..OF LIFE[YOU EVEN WENT AND PLAGIARIZED THE BIBLE..plus the big bang..of let there BE LIGHT..
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5899&page=3

except SOMEHOW..YOU MANAGE TO do it by renaming EVE INTO LUCY
BY RENAMING THINGS.INTO LATIN/BY SOME FEATURE LIKE BIG EGG..OR SPINE..OR NO GILLS..OR so much other clever name changing..BUT MATE GIVE IT TO ME..IN..*CLEAR Names

whO WAS/THE HIPPOS MUMMY?..[a fish/salamader/or a hippo?]
WHICH WHALE...BECAME WHICH DOLPHIN THINGY..THAT CAME FROM WHICH CON MAN Ancestor of the wolf and the HIPPO..you need think on using the real common names..cause THAT'..?HOW..ya hide the lie..by using new names/that alone should normally wake people up/cause the bible did the same/PEER-BIASED..things

saul became paul
the old matriarch..became someone..else/just cause he thought/HE..*fought..[raped?]..'an angel'..[Depending/on..the version]

HERE IS..ANOTHER/LINK..Of..WHAT/COMes..to mind..;..[THALIDOMIDE/LIMBS?]
http://www.evolutionevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/i-d0461980488edc7e81dbf3850219c4f6-cet_hindlimb_loss1.gif

AS YOUR..CLEARLY..[THE/CURRENT/PROFESSING-EXPERT]
PLEASE name real names..of real critters..[NOT JUST/STONE BONE/FRAGMENTS..MADE/FROM PLASTER CASTS/DRAWN..INTO PICTURES.

because the pictures..just look nothing..alike..
[none of this..'gradual/evolution/BUT GREAT..CHUNKS OF DELETED ..'JUNK'..THat some how..AVOIDS...Explaining..the reverse[HOW FINS GREW..LEGS/BUT\NOT HIPS..ARMS/..BUT/NOT..SHOULDER BLADES]..

how..do we know ITS..THE WHALE loosing..its digits[hoofs]
OR A WOLF LOOSING ITS PAwS..[OR A FISH..EVOLVING THEM..hips

IE..THESE STONE FRAGMENTS..are you sure/
/science precise..they were all*//made evolving..or devolving?

thing is you cant/no-one..can*
so you throw..some grade.school/theory about..and avoid nAMING NAMES../[YET AGAIN]..it turns out..[pheno-type/as..opposed by geno-type]..taxonomic classification..deceived too many

from
http://www.anusha.com/eukarya.htm

ITS..NOT YOUR FAULT SALTY/I USED TO..BELIEVE IN SCIENCE..1/too...LIKE YOU..TILL I LEARNED..ITS BUILT ON..NON-SCIENCE LIES/AND PLAGIARIZED godless-THEORIES.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5899&page=3

Re: Debunking Evolution: Problems, Errors, and Lies EXPOSED, in plain language for non-scientists
The "Tree of Life" is falling
New discoveries are bringing down the whole notion of a "tree of life", as passages from an article in the mainstream magazine New Scientist show:18

"The tree-of-life concept was absolutely central to Darwin's thinking, equal in importance to natural selection, according to biologist W. Ford Doolittle of Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Without it the theory of evolution would never have happened."

"For much of the past 150 years, biology has largely concerned itself with filling in the details of the tree.

"But today the project lies in tatters, torn to pieces by an onslaught of negative evidence.

Many biologists now argue that the tree concept is obsolete and needs to be discarded.

'We have no evidence at all that the tree of life is a reality,' says Bapteste.
That bombshell has even persuaded some that our fundamental view of biology needs to change."

"The problems began in the early 1990s when it became possible to sequence actual bacterial and archaeal genes".

"As early as 1993, some were proposing that for bacteria and archaea the tree of life was more like a web.

In 1999, Doolittle made the provocative claim that 'the history of life cannot properly be represented as a tree'.11

'The tree of life is not something that exists in nature, it's a way that humans classify nature,' he says."

I think you’re just dodging the questions I put to you, OUG.

<<AJ..PLEASE//lets focus..just on your whale tale>>

It’s not my “tale” either. Just as it’s not just “my” theory. You are trying personalise this instead of sticking to facts.

<<please put up how 'it really ha[p[end'..according to your theory>>

If you want to know how it all happened, then there’s an abundance of literature for you to immerse yourself in.

<<what specific cow like wolf like mannel/became a whale...[for what reason]>>

The fact that Pakicetus was at the beginning of the list I provided you was supposed to suggest the answer to this question.

You claim to have studied evolution in depth and to have accepted it at one point (until you became “educated”) and yet you don’t know these sorts of details or how to find answers to the questions you pose, despite your apparent ability to find some of the most obscure conspiracy websites. To me, this suggests that you feel you are right if you can just trip up, or draw a blank from, those with whom you are discussing this topic. Whether or not your average Joe knows the answers to your questions is not indicative of how right you are.

<<…that became which whale specifically[ignoring the obvious/size Differences]>>

All Whales. Dolphins too.

<<[I WILL NED FOSSILS AND NAMES..like i did last time..a few bone fragments aint going to fix it this time..>>

I have already provided you with a long list of fossil names. And all in the correct order too. You can do the rest for yourself if you are genuinely interested.

By the way, given what we know of anatomy and skeletal systems, and the computer modelling technology now available to us, bone fragments are all we need. This argument doesn’t help you much with all the more complete fossils that have been found though.

As for your strawman argument regarding amoebas: here’s a short video for you to watch called The Origins of Life Made Easy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8nYTJf62sE

I certainly hope you don’t claim to have studied abiogenesis in depth too.

science/that is uncritical/isnt science/YOuthrow up junk links..i need watch/TO Get insulted..by grade schOOL SCIENCE
IN A 6 MINUTE VIDIO He wastes the first minute..and the last half minute telling creationists how dumb we are

NEAR THE END HE ADMITS WE MAY NEVER KNOW
AFTER THE First point he says words to the affect MOST LIKELT

THING IS THERE ARE 20 STEPS TO LIFE..HE LISTED 6 POINTS
THE THING IS its his theory.not scienCE

IE SPIN..IN LUE OF PROOF[THE CLAY DONT EXPLAIN THE LIPODS INVERSION ESSENTIAL TOP A CELL MEMBRANE[A LITTLE POINT HE JUST LEAVes hanging in a doodle of tangled rna..which isnt paired dna life has

ij short dear boy its spin

now..Regarding to whale evolution,
ACCORDING..to you simply dropping the names proves itself

anyhow..you claim..we have Pakicetus,>>..

IT LOOKS LIKE A TASI TIGER WITHOUT STRIPES
http://www.google.com.au/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hl=en&tbm=isch&q=pakicetus+skeleton&revid=2031722051&sa=X&ei=2qovU8LcAoiElQXCuYC4Cw&ved=0CFkQ1QIoAg

SO this tassie tiger[mammal]..gave birth to
<<Ambulocetus,>>.. it looks like a stuffed crocodile
OR MAYBE An aligator

anyhow the aligator..GAVE BIRTH TO

http://www.google.com.au/images?q=Ambulocetus&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&client=firefox-a&gfe_rd=ctrl&gws_rd=cr&hl=en&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ei=z6svU_rOIc2kkQXb34GQCQ&ved=0CCkQsAQ

<<..Dalanistes,>>. SOME CROCODILE LOOKING SEAL LEOPARD CROSS OTTER looking thing

http://www.google.com.au/images?q=dalanistes&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&client=firefox-a&gfe_rd=cr&hl=en&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ei=ZawvU5i9FY3FkQWJ6YC4Bg&ved=0CCQQsAQ

no picture..at wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalanistes

the seal crok/thing..gave birth to..

<<..Rodhocetus,>.SOME LOCKNESS MONSTER CRITTER
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=Rodhocetus&ie=utf-8&

THAT DIDNT LAY EGGS LIKE the croCk leopard thing did
ANYHOW nessie gave birth to

<<..Takracetus,>>
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=Takracetus&i

THAT SEEMS TO HAVE REVETED TO//the sealcrock/thingy

WHAT GAVE BIRTH TO..
<<..Gaviocetus>>..THAT IN SOME DRAWINGS LOOKS LIKE A STYRGIN WITH NO LEGS IJN OTHERS LIKE A KANGEROO OTTEr cdross

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=Gaviocetus&ie=utf-8&o

ANYHOW NEXT the otter roo/sturgen..gave birth to

,<<..Dorudon,>>..WHO LOOKS LIE A FESHWATER DOLPHIN

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=Dorudon&ie=utf-8

WHO GAVE BIRTH [PRESUMABLY]..TO..<<..Basilosaurus,..>>
THAT LOOKS like a crock..[salty crock/load of crock?
or maybe like a dinosaur

and the http://www.google.com.au/search?q=Basilosaurus&ie=utf-8

LOAD OR SAUR CROCK..GAVE BIRTH TO<<.. Mysticetes,>>

THAT May..or may not look like a whale[AS NO PHOTOAPPEARS on the first p[age

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=Mysticete&ie=ut

So you learned absolutely nothing from the video then, OUG? I didn’t think you would. No acknowledgement either of just how misguided your post regarding amoebas was either.

<<science/that is uncritical/isnt science/YOuthrow up junk links..i need watch/TO Get insulted..by grade schOOL SCIENCE>>

I agree that science that isn’t critical isn’t science. I’m sorry, too, that you felt insulted by the scientific level of the video, but apparently you still needed to hear it.

I’d be interested in your answer to the final question of the video, though. At what step in the process did God need to intervene and what is your evidence for this? You demand some pretty high standards of evidence from others, yet you offer none yourself.

<<NEAR THE END HE ADMITS WE MAY NEVER KNOW>>

So what? It’s better than making something up. How is the possibility of never knowing something for sure evidence against it?

The video does make clear the fact that abiogenesis is still in its infancy, so there are no Nobel prizes for raising unanswered questions; the title should also make it clear that the video is only a brief and introductory overview of abiogenesis, So the rest of your comments regarding it are irrelevant.

<<ACCORDING..to you simply dropping the names proves itself>>

Where did I say that?

As for the rest of your post, I have no idea what your point is supposed to be. None of them gave birth to the other and who cares what each transitional species looks like or whether or not you could find a picture of it on Wikipedia. Evolutionary scientists don’t determine ancestry based on what a fossil looks like. It is a combination of anatomy, strata, age, location, etc... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent. Scientists first clued on to Pakicetus because it had the unique ear bone of a whale. Evolution is so accurate in its predictions that it enabled scientists to then locate many of the other transitional species that came after.

Speaking of which, you still haven’t answered my question regarding evolution’s ability to predict the locations of fossils. Was God out to trick us?.

Dear OUG,

How about a different tack.
You are a unique individual, as am I and almost every other Sapiens on the planet. (Some identical twins may be excluded.)
Now, during the Black Plague (circa 1346-1350CE) an estimated 75 to 200 million succumbed worldwide, but millions of others survived because they were able to develop immunity.
Similarly, the 1918-1920 Flu Pandemic infected an estimated 500 million worldwide, and killed some 50 to 100 million - 3 to 5 percent of the world's total human population of the time.

Uniqueness has its advantages - amongst them the capacity to develop immunity to various diseases and to simply overcome or withstand others.
But, genetic uniqueness will condemn some to develop heart disease, leukemia or diabetes, or to be weak or have poor eyesight or low intellect, etc.

Some Sapiens will be seen to be better fitted to survive (and so, to propagate their 'genes'), and in a fully 'natural' system this 'fitness' would, over time, be expected to be reflected in the worldwide gene 'pool'.

We have seen what damage disease and viruses can do to human populations, and we have seen the capability of the AIDS virus to adapt to retrovirus treatments and then to change its 'constitution' to resist and withstand these treatments.
Similarly, vaccines have been our only means of defeating the likes of Polio, Smallpox, Diphtheria and Tuberculosis. Vaccines, which prime and boost our immune systems to 'kill' these infections.

TBC>

Continued:

There is still no cure for many infections, and we are rapidly running out of treatments (antibiotics etc) with which to fight and to 'cure' a range of diseases.
Unless science can develop new and superior antibiotic treatments and vaccines, human populations will become increasingly at risk from the likes of MRSA and other 'mutant' infectious disease strains, or from new 'mutant' disease 'species'.
Our use of antibiotics has contributed greatly to the development of 'resistant' disease strains, and mass-production stock rearing has given rise to cross-over strains of Bird Flu and Swine Flu which are capable of infecting and of killing humans.

It must be conceivable that a pandemic could arise, at some time in the future, which could wipe out a substantial portion of the global human population, leaving a nucleus of 'resistant' individuals.
(Hopefully such a residual population would include a reasonable balance of male and female constituents.)
Could this not then be the foundation of a new human 'species'; or may such 'evolution' arise from an increasing dependence on intellectual capacity, an ability to write computer code, or perhaps an ability to withstand greatly increased nuclear or cosmic radiation levels?

It is not likely that a new human species will be defined by the loss of 'wisdom teeth' or of the little toe, but by an enhanced immune system and increased intellectual capacity - and/or an enhanced fitness for space travel?
But it most probably will come. Perhaps in the 121st Millennium?
That, or Doomsday? Some day.

I HAVe too many windows open..post limits are making a mesS OF NOTES
AJ/I ASKED..YOU TO NAME NAMES/YOU did..so i laboriously searched THEM..OUT..TO reveal the absurdity//OF THIS EXTINCT FOSSIL being the parent..of that..which IS AN ABSURDITY..EVEN YOU NOTICE

YET You still believe we all came via some evolving tree/where ya a tassie TIGER[THE FOSSIL DONT SHOW THE STRIPES]..nor that its a pouch bearing beastly..And the only difference in its scull and the s\kull OF A CANINE.CANUS[WOLF]..IS TWo tiny holes..in the skull[that that marsupial page birth to an egg Laying CROC..THAT GAVE BIRTH?[LOL]..TO STRETCHY SKIPPY..THAT GAVE BIRTH to..AN EGGlaying..sturgin/that gave BIRTH TO AN ALBINO Live birthing river dolphin[thats what THE PICTURES OF ALL THAT WORK REVEALS

here is the yesterday LINKS/NOTE..IM DONE/OVER IT..4 POSTS PER DAY CANT FULLY Reveal it[i DID EXPLAIN IT IN 8 VERY Lengthy pages it took me years TO PUT TOGETHER/BUT SOME ATHEIST MOD/DELETED IT..in a BINK OF AN EYE[YOUR ATHEIST Questions guided the research..but too much to refute

like take salty..in two posts posts much lies[vaccinations havnt fixed nutting[in faCT MEDICINE HAS MANY SINS/CULMINATING WITH SUPER BUGS..as i have explained many times[THATS A REDIRECTION..I DONT NEED TAKE/HERE..cause THE LAST COMMENTS OF IT CONTINUE here/

salty/please ask there
[EVOLUTION works/by killing those who died[THOSE WHO DIDNT DIE ARE IMMUNE/DITTO THEIR DESCENDANTS/sure a new flue can come along..but it just washes out the weaklings

so what do the mongrel DEMONS DO/THEY INJECT SICKNESS INTO EVERY KID
PLUS A Gmo virus.plUS HEAPS OF OTHER POISEN BIOTA/VIRUS MUTAGENS HEAVY METALS ETC..TO FIGHT EVOLUTION/Who defeated all their pathetic GERMS/ACROSS TIME/YET..WE SURVIVED..and our kids GOT RESISTING GENES/thats why the INTENDED genocide..is so slow..[YET THEY STill fear revealing their vile lies]

BUT WE DONT GET SICK ENOUGH/SO THEY ADD HEAVEY METALS TO OUR FOOD WATER/CUT IODINE FROM OUR SALT/REFINE OFF THE HEALTHY HUSK..OFf wheat/with talcum powder to make white flour white suger THATS KILLING US..THEN ANTIBIOTIC resistance/more undereducated..ALL ..[MISS EDUCATED]/FOOLS TRUst idiots..cause of faith in evolution

well..evolution cant loose
the weakened sickenD..WILl DIE..AND.,,aloneTHE FIT..wilL SURVIVE

fit-TEST..CONTINUED

STICKEY CURSER STILl mass deleting stuff/lost 600 words

TO SURVIVE THIS MAN MADE HELL ALONE WILL Survive..[govt IS KILLING US VIa faith in science/the root oF THE ROT IS EVOLUTION..OF TASSIE tigers into crocks..into river dolphines INT0 WHALES..BY PROOF OF A EAR BONE
we got here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baleen_whale
THAt has no teeth..from a toothy tassie tiger into an egglaying something[LOOK AT THE END OF THE LINk..YOU DIDNT EXPLAIN NUTHINg

look back one fossIL[AT SCALE]..BETWEEN THE TOOTHLESS BALINE/WHOLE WHALE
AND Its mummy/daddy..wtf ?

why has evolution/THEOIRY/TAUGHT TO IGNORANTS..evolved so many mind numb FAITHFUL?[rhetorical Despair..RATHER THAN ANY REAL QUESTION]

THEY TAUGHT..you what to think
yOU CANT LEARN..ONLY REMEMBER.

THEY TAUGHT..YOU..what TO THINK
NOT HOW TO THINK
please..THINK?

anyhow
dump the notes..i over these deceptions
Worm evolves to eat corn that was genetically engineered to kill it
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Worm_evolves_to_eat_corn_that_was_genetically_engineered_to_kill_it/33906/0/38/38/Y/M.html While an awe-inspiring demonstration of nature's endurance, the development could cause billions of dollars worth of damage to US crops http://www.tbyil.com/Disciplined_Doctors.ht.
Figure 1. Organization of sublevels in VariO. Examples of terms in the different levels. The three central levels are DNA, RNA, and protein, to which
modifier attributes add further versatility. On each major level certain details are shown to illustrate the organization of VariO and types of terms.
Figure 2. Variation types at the DNA, RNA, and protein levels. Terms with ‘‘is a’’ relation are indicated by lines with arrowheads, and those with ‘‘part
of’’ relation are indicated by a dashed line
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/24/2/356.full.pdf+html
ttp://genome.cshlp.org/search?fulltext=TASSI+TIGER&submit=yes&x=13&y=6

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/21/8/1306.full.pdf+html?sid=ef8852d0-2267-4193-ae01-7470dde5e7c4

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/12/11/1663.full.pdf+html?sid=ef8852d0-2267-4193-ae01-7470dde5e7c4
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/19/2/213.full.pdf+html?sid=ef8852d0-2267-4193-ae01-7470dde5e7c4
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/19/2/213.full?sid=ef8852d0-2267-4193-ae01-7470dde5e7c4

The mitochondrial genome sequence of the Tasmanian tiger (Thylacinus cynocephalus)
http://old.richarddawkins.net/users/49579/comments
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/19/2/213/F3.large.jpg
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/19/2/213/F3.expansion.html

IM OVER KEEPING THESE PAGES OPEN/JUST IN CASE
SO CLOSE THEM AS I PUT Them here
http://www.youtube.com/user/HighFlyingDutchman/playlists
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/19/2/213/F3.expansion.html
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/19/2/213.full?sid=ef8852d0-2267-4193-ae01-7470dde5e7c4
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2014/03/19/giant-chicken-from-hell-is-new-dinosaur-species/
http://board.freedomainradio.com/page/books/the_handbook_of_human_ownership_a_manual_for_new_tax_farmers.html
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-infertility.html
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message861599/pg1
http://whatreallyhappened.com/



http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6258&page=0

Still avoiding my questions, OUG? Still very sparse on the evidence front too, I see.

Attempting to refute evolution does not support your creationist beliefs. Even if you were to disprove evolution, you would still then be faced with the mammoth task of proving that God created everything.

<<…i laboriously searched THEM..OUT..TO reveal the absurdity//OF THIS EXTINCT FOSSIL being the parent..of that..which IS AN ABSURDITY..EVEN YOU NOTICE>>

Did I? Please point to where I noticed the (so far, undemonstrated) absurdity. Please also explain how you demonstrated anything at all. All you seemed to do was Google pictures of the transitional species and then state that you don’t think they look like they’re descendants/ancestors, while suggesting that their similarities to other species was evidence that they’re not descendants/ancestors of each other. Worse still, you seem to have now convinced yourself that Pakicetus was actually the Thylacine, simply because of how it looks, and all while falsely accusing scientists of making the exact same mistake!

Real scientific there, OUG.

<<4 POSTS PER DAY CANT FULLY Reveal it>>

Well, posting easily discreditable nonsense in the four posts that you ARE allowed doesn’t exactly help to suggest that allowing you more will make any difference. How about you make better use of the four posts that you do have? Saltpetre and I seem to be doing fine and our posting styles don’t give us an extra 100 or so words in each post.

aj/phylips said..<<..None/of them...gave birth to/the other..and who cares..*what each transitional/species..looks like..or whether ..r not you..could find a picture..of it-on Wikipedia>>

THATS RIGHT.....MO FREAKING TASSIE-TIGER..EVER GAVE BIRTH TO ANY FREAKING WHALE/wanna-be..[THE absurdity..is clear]..to any..but..thats what your theory..SAYS

NOT ONLY THAT/BUT THat..life 'came'..from nuthing
WHEN EVERY SPEC..OF Biological evidence..reveals life..*can only come from life..

NOW WE CAN DEBATE BACK...AND FORTH..OF/WHAT YOU..'REALLY Meant to say'..but its clear..by saying evolution/your saying..snaKeS BREED BIRDS[and..that level..of absurdity..needs real proof/not a pathetic PLAGIARIZED..FABLE CALLED the theory..of genus/macro-evolving..[LOL]..INTO OTHER GENUS

BUT..YOU LOT..OF GENEROUSNESS..OF GENERALITIES[ABSTRACT]..AN IN-GENUS Proof..into an absurdity..of fleas breeding..dogs and A MUDCRAWLING COLDBLOOD..MAMMAL/FROG..sally mander..emerging/froM THE WATERS..evolving..into humans.

IF YOU EVEN TRied keeping up..it would help
but think back from the wjhale..back down the chain
put..the list of names..into a picture/sEARCH..AND LOOK AT WHAT Exactly..your theory....says begat what.

like the otheR LINK..the one that bred..all birds slakes..MAMMALS/and [platypus..and turtle]..WAS THE PARENT..IN/BETWEEN..OF THE FROG LINE AND THE Salamander line..[mate..your..too trustING/you think,..AS You were told..by remembering..thus...so IT MUST BE.

im your memory./lie all/the names..BY-Rote
but..,,i look at..the pictures and they...dimensionally insane
if THIS..TURNS INTO THAT..[IS ALL TO..?].THE SAME scale[no]
but..to put a frog..into a whale..is huge artistic-license[lie]

to talk of gaPS..IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT..its like looking/at.a Forrest of interbreeding hybreds..let face it...if ya paPPY WAS AN ARROGANCE AND YA MAMMY..WAS..A/LUSTY/DUSTRY-GREEN..YOU KIDS..AINT GOING TO HAVE NO PROBLEM..Breeding with.-anything sub-related

but ohh no..thATS ONE STEP.TO FAR
yet thats what im saying happened after god left..his exclusive sTATION..TO ENJOIN.IN..THE MORTAL/FUN..[THINK LOKI][once you know how it really happend...isnt apes sexing..it up with apes..ya realize apes do it with anything..aND..THE SCIENCE/SAYS..WE ARE CHIMP PIG HYBRED

AND ALL YOU CAN DO IS PRATTLE BACK BY ROTE THAT TAUGHT TO ANY TEN YEAR OLD..by the godless wanting/nay needing..a god FREE..'CREATION-THEORY'..[i..just waNT/THE TRUTH..AND.dogs breed dogs..unless/ITS NOT TWO DOGS.[IE..DOGS..WILL ONLY..EVER/BREED Dogs..if its/not dog..its hybred..with other..not dog-thing]

and..our other..ancestor was..a sow
ok..the hippos might have raped..a crocodile..T0..breed/one of them whale-critters..but no pure-blood-MATING..EVER CAN..UNLESS ITS REVISION TO WILDType..[+]..BUT..I WOULD/Have better..luck talking/to a wall...OK..THats my posts...till tomorrow.

OUG,

I’ve always said that the more accurate my comments are the less readable yours become, and now is no exception. I understood very little of what you said.

<<THATS RIGHT.....MO FREAKING TASSIE-TIGER..EVER GAVE BIRTH TO ANY FREAKING WHALE/wanna-be..[THE absurdity..is clear]..to any..but..thats what your theory..SAYS>>

No thylacine ever gave birth to a whale and nor did any Pakicetus, correct. But how does evolution claim this?

<<NOT ONLY THAT/BUT THat..life 'came'..from nothing WHEN EVERY SPEC..OF Biological evidence..reveals life..*can only come from life..>>

There is nothing to suggest that life cannot come from non-life; only that complex life forms cannot spring from inanimate objects. But no-one has ever suggested that they could, as your attempts to make abiogenesis appear absurd would have us believe. I even linked you to a video explaining one of the hypotheses regarding how this may be possible, but you refused to address any of the points made.

<<NOW WE CAN DEBATE BACK...AND FORTH..OF/WHAT YOU..'REALLY Meant to say'..but its clear..by saying evolution/your saying..snaKeS BREED BIRDS[and..that level..of absurdity..needs real proof/not a pathetic PLAGIARIZED..FABLE CALLED the theory..of genus/macro-evolving..[LOL]..INTO OTHER GENUS>>

What I “really meant to say” when?

Are you now claiming to know what I believe, better than even I do?

By the way, snakes have never bred birds and fleas have never bred dogs, and evolution doesn’t claim that they have either. If a species could give birth to another species, then it would disprove evolution. Apparently you need to maintain this absurd picture in your head of one species giving birth to another, and complex cells popping into existence, just to maintain your rejection of evolution and abiogenesis; and when someone explains to you that that is not what evolution or abiogenesis claim, you try to convince them that that is what they believe anyway.

I can’t really decipher the rest of your post. This, however…

<<THE SCIENCE/SAYS..WE ARE CHIMP PIG HYBRED>>

…is utter rubbish. It is impossible for two different species to breed and this is yet another accurate prediction of evolution, as is the sterile offspring resulting from two different, yet similar, species (e.g. the mule).

aj/quote..<<..There..is nothing..to suggest.that life..cannot come from..on-life;>>

eleven../Wonderful words..THAT has taken..maNY MORE WORDS TO REFUTE
[IGNORED]..[SCIENCE..IS ON MY SIDE..TRUE SCIENCE..CAN TESTIFY..IN ANY COURT...THAT LIFE COMES FROM LIFE

[ITS SO LOGICAL]..YET..YOU CAN THRow out..an 11 WORD SENTANCE
[ON TOP OF..'s A RABID CREATIONIST HATERS/VIDIO....AND..MIND/CLOSED/CASE CLOSED

PLEASE../DO US BOTH..A FAVOR/..PUT INTO A POST..WHAT SPECIFIC CHEMICALS..you/claim..DUN WHAt

[you know..resent proof,,of thesus
[which..by beiNG..*SCIENCE MUST BE..REPLICABLE..FACT

BUT YOU..[IF your..honest]..yOU/know..its not true
yet yoU..Know..too..i CANT..dis-PROVE IT/either
WELL PJ..WITHOUT proof..ya GOT A FAITH..IN
A FAUX-THEORy..but..ITS/not science
then/INVERT/WHAT..YA JUST SAID.

<<..only that...complex life forms..cannot..spring from inanimate objects.>>

oh holy heck/ya..just unconditionally..SAID SOMETHING[NOW YA CONDITION..IT..that life..cannot spring from INANIMATE objects..golly-gosh..no kidden?.[TOO CLEver]

<<>But no-one..has ever suggested..that they could,>>

YOU JUST DID

<<..as your attempts...to make abiogenesis..appear absurd..would have us believe.>>..OTS..TOO/SILLY/FANCIFUL..TO BE FACTualy trUE.

now..your saying..the opposite/AGAIN..[life from non life]..ITS BECOMING SCHIZO

NOW..YOUR PROVING..What?
<<..I..even linked you..to a video..explaining/one of..the hypotheses>>..

yea/but..you claim..'science'..ir proof/but you got..some huys half thesus...[in spoken word/look/

*write..a transcript..anD EVEN..YOU WILL SEE.THE ERRORS[TWENTY STEPS TO MAKE ..LIFE NEED BE MET//[HE AT BEST PRESENTED 6..and YOU DONT DO ANY BETTER]..TILL YOU SAY..SPECIFICLU..THIS PLUS..THAT..[specifically]..and in writing..you got nOTHING/BUT CLEVER WORDS AND A TRICKERY VIDIO

<<..regarding how/this..*may be/lol/possible,..but..you refused to address..any of the..points made.>>[ITS NONSENSE]

HOW ABOUT..YOU LIST THEM/'POINTS'..[in full..including the insults]..and we beGIN..FROM THAT YOU*..PUT into writing?

you know..you do soMETHING
TO PROVE..YA/own..THEORY/..not throw...it all back on me/while you flee freE..[YOUR THE One...that sayS LIFE FROM NOTHING..OR LIFE FROM SOMETHING..[BUT MY PROVABLE..THESUS IS LIFE..FROM Life]..NO LIE

till some..cleve/[persoN DOES IT..IN REAL/LIFE..ITS A THEORY

pUre fantasy..LIVE WITH IT

<<PIG HYBRED…is..utter rubbish. >.

FINE..APES breeding human..prove it/
but..no..thats..another/theory.

theN..PLEASE/Explain..why the pig dna..?

i used..to believe..hybred/sterility..TOO/USED..IT MYSELF..IN MANY DEBATES/..UNTIL I SAW..THE PROOF/YOU CLEARLY CHOSE/TO ignore]

<<..It is impossible..for two different..species to breed>

REFUTED..MANY LINks ago
and this..is yet another..failed prediction of evolution,

<<..sterile offspring>>..WAS REFUTED IN HIS BOOK
..
OH..YOU MISSED THAT TOO?

You're not fairing too well here, are you OUG.

<<eleven../Wonderful words..THAT has taken..maNY MORE WORDS TO REFUTE>>

Well, how about you try a few words of rebuttal to start with. So far you have provided nothing. About the best you’ve done is to state that “ITS [sic] SO LOGICAL”.

<<PLEASE../DO US BOTH..A FAVOR/..PUT INTO A POST..WHAT SPECIFIC CHEMICALS..you/claim..DUN WHAt>>

Here’s a few hypotheses to keep you amused for a while:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis.

<<*SCIENCE MUST BE..REPLICABLE..FACT>>

For a long time nuclear fusion wasn't replicable even though scientists knew how it occurred in nature. That didn't mean that it wasn't science back then.

<<oh holy heck/ya..just unconditionally..SAID SOMETHING[NOW YA CONDITION..IT..that life..cannot spring from INANIMATE objects..golly-gosh..no kidden?.[TOO CLEver]>>

The condition was “complex [life]”, not “inanimate”. Yet you dropped the “complex” bit. The unconditional nature of my other statement is totally irrelevant.

I don’t know if you’re being deceitful or just having difficulties keeping up here.

<<YOU JUST DID [suggest that complex life could spring from inanimate objects]>>

See the confusion you cause yourself when you interpret others the way you please? I suggested no such thing.

<<*write..a transcript..anD EVEN..YOU WILL SEE.THE ERRORS[TWENTY STEPS TO MAKE ..LIFE NEED BE MET//[HE AT BEST PRESENTED 6..and YOU DONT DO ANY BETTER]..TILL YOU SAY..SPECIFICLU..THIS PLUS..THAT..[specifically]..and in writing..you got nOTHING/BUT CLEVER WORDS AND A TRICKERY VIDIO>>

What are these 20 steps you speak of?

<<HOW ABOUT..YOU LIST THEM/'POINTS'..[in full..including the insults]..and we beGIN..FROM THAT YOU*..PUT into writing?>>

Why request such a thing? So you can use up my word count? How about you just number the points in the video or pick some at random?

<<FINE..APES breeding human..prove it/>>

Scientists already have with DNA, mitochondrial DNA, chromosome fusion, the fossil record. By the way, we’re still apes.

<<theN..PLEASE/Explain..why the pig dna..?>>

Probably for the same reason we share 50% of our genes with bananas.

As for you claims regarding hybrids and sterility, I’d like to see your evidence for this that I allegedly chose to ignore. Especially considering mules, ligers, etc. always seem to be sterile.

reply..to..aj/from..post/here

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16038&page=0

You're..not fairing..too well..AJ
BATTING ZIP

aj..replied..<<..Here’s.a few.hypotheses>>..RE ABIOGENSUS

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis.

FAIR Enough/..i..only need..one..
To refute..all..you said

see item..9/..link..1
<<..plausible scenarios>>...ie not any proof/just theories.

then/go2..LINE1
<<..Even the simplest..currently living..cells..contain hundreds of proteins..most of which are essential..to their functioning.>>

THEN YOU..GRASPED AT STraws..<<..nuclear\fusion>>..

MY REPLY..IS..THAT STUDIES..KNOWN PHENOMENA
UNLIKE/THE SPECULATIONS....RE/FIRST..*LIE..[liFe..from non life..]

<<..What...are these..20 steps..you speak of?>>

Quote..final/lines..point 1

<<...The likely*..most accurate..hypothetical study..(Gil et al. 2004..puts the minimal..number of genes at 206...[wink]..All the proteins..produced from these genes..are involved..in a maze of pathways of metabolism,...replication,..as well as building and maintenance of structure,/..which is..of bewildering complexity.>>..

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=20+steps+to+liviNg+cell+life&i

[then/there..of course..is thE..SMALL-MATTER..of..a cell-membrain.

..<<In fact..how else/than through..such a..minimum amount..of complexity, could even..a primitive/cell...have met..the just mentioned..basic demands?..How could..such a.*vastly complex network..of more than..*200 proteins..have arisen by itself?..>.//

your/OWN-link..denies YOU...MINE/Replies

APES breeding human..prove it/..its/YOUR..PROOF?

in your opinion..[biased/opinion]....
<<..Scientists already..have with DNA,..mitochondrial DNA,..>>

YEAH THE..DNA/we share too..with a bannana
[if i..cant use..that crap/..you..cant EITHER

APART..FROM THAT..WHAT/YA GOT?

<<..chromosome*fusion,>>..lol
see previous/posts..re short STANDS..FAVOURD

fusion..lol..*prove it

rubbish...re the..<<fossil-record..>>..prove it

By the way,..yoU’re..still ALL PURE-ape..to me
,,so/go..get an ape/HEART-VALVE..LOL..

[THINK]....WHY YOU/GET..THEM..FROM A PiG?]

AJ.<<..Probably..for/the same
reason..we share..50% of..our genes..with bananas.>>..

THAt..didnt work..for me/nor you

do TRY..Again

<<>.As for you/claims..regarding hybrids..and sterility>>

ok..i will yet again../DO YOUR THINKING
FOR YOU..

its pathetic..but..i will be..the..bigger guy.

man is king..of the beasts/..
WE ARE HERE..ONLY..because ape...raped a pig..[LIVE With it]..it began proper/here

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16038&page=0

AND BECAUSE I RESPECT/..YOUR TIME..and unlike..thy good/selF DONT LIKE OTHERS..*WASTING THEIR TIME/EITHER..[]IT SORT/OF BEGAN..Tuesday, 25 February]..with me scrEWING..YA APE THEORY/..before finding the pig hybrid...THEO-WRY]

if you..could KEEP COMMENT..ON THAT/TOPIC..THERE
THAT Gives me..4..more posts to/properly reply YOUR ASPERSIONS/there

know..THAT GRAN-MA EVE..was a sow...or lucies hubby..[YOUR's..and/MINe..great/great/grand-PAPPY..was a boar...

LIVE WITH IT/YA CANT escape..what we are
SUCK IT UP..LIKE A MAN../or\..LIKE LUCY HAD TO.`

NAME..THE NON-LIFE..THAT BECAME A..proto-CELL
ya got nuthin...but..hERE IS MORE..options..4/ya.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5899&page=3

EVen more
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15257&page=38

TRY TO BE FAIR..MOVE..SOME COMMENT HERE
[like creationist insults]..here/PLEASE
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6293&page=0

OUG,

I'm not jumping around from thread to thread chasing your replies as you breach multiple forum rules with every response.

<<i..only need..one..[abiogenesis hypothesis] To refute..all..you said ... see not any proof/just theories.

Maybe not "proof" as such. There is, however, a lot of evidence. Please see the video I linked you to.

<<Even the simplest..currently living..cells..contain hundreds of proteins..most of which are essential..to their functioning.>>

Yes, the key words there being "currently living". This proves nothing. I refer you once again to the video you won't address.

<<MY REPLY..IS..THAT STUDIES..KNOWN PHENOMENA
UNLIKE/THE SPECULATIONS....RE/FIRST..*LIE..[liFe..from non life..]>>

The video I linked you to also discusses known phenomena.

As for these 20 steps to life, I saw nothing in the Google search you provided, nor in the numerous searches I tried.

<<[then/there..of course..is thE..SMALL-MATTER..of..a cell-membrain.>>

What's to say early cells had or needed a membrane?

<<In fact..how else/than through..such a..minimum amount..of complexity, could even..a primitive/cell...have met..the just mentioned..basic demands?..How could..such a.*vastly complex network..of more than..*200 proteins..have arisen by itself?..>>

Please see the links I've provided so far.

<<your/OWN-link..denies YOU...MINE/Replies>>

Arguments from incredulity and the downplaying of what I link to by implying incorrectly that they're filled with guesses are not valid responses. You have not yet provided a response that isn't either fallacious or irrelevant.

Regarding your early-apes-to-humans rebuttals, it looks like we may need to start from a more elementary scientific level. So here's another short video for you called Human Evolution Made Easy... http://youtube.com/watch?v=MCayG4IIOEQ&list=PL82yk73N8eoX8RpvQfjdupAKFWKjtMhTe

As for the sterility of hybrids, your argument seems to rest on the pig-ape-hybrid claim; a claim that has been thoroughly debunked. It's ironic that you'll reject evolution but accept such nonsense. Does that mean that Adam and Eve were an ape and a pig? How does this ape-pig-hybrid hypothesis fit into your biblical creation story? That is the whole reason you reject evolution, after all.

Looks like creationists have pulled their 'DMCA claim' trick once again (funny how heavily they rely on censorship - as they do with their YouTube vote bots). This link should work... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=93e_1220021831

my/noteS
FROM YA IGNORANT 9 MINUTE TIMEWASTING VIDIO

''DRAGON GODESS RAVEN GODS..THEN..darwin/who wrote evolution of species[not evolution into new genus]..nor ape evolution into

the prat is still prateling unearther human..arcic ancestors homid erectus /peking man..none are missing link..now aftrika..dont fit with southern england..pit down man the anomoly/fraud/hoax..yet it caused two schols of thought..out of afrika

mother load of fossils..music music music

as they fash a lot of pictures of PLASTER SKULL

MATE PUT IT IN YA OWN WORDS
YOUR A TIME WASTER

RICH FAMILY TREE..BLAH BLAH HOMID FOSSILS GOT NO DNA
ASNY STORY THEY TELL IS BASED ON LOOKs like not genes evolving

wehat species are these apes/they wernt human either

WHY DO WE SEE A CLEAR PROGRESSIOn in time

never se species diSSAPPEARING /TRUE IN SOME CASES BUT NOT ALL TWO LEGS THUMBS BLAH BLAH..7 MINUTES IN
WE COULDNT HAVE EVOLVED UNLESS TWO fused
if we dont find it
gues what its chomosame number two

great ape 19..B;LAH BLAH..BAH

COMPLETLY DIFFERENT FROM ANY TYPE OF HUMAN..NEANDERTHAL Mitro condial dna

screw YOU MAN
APEman..YOU Full of sshH IT

I WISH YOU COULD EIOTHER WRITe
or read/these vidios got you hypnotoiseD

NOTHING IN dna refutes fossil..lol..no dna in stone you fw

Well that's strange. Now that I try the first link on a computer, I'm no long told that it's blocked due a DMCA complaint.

So anyway, OUG, in other words, you have nothing left. I didn't think you would. Nothing but mockery and ridicule with your 'blah, blah, blahs', anyway.

And you still haven't answered any of my questions. There's quite a backlog now.

LO..YOUR ONE TO TALK..RE IGNORING QUESTions
you are in denial/..my old fart
THREE LINKS WOULD HAVE Suggested the 20 NESSISARY STEPS
[ingredients if you will/that theorize..TO MAKE LIFE

THE REALITY IS CLOSER TO THE 600 YOU theories/need
your..LOL claim..of a modern 'evolution..of some far SIMPLER CELL[THAT CLEARLY CANT REPLICATE..WITHOUT BURSTING ITS CLAY CELL WALL.is pure delusional thinking

CLAY Bubles dont DIVIDE/THUS CANT REPLICATE TO 'EVOLVE'
get it/old shoe LACE?

ITS UNSURE..IF YOUR just plain ignorant..or simply lost in your own CIRCULAR/themed/AVOIDANCE..YOU OFFER as if PROOF..pURE/RUBBISH..[the inAGRY..WAS THE NON LINKED JUNK HE JUST REJECTED LINKED..

THEN AVOID GOING TO my links..then crappon like you got some science rubbish..[you fail to present]..its clear your just wanting the last word..SO I WILL LET YOU Have it

or just RESUME..doing
before/you DISTRACTED..THE THread..with youtuBE..

you say unreplied questions..but im SICK OF RE READING FOR junk you slip into the middle of insults..PLEASE LIST THE THINGS AGAIN

IF YOU WANT ME TO find reply..FOR YOU/YET AGAIN..WILL YOU READ THE LINKS..OF COURSE NOT..thats why we are here now..YOU SIMPLY PLAying some game

Do as you chose..ITS CLEAR YOUR PLAYING WITH Yourself
the links are there for OTHERS TO FIND..OUT FOR THEM SELF/WHO SAID WHAT

from my search term
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=20+steps+to+liviNg+cell+life&i
Imitation of Life » American Scientist
https://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/imitation-of-life
&#8206;

9 Feb 2013 ... The first step would be to decipher its complete genetic sequence, which ... of life”
in 600 steps and “completely understanding” a living cell still ...

The Origin of Life



To account for the origin of life on our earth requires solving several problems: ....
It is a single organism whose cells have lost their ability to live independently. ...
In Volvox this process goes no further than having certain cells specialize for ...
The same team reported on 20 May 2010 in the online Science Express that they
...
#
Phases of mitosis | Cell division | Khan Academy
www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/cell-division/v/phases-of-mitosis
&#8206;



Explanation of the phases of mitosis.

OUG,

I'm pretty sure I've answered all your questions. Those that I've dismissed were dismissed due to their fallaciousness or because they were simply attacking a strawman, and I've made attempts to at least point this out in these cases. You, on the other hand, would simply steam on as if nothing had been said.

Most of the rest of your post is just you lashing out at me for not playing your game the way you need me to. You hate that I save time by referring you to videos refuting your claims and when you have nothing to counter them, and your attempts to distract from what they say don't work, you lash out at me as though I were cheating in some way. You accuse me of wasting your time while, ironically, trying to waste mine by demanding that I type out the rebuttals from the videos.

Thanks for the link to the website explaining these "steps to life" you've been going on about. Unfortunately, though, it's referring to the complex and evolved life forms that we know today, not the primitive cells that would have been around billions of years ago. You're really having troubles making this distinction, aren't you.

PJ/QUOTE..<<..the primitive cells..that would/have been.around billions..of years ago...You're really/having troubles..making this distinction,/aren't you.>>

YEAH..LIFE/FROM..CRYSTALS,,[HUH?}
IM LOST.*WONDERING HOw the freak..one as clever
AS you can..appear.*to be..can yet..be so/SIMPLY..deceived

<<..Primitive cell/From/Wikipedia,

The parallelogram..is the..general primitive cell..for the plane.>>

YEAH/BUT..ITS NOT LIFE

<<.A parallelepiped..is a general primitive cell.-for 3-dimensional space.>>

[IN theory..its a cell/BUT
BY PICTURES ITS A CRYSTAL]..thus not 'life'

<<..A primitive/cell..is a unit-cell>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_cell#Unit_cell

ESSENTIALLY LIKE...A SALT CRYSTAL..BUTT..[its not..LIFE

<<..built on..the primitive basis..of the direct lattice,..namely a crystallographic basis..of the vector lattice..L..such that every lattice vector..t of L..may be obtained..as an integral linear combination..of the basis vectors,..a.b..c...

Used predominantly in geometry,..solid state physics,..and mineralogy,...particularly in describing crystal structure>>

Ie its..a mineraL..LIKE YA STONE FOSSILS
YOU DONT Even..have imagination..YA FIND A STONE/
THAT LOOKS LIKE..AN EAR BONE..AND BINGO..A TASSIE TIGER..[marsupial pouch/breeder]..BREEDS An/egg laying] crocodile..breeeds a river dolphin...[LIFE BREDER]..that breeds an egg laying sturgeon..THAT builds a baleens toothless what>? mammaL.

its insanity/taught..kids/by rote
to children/who believe..in satan claws only comes..in chimiNIES
CLEARLY TRYING...TO RECREATE..A PRIMITIVE CELL..and the ester rabbit that lays..'brown'-eGGS..that..$melt..in ya mmouth

<<..,a primitive cell,,is a minimum volume cell..corresponding to a single lattice point..of a structure..with translational symmetry in 2 dimensions,..3 dimensions,..[lo]..or other dimensions...A lattice can be characterized..by the geometry of its primitive cell.

The primitive cell..is a fundamental domain>>

in non living/things

<<..with respect to..translational symmetry only...In the case of additional symmetries..a fundamental domain is smaller.>>..in/life/non-existant.

LIKE I SAID
BLAH..BLAH/BLAH/BAH..BAA..BAA..BAA

its sad..THAT/yOU CANT REASON/../THOUGH..YOUR MIND CAN RECALL
IT..SEEMS TO RECALL..MULTITUDES..OF ABSURDITIES..as usual without an.. written link..[like any conman/Deceiver..your careful to avoid putting it into writing..oR ATTRIBUTING IT..TO A..real-SCIENCE..[PRIMITIVE CELL RELATES..TO THE Science of crystallography..or matH..NOT Biology..*NOT LIFE]

PLEASE STOP..TRYING TO MAKE ME SOUND..SO CLEVER
I NEVER HEARD OF YA PRIMATE...PRIMITIVE CELL..Before you threw it aINST THE WALL..TRYING TO GET YA Mucky abiogenus/muck..to stick/sadly im not even aNgry..

just sad..your so deceived..that
you..MINDLESSLY..deceived others..SIMPLY/by mis-belief/..

MISPLACED FAITH..IN LIARS
think/why..they want..the god free creation delusion..

For the life of me..i cant seE..what so frightens you
[your certainly..not fooling no one.]..AND ONLY decievers go to hell.

OUG,

The only rebuttals you seem to be able to make are the Argument from Incredulity fallacy (as you displayed with the pictures of the transitional whale species), an over simplification of the science (e.g. “YEAH..LIFE/FROM..CRYSTALS” (also an argument from incredulity)), or an outright misrepresentation (e.g. “NOTHING IN dna refutes fossil..lol..no dna in stone you fw”).

All of which you have committed once again in your most recent post, invalidating everything you’ve said.

So, to put it in words you’ll probably understand…

YA/GOT..NUTTINg[LOL]

P.S. A point that I thought I had made before, but must have accidentally deleted from my response, was the fact that pig heart valves are more suitable than ape heart valves because they’re the right size and are far cheaper to acquire. The similarity of the DNA in them is irrelevant.

aj/quote..<<..The only rebuttals you seem to be able to make
are the Argument..from Incredulity fallacy..(as you displayed with the pictures of the transitional whale species..>>,

JUST FOUND A NEW ONE
http://www.uncommondescent.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/whale-transition.gif

it provides another problem
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-whale-of-a-problem-for-evolution-ancient-whale-jawbone-found-in-antartica/

IF YOU HADN'T RAISED IT..I WOULD NEVER HAVE Searched for it
BECAUSE THE OTHER LINK WAS INSANE/LOOK AT THE TWO DIFFERENT GIFS AGAIN

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=WHALE+JAWBOnes+vary+IN+SIZE&

then you who posts movies/tubES..acuse me of..<<>.an over simplification of the science (e.g. “YEAH..LIFE/FROM..CRYSTALS”>>

WHAT NO REFUTER?
you say a magic word>>i reveal links explaining the words meaning>>yes i simplify by sorting the bull from the fact..LOL..BUT..NOT YOU/EH?

YOU LIST THREE STRENGTHS>>CAll them weak
>>by no proof/no rebuttal..only joiner..nuthn>>sad SAD SAD

<<..(also an argument from incredulity)), or an outright misrepresentation.(e.g. “NOTHING IN dna refutes fossil..lol..no dna in stone you fw”).>>

the your/youtube/link..said..nothing in dna...refutes FOSSILS
[TAKEN FROM THe vidio..you said proved your theses]

from memory that was about the time...they were showing the skulls they just said arnt linked to man/APE DECENT[THE APE CONNECTION WAS EVEN IGNORED]

NOW YOU TRY TO MAKE SOME POINT..[YOUR OWN/..?
[YOUR PROOF SAID IT/..not me]

i simply refuted..<<>..no dna in stone you fw”).>>
AND/THERE ISN'T/NO DNA..IN FOSSILIZED STONE[NOR PLASTER=-VASTS]..NOR..Resin/,as most fossils realy be.

PLEASE READ CAREFULLY..how you finished
this NON FACTUAL evidence free Rebuttal?

<<>>All of which..you have committed..once again
in your most recent post,..invalidating everything..you’ve said.>>

I VALIDATE/WHAT I SAY
YOUR the big detractor..that flays out blindly..THEN FADES AWAY
BUT I LOVE how Its making me learn..[Confirm]..EVEN MORE THAN I WANTED TO KNOW
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=why+are+pig+heart+valves+not+rejected&ie=ut

So, to put it in words
..you’ll probably understand…

YA/GOT..NUTTINg[LOL]
The porcine (or pig)..heart is most similar..to the human heart,
and therefore represents..the best anatomical fit..for replacement.

say/*/oink..oink..mummy.

OUG,

All the jawbone discovery means is that one species/breed of whale evolved over 4 million years instead of the 15 million they were all originally thought to. It may be the direct ancestor of today's whales or it may have been a dead end. The discovery debunks nothing except the creationist claim that the universe is 6000 years old and that macroevolution is impossible.

Tell me, what is the mechanism that renders macroevolution impossible and what is your evidence for it? It's high time you started providing some evidence for your beliefs, don't you think? Disproving evolution (even if that were what you were doing) doesn't prove the creationist position.

By the way, how does this negate the part of my post that you were quoting and responding to?

<<YOU LIST THREE STRENGTHS>>CAll them weak>>

Fallacies, oversimplifications and misrepresentations are never strengths and with your rebuttals to my claim regarding your use of these, we can now add sidestepping.

<<the your/youtube/link..said..nothing in dna...refutes FOSSILS>>

Correct. There is nothing about the DNA of the species of ape alive today that contradicts what the fossils suggest.

You're really drowning here, OUG.

<<The porcine (or pig)..heart is most similar..to the human heart,
and therefore represents..the best anatomical fit..for replacement.>>

Correct. That doesn't mean they're a closer relative than other apes, or an ancestor. It just means they've evolved to have similar hearts to ours.

You still haven't stated how your pig theory fits into the biblical creation story. So that makes pigs and apes breeding, and ancient whales that you need to explain - on top of the numerous other questions you've evaded.

you know me aj..i like to take things to the next level
so i googled..

*SAPIAN HEARTS COMPARED TO HUMAN*
AND IT WAS AN AMASSING COVer-up [conspiracy]..i found

IT might not be obvious till you look at Google IMAGES SEARCH

how hARD COULD BIT BE TO COMPARE A SAPIAN HEART TO YOUR homosapien[its not in spell check]..HEART..WHAt do we call a chimps heart

HOMOSAPIen chimp hearts..nothing either[but got twO SKULLS]
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTz3q051X1Z2JegpUPbwS3-fz3tZgehYX5Fg6rVDQBED585AAqzzyz72ak

FRUIt from the next search term
HUMAN CHIMP HEArt comparison
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT3MACNiRXswtRIw4Yo1xQ3UWQfwW2ifqqSGf2_VAmYvz5-gufuchu4qFk

http://listverse.com/2012/02/14/10-comparisons-between-chimps-and-humans/

A PROPer COMPARISON..Of evolution thesus//ape into huh?man
http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/348289/96633991/stock-vector-comparison-of-greatest-apes-skeleton-with-human-skeleton-gibbon-gorilla-chimpanzee-orangutan-96633991.jpg

it took billions of yeaRS TO MAKE THIS..[ape]
THEN ONLY 100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTcDxXOwayugH1ZZBeLItyskX_f30Rx64PZ1ux-ALvhzz-cNn31we5THQ

oh DEAR I HAVE COME FULL CIRCLE
back to the beginning OF THE PIg theory
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-section-3.html

PLEASE NOTE THE NEEDED CHANGES..FROM Chimp..
into chump[see..green colums right-hand side..]
LEARN SOMETHING..THE page leads to hybreds..but i cant learn it for you.

ANYHOW CHEERS..EH

AJ/QUOTE..<<..All the jawbone discovery means is that one species/breed of whale evolved over 4 million years instead of the 15 million they were all originally thought to.>>

LETS REFER TO..THE/LINK

QUOTE..<<>.Argentine paleontologist..said the fossilized archaeocete jawbone found in February dates back 49 million years. In evolutionary terms,..that’s not far off from the fossils of even older proto-whales from 53 million years ago..that have been found in South Asia and other warmer latitudes.>>..[faIL]

AS USUal/aj/truth..are far removed..
yet he uses this as a base for further attack..

<<..It may be the direct ancestor of today's whales or it may have been a dead end...The discovery debunks nothing except the creationist claim that the universe is 6000 years old and that macroevolution is impossible.>>

SEE HOW HE DONT GOT NUTHIN/..BUT THE OLD evolutionist REFUSAL/BY INFERENCE..of some myth Creation/OR WHATEVER HAPPENED over 6000 years

tell me clever pj..where does it say that in any holY BOOK?

its weak/as piss

<<>Tell me, what is the mechanism that renders macroevolution impossible>>..how can a cold blood fish..BY SM--ALL 'CHANGES'..become a warmblood animal beast/with legs and shoulderblades[your the onE SELLING ILLusion/its you what CLAIMS SCIENCE/ITS ME WHAT SAYS YOU GOT SCIENCE..WELL PRESENT IT.

but you dont got science
you got a theory/full of lies

<<and what is your evidence for it?>>

Mate..macro-EVOLUTION..INTO NEW GENUS.IS YOUR THEORY PAL
NOT MINE..yet his inner Inversion/perversion..goes ON

<<It's high time you started providing some evidence for your beliefs,>>

I HAVE
YOU REFUSE to read my links



<<>.You still haven't stated how your pig theory fits into the biblical creation story.>>

thats THE FUNNY THING/THEY HATE THE PIG THESES MORE THAN YOU
IM TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE/BIG STICK..THAT BRINGS THE FARCE DOWN

<<..So that makes pigs and apes breeding>>..breeding us/yep

<<..,and ancient whales..that you need to explain>>
NOT ME OL MATE..ITS Your theory..that tassie TIGERS EVOLVED INTO BAyleene MUNCHERS..not mine..

FOR THE 4 TH TIME..RE-ASK/ANY QUESTIONS/YOU THINK I HAVNT TRIED TO REPLY/JUST SAYING IM NOT REPLYING..ISNT TRUE..AS ANY READER CAN Know.

OUG,

I don’t really understand what you’re getting at in your first post. It seems to be a whole lot of the Argument from Incredulity fallacy.

One bit that I think I did understand, though, was this…

<<it took billions of yeaRS TO MAKE THIS..[ape]
THEN ONLY 100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]>>

Which ape? 100,000 years ago we were still Homo sapiens and looked pretty much like we do now.

<<PLEASE NOTE THE NEEDED CHANGES..FROM Chimp.. into chump>>

If you’re talking about chimps to humans, that never happened. We were never chimps.

As for your waffle regarding the whale jawbone, it negates none of what I said. It just points to potential gaps in knowledge (which is fallacious) and ends with a false claim of me sidestepping your point.

<<tell me clever pj..where does it say that [the universe is 6000 years old] in any holY BOOK?>>

It doesn’t explicitly say that, but that doesn’t mean that the chronology doesn’t imply it when interpreted from a creationist perspective. Of course, you already knew that.

<<how can a cold blood fish..BY SM--ALL 'CHANGES'..become a warmblood animal beast/with legs and shoulderblades>>

That’s not a mechanism. It’s an Argument from Incredulity fallacy (again), and an Argument from Ignorance fallacy too.

<<Mate..macro-EVOLUTION..INTO NEW GENUS.IS YOUR THEORY PAL>>

So? You’re the one claiming it’s impossible and that’s what was relevant to my question. Please try to keep up.

<<YOU REFUSE to read my links>>

I’ve read them and they prove absolutely nothing for the reasons that I state.

<<IM TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE/BIG STICK..THAT BRINGS THE FARCE DOWN>>

Only it doesn’t, and for the reasons that I’ve stated. About the best you’ve done is make invalid points regarding pig heart valves.

Either way, you miss my point. You accept the pig-ape-hybrid hypothesis as true (you’d have to, otherwise there would be no point in using it as evidence against evolution), yet it clashes with your creationist beliefs. The same goes for your whale jawbone point.

So my question remains unanswered and now sidestepped, as so many of them still do.

PJ/QUOTE..<<..pig-ape-hybrid hypothesi..There would be no point in using it..as evidence against evolution)>>

RUBBISH..YOU PRESUME APE/Evolved..into you
but..if pig..thats not aPE/THEN\..YOU STUFFED IT/UP..BADLY

[YOU EVEN RIDICULED..IT..ON THIS THREAD.

lol/buT THEN DENY,..my uses..of ape/chimp..[FOR YOUR/THEory]..but offer little ELSE ..So my..REPLIES..remains unanswered...and now sidestepped..again

<<..your first post...>..[HUh?..FIRST..OR last-post?]..RE<<..the Argument..from Incredulity fallacy...One bit ..I did understand,..was this…>>'..'<<it took billions..of yeaRS TO..MAKE THIS..[ape]
THEN ONLY..100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]>>..

AND what/was..your consigned..'question'..[rEPLY..<<..Which ape? 100,000 years ago..we were still Homo sapiens.and looked pretty much like we do now.>>...[AVOIDANCE?]..[ET'TU?]

[so..PJ..please/for once
STATE..WHEN chimp/whatever..became man
YOUR Science says 80/120,thousands of years ago..

[we just seen...you become CHUMP..become/now.try//BECOMING..a CHAMP..WRITE SOMETHING..as *your*statement..OF FACT]

so/you..SAID,,<<..chimps to humans,..that
never happened..We were never chimps......

lo..give me a lol..[we dont come from pigs?]..
like..we..were[NEVER CHIMPS..im seeing a explanation/Excuse..spin/RATHER THAN PROOF/OR eveN-REBUTAL

[NITT-wittING PICKING..STING..on terminology]

<<..As for your waffle regarding..the whale
jawbone,..it negates none of what I said.>>...

RUBBISH..PLEASE GO BACK..TO THE LINK
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-whale-of-a-problem-for-evolution-ancient-whale-jawbone-found-in-antartica/

scroll down/TO the evolution...schematic/picture
http://www.uncommondescent.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/whale-transition.gif

THAT Picture..represents..the theory..'evolution..of the whale from THE HIPPO/[not shown]..side evolving..INTO WOLF CONVERGENCE..begin.. supposedly..[65]MILLION YEARS AGO..BUT..IF..the result..[a whole WHALE..WAS PRESENT..50 million years ago..the other..'evolutions ARE OBVIOUSLY FRAUD..Invalidated..GET IT?

YOU..CANT CLAIM/THEM..AS STEPS
IF THE WHALE Is already there..before THEY..EVEN..'EVOLVED'

A 49 million year old,..fully aquatic ancient whale fossil..would clearly demonstrate..that the younger..so-called ‘transistional’ fossils were,..in fact,..nothing of the sort...To claim otherwise is science fiction.

If you think..you can..NOW..“tweak” Ambulocetus..back
into this FANCIFUL/picture..then think again.

..LETS TRY/for..the 7th TIME...With this new fossil find,..dating to 49 million years ago..(bear in mind..that Pakicetus lived around 53 million years ago),

this means that.the first fully aquatic whales..now date to around the time..when walking whales..(Ambulocetus)..first appear...LOL.

If this new fossil find is correct,..then this clearly demonstrates that the evolutionary whale tale..was science fiction,..not fact..

NOW..LETS get back..to Examining..the piggy fact's?
SEE..IF WE CAN/FIGURE OUT..HOW GOD DUn/it?

Fine, OUG. So you don’t believe the whole pig-ape-hybrid bit (I suspected you didn’t). That brings me to the next point then…

<<RUBBISH..YOU PRESUME APE/Evolved..into you
but..if pig..thats not aPE/THEN\..YOU STUFFED IT/UP..BADLY>>

If you don’t accept evolution or this scientifically impossible pig-ape-hybrid nonsense that you love so much, then, according to you, there is no stuff up because there was nothing to be stuffed-up to begin with. If a flat-earther decides that the earth has four corners instead of being disc-shaped, then did they stuff up? No, because nothing real has been corrected.

So your pig-ape-hybrid argument is a meaningless and insincere attempt to simply ridicule and embarrass.

Now who’s speaking rubbish?

<<..your first post...>..[HUh?..FIRST..OR last-post?]>>

The first of your last two, I meant. Sheesh.

<<it took billions..of yeaRS TO..MAKE THIS..[ape]>>

Again, which ape? All apes? Yes, including us.

<<THEN ONLY..100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]>>

Wrong. Check the video I linked to again. Your comprehension skills are appalling. And again, we’re still apes.

<<STATE..WHEN chimp/whatever..became man
YOUR Science says 80/120,thousands of years ago..>>

There is no definitive line. It’s a gradual process that occurs over millions of years. A human wasn’t just born one day. You still can't get your head around the fact that species don't give birth to other species. Yes, there is a 100,000 year mark that is spoken of but that doesn’t mean we were climbing trees and picking fleas off of each other’s backs 100,001 years ago.

As for your ‘whale jawbone’ nonsense, I already answered this in the first paragraph here… http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16065#280906

[please/note..folks..this..is how/things..go
4..///those..2..dumbed down..+..only have the repeating..OF THE mantra

[leT ME REVEAL..IT..IN ACTION

ME<<it took billions..of yeaRS TO..MAKE/THIS..[ape]>>

HE..<<>.Again,..which ape?...All apes?..Yes,..including us.

ME<<..THEN ONLY..100,000 YEARS..TO MAKE/THAT..[you]>>

HE<<..Wrong...Check the video..I linked to again...Your comprehension skills..are appalling...And again,..*we’re..still apes.

me<<..STATE..WHEN chimp/whatever..became man
YOUR Science..says 80/120,thousands of years ago..>>

he<<.There..is no..definitive line.>>[then/says..100,000..LOL.

HE,,<<..If you’re talking..about chimps...to humans,.that never happened...We were..never chimps.>>..[Inversion/perversion?..

That..brings me..to the next point

you..<<..If you don’t..accept evolution..or this scientifically impossible pig-ape-hybrid nonsense..that you..*love so much>>

now hang-on..lesT WE FORGET/earlier/you..said
persisting/in inverting..any/reply..

<<..Fine, OUG...So you don’t believe..the whole pig-ape-hybrid bit>>

me/..i raised/it..as it sounds..reasonable..[i know you..havnt bothered reading the theses..so accept..your statement..as made/by ignorance..to/deceive..?

ditto/you\said..<<..(I suspected you didn’t).>>

SEE/HE\..it..saiD/ONLY..TO STiCK/THIS..next/TWISTER..*IN

he<<..So your pig-ape-hybrid argument..is a meaningless and insincere attempt..to simply ridicule and embarrass.>>

IE/,you<<..then,..according to you,..there is no stuff up
because there was nothing..to be stuffed-up to begin with.>>

then…

YOU<<..100,000 years ago..we were still Homo sapiens
and looked pretty much like we do now.

me<<PLEASE NOTE THE NEEDED CHANGES..FROM Chimp.. into chump>>

ME<<RUBBISH..YOU PRESUME APE/Evolved..into you
but..if pig..thats not aPE/THEN\..YOU STUFFED IT/UP..BADLY>>THEN CONFIRMS IT..by a redirection..based on reference/back to a refuted post..[where hE CUTS OUT..OVER/HALF/THE TIME-LINE..OF/WHALE EVOLUTION..FROM 65 MILLION Years to 15>?..OR 4?..[in his..MISBEGOTTEN/words?]

you<<..It’s a gradual process..that occurs over millions of years.>>

UNLESS ITS A WHALE?

but at/the end..we finaly aGREE..

<<You still can't get your head around..the fact
that species don't give birth..to other species.>>

AHHMEN..to/that
HALLALUEYA..no evolution..into new species.
NO/NEW-genus/FAMLIY ETC..[BUT/BY HYBRIDIZATION/see/HYBRedisaTion
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-section-3.html

**Yes,..there is a 100,000 year mark..that is spoken of..but that doesn’t mean.we were climbing trees and picking fleas..off of each other’s backs 100,001 years ago.>>

prove/it?

<<As for your ‘whale jawbone’ nonsense,..I already,,>>
[AVOIDED..answering by lOGIC/JUST REACTIVE INSANITY....you<< answered this in the first paragraph here…>> http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16065#280906

where..You\he shortened..WHALE Evolution..by 40 million odd years or SO..CUTTING OFF MAny of the so called time/dependent-stePS.. evolutionists/claIM..WHALES..need/TO HAVE EVOLVED..by.

lol

A 49 million year old,..fully aquatic ancient whale fossil would clearly demonstrate..that the younger..so-called ‘transistional’ fossils were,..are..in fact,..as/if\othing..at all

[thus..the proof/for whales..'evolving'..is void..dead/morte

SO..THE PIG HYBRED REMAINS..
DESPITE/YOUR TWISTs/turns...inversions..AND EVENTUAL/SUBVERSION.

its been fun

Wow, OUG. You're further gone than I thought - and I'm not referring to your creationist beliefs either. As someone who is currently studying criminology, I can only hope - for the sake of public safely - that you are posting this from a secure location. Despite your posting style indictating severe problems, I gave you the benefit of the doubt in regards to your potential to be reasonable because others here treat you in such a way, but they're wrong in doing so.

Goodbye.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=whale+evolution+timeline&i
I KNOW..YOU CAN COMPREHEND..EVEN YOUR OWN WORDS
SO I FOUND YOU A YOUTUBE CLIP..just two minutes time..and you may have caught UP..ON HOW FINDING A FINISHED 'EVOLUTION..appearing 40 million years before its time..refutES THE THEory of hoW IT 'EVOLVED'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OZJrRQONtI
in case you..still..dont get it..another
MAYBE IT WILL MAKE YOU SMILE..TOO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cn0kf8mhS4

COMEON AJ..ITS A SIM-LE MATTER OF TIMMING[TIMMING..IS EVERYTHING]
IF MUMMY ISNT BORN BEFORE KIDDIE..theres a story/going down

heck look at this timeline
http://ocean.si.edu/did-whale-evolution-go-backwards

ITS Pretty its glossy..but its just moving pictures

at least take me on re the PIG THESES
im only 60 percent sold on that

WHERAS THE WHALE/tale.. I WAS allways suss On..
it just sounded too silly

[how did that fat man get down my chimminy silly.]
or that jesus died so i can sin silly..it didnt pass the sniff test

look at the last youTUBE VIDIO//lol..a waTER RAT[MAMMAL]..GOES FOR A SWIM[TURNs into a EGGlaying crok'o-rat.THAT ACTUally skips into skippy the bush kangeroo..doing an aIRWALK/HOP/SKIPPY And jump[ IN THE WATER]..THAT ALONE IF HILARIOUS..

DONT GET SO..SERIOUS

comeon aj..its funny
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cn0kf8mhS4
SEE THE JOKE..HAve a LAUGH..THEN LETS HAVE A GO..AT HOW A MUTAnt chimpl liKE CRITTER.ANCESTOR..MADE PASSION WITH A SOW..AND HOW HER INCESTIOPUS F1 GENERATION..EVOLVED INTO NEW man*

or think..of hOW eve..[XX]..WAS FROM ADAMS DNA [Xy]
and how they thus legally are brother/sister[f1]..BUT IT GETS BETTER
under the mosaic laws..a brother [adam]]..may forgive a sister[eve]..any FOOLISHNESS LIKE An apple

[just like hubbyadam/canb forgive a wife[eve]..a foolishness
[just like a father adam/can forgive a DAUGHTER[EVE]..A FOOLISHNESS

ETC..SEE HOW BY LOOSING A LITTLE
YOU CAN Now do the proper job..on us creationists..[or cretins/for short]..

LAUgh damm you..ITS FUNNY
SEE THE JOKE..see thE JOKER

What basis for 'creation'?
GENESIS?
When I start reading Genesis I find myself picturing a group of swarthy farmers and their families, wives, adolescents and children, sitting around a central glowing fire in a large thatched communal hut, with smoke billowing up through a central hole in the thatch, and there towards the middle of their circle sits an old full-bearded man, slightly elevated on a pillow or a small pile of skins, with the firelight illuminating his face, and his eyes glowing reddish, as he holds the gathering spellbound, as his father had before him, and his father before him, addressing similar groups:

“Our God, the Father of us all, caused there to be a great light to warm the day and a smaller light to soften the dark of night, and sowed He the heavens above with a carpet of glowing embers to guide us in our travels, and gathered He together the waters for seas, streams and lakes, and into which He caused there to be fishes and great whales, and on the land caused there to be grass and grains and forests of trees with many fruits, and cattle and abundant life for meat, and many creeping and slithering things, and above the land He caused there to be fowl of the air, and for all of this we here give thanks.”

I can picture such groups scattered across the continents telling their own version in their own way, giving thanks for the seasons of sowing and reaping, of fishing and hunting, and of gathering the fruits of the earth and the fowl of the air. I can see some groups remarking on the travels of the great whales, and others speaking of the great migrations and the great Elephants, and of the big cats and the many dangers of the land and the water, and the amazement of it all.

TBC>

Continued:

But some things are strange about the Genesis version: whereas there is mention of whales to a people largely of the desert, of Egypt and the middle-east, who would have little possibility of seeing whales, there is no mention of elephants – those larger-than-life wanderers of the land – but then elephants didn’t live in the middle-east. Similarly, no mention of monkeys, or of lions, let alone any mention of ‘dinosaurs’ – but then of course the dinosaurs were long since extinct when Genesis was compiled. But there is mention of cattle, which could only have been domesticated quite late in the ‘human’ story. Also telling perhaps is the lack of recognition of the role of the ‘microbes’ in the story of ‘life’ and its ‘beginnings’ – but this omission is understandable, since they cannot be seen. This prompts the realisation that Genesis really only covers that which would have been directly familiar to the early middle-eastern writers and tellers of this version of ‘beginnings’, and long after Earth’s actual ‘creation’, long after life itself began, and long after the first man walked on the earth.

No wonder people remain confused, for the further one delves into the book the more it reveals its relevance directly to the times, knowledge and conditions appertaining way back then (whenever that was), and that certainly couldn’t have been anywhere near the actual ‘beginning’.

ANYHOW/../HERE..IS WHERE..I THInk..*they went wrong

Conquest...of Land by Vertebrates

The first..limbed vertebrates,..such as..Acanthostega and Ichthyostega, were clearly aquatic taxa..(Clack, 2002)..because they..*appear to have..retained internal gills,[as shown..by grooves on the ceratobranchials,]..which..*may have*...accommodated afferent branchial-arteries.

They also retained..a postbranchial..lamina..of the cleithrum,..which may have delimited the branchial chamber posteriorly..(Coates and Clack, 1991)...In addition,..they retained lepidotrichia in the caudal fin..and a well-developed lateral-line organ,..as shown by canals..for.its cephalic portion.

The internal gills..may have disappeared fairly early in the Carboniferous,..and..there is no trace..of lepidotrichia in stegocephalians..after the Devonian,..and this..*may indicate a slightly*.less aquatic lifestyle.

However,..the lateral-line organ..persisted..[in most Carboniferous]..and many Permian stegocephalians,..which suggests that many species..were still*..*primarily aquatic...*

The absence...of grooves..for the lateral-line organ..is not a reliable criterion..to infer*..a terrestrial lifestyle..because the organ may*be present..without leaving..any traces..on the skeleton.

Since the body shape..of early stegocephalians..is fairly conservative,.aquatic species..do not necessarily..differ drastically from terrestrial ones..in body shape.(Laurin, 2008).>>

or arnt/differentiated..AT ALL

<<..Thus,..additional criteria,..such as bone microanatomy, have been studied to determine.*..[oops]..when vertebrates became terrestrial (Laurin et al.,2004; Germain and Laurin, 2005).

Preliminary/results suggest..that/a terrestrial=lifestyle appeared in stegocephalians..>>

ie pre/hypothesized WHALE..'EVOLVING''..thus//in Filled/ERANTLY

<<..in the..Early Carboniferous..(Kriloff et al., 2008),..but many more species..will have to be studied..to yield reliable results.

key*..Atmospheric oxygen*concentration..may conceivably have played a role..in enabling vertebrates..to move onto land...The first,..aquatic stegocephalians appeared..while the atmospheric oxygen..was present.in low concentration...>>

application being..is 'size relative../LOW 0 ENVIRONMENT
how about fauna trees..ALGAE CLEARLY/OXYGENATES..THE H20..

ANYHOW..<<..Romer's gap,..a period.during which very few stegocephalians ..are known,..represents the final phase.of this episode..of low oxygen concentration...Soon after,..as atmospheric oxygen concentration..reached.and even surpassed.*..

[watch-out/aberation/self deleted]
restored//CONTEXT

romer's gap,..a period/during which..very few stegocephalians are known,*..[represents..the final phase..of this episode..of low oxygen concentration.]

Soon after,..as atmospheric oxygen concentration..reached and even surpassed its present level,.stegocephalians underwent a spectacular evolutionary radiation,..*[?]..which included..[Theory].the first terrestrial vertebrates.

That evolutionary*radiation..[lumping-together]..was paralleled in arthropods...Thus,..Ward et al...(2006) suggest that the oxygen concentration..triggered or facilitated terrestrialization..in arthropods and vertebrates,..and that an oxygen concentration of about 20% in the atmosphere..was the lower threshold.

*which allowed...[not a micrO/BUT/THE MACRO-EVOLUTION
<<..a switch[?]..from gill breathing in water to air-breathing..in vertebrates,..and arthropods.

CONTEXT
http://tolweb.org/Terrestrial_Vertebrates/14952
refute faCT..use applIED/SCIENCE.

salty/quote..<<..No wonder people remain confused, for the further one delves into the book the more it reveals its relevance directly to the times, knowledge and conditions appertaining way back then (whenever that was), and that certainly couldn’t have been anywhere near the actual ‘beginning’.>>

of course..IT WAS TOLD ..BEFORE IT WAS WRITTEN..
but the beginning lies far baCK IN TIME

BUT SEE THE AMASING THING..in the beginning/pre the big bang
all was void..blackness..[NOTHING]..FROM NUTHIn came something
THEY CALLED 'THE LIGHT'..[IE ENERGY RELEASED FROM ITS MASS..AND SCIENCE CALLS IT THE BIG BANG

its THE LOGIC OF IT ALL
Science/Has lucy..they begat eve..as the means theY MUST HAVE BEEN BEGOTTEN..thus needed to make eve[science tells us is [XX]..from adam[Xy]..[it wouldnt work[ie dna cloning from a riB/THAT SIMPLY DOUBLED UP ON THE x..AND TOSSING AWAY THE 'Y'..

THe logic of having light first/that sustains life..simply by light
its all more deeply thunk out than..these ignorant could reasonable be expected to think

THUS ARISES DIVINE INSPIRATION..FROM the illumined ones
the fallen angels fallen from heaven..we judge by our works.

AS ONE/WHO ON OCCASION READ MY OWN WORDS..im amazed anyone could make sense of it[let alone SOMEHOW I WRITE IT ONE LETTER SPELLED OUT TO ME AT A TIME

I IMAGINE PICTURE Language communes much thE SAME WAY
I SEE A Giff of say a giraffe/MY GUIDES SAy..what it is by infilling its proper context with the REED..and THE THREE DUCKS..[HOw that falls OUT OF MY MINDS EYE ..into writing..ASTOUNDS me]..THAT OTHERS DO IT BETTER...well thats great too.

as the koran says..make first one like it
and thing IS MOST People dont got that level of inspiration
they chased their guiding SPIRITS AWAY LONG AGO..AND NOW LEND THEIR IGNORANCE'S FROM..those living bY ROTE/creed..and greed..if some GETS VERIFIED..THEN WHO GETs the credit due..[its CERTAINLY/..NOT ME]..But you..who gave the first clue/..that saw my minds EYE..FORM A REPLY..cause..thats how I DO.

Well, OUG, it's been a fun ride, but now it's time to get real, or else to wind it up.

Your post of 11:16:23AM today, 30 March, examined the science behind the processes by which aquatic/marine vertebrates may have adapted to life in a terrestrial environment; and possible parallels in the development of arthropods.

Now, that was a good start - trying to understand the very slow and very complex processes by which early life (vertebrate and arthropod) may have made the transition from water to land.

But then, your next post (of 11:50:21AM) reverts to all the B/S and ill-concocted ramblings about xx/xy, Divine Inspiration, fallen angels, and other visions and cacophony of your 'mind's eye'. A complete load of horse-feathers.

The great majority of world theologians, of all persuasions, accept the Theory and Science of Evolution, and accept that Genesis (and many other parts of the Good Book) are allegorical rather than explicit or implicit 'fact'. You, on the other hand, rattle on about 'Creation' as though there was some genuine evidence for it (let alone 'proof'). But then, You don't need any proof, or evidence, you just 'believe' what only a load of deluded Americans are willing to believe - the Creationist Myth!

I tried to show how Genesis could only have been 'received from God', and passed-around and written down, a helluva long time after the beginnings of 'Life on Earth'. It, Genesis, is little more than a 'bedtime story', very much akin to our Indigenous People's 'Rainbow Serpent' and other such stories.
If the most knowledgeable theologians accept Evolution as 'Science' and as the True Means by which 'life' has developed on Earth (including our own development), And accept that Genesis is only a 'story', Why Can't You?

Accepting and believing in Evolution does not mean abandoning God, it just means seeing and seeking God in a different way, in the way we live, the way we relate to others and to this magnificent habitat we are 'blessed' to inhabit, and in appreciating the sheer extraordinary wonder of 'the cosmos' and all it contains.

In biology and specifically, genetics, the term hybrid has several meanings, all referring to the offspring of sexual reproduction.[1]

1. In general usage, hybrid is synonymous with heterozygous: any offspring resulting from the mating of two genetically distinct individuals
2. a genetic hybrid carries two different alleles of the same gene
3. a structural hybrid results from the fusion of gametes that have differing structure in at least one chromosome, as a result of structural abnormalities
4. a numerical hybrid results from the fusion of gametes having different haploid numbers of chromosomes
5. a permanent hybrid is a situation where only the heterozygous genotype occurs, because all homozygous combinations are lethal.

From a taxonomic perspective, hybrid refers to:

1. Offspring resulting from the interbreeding between two animals or plants of different species.[2] See also hybrid speciation.
2. Hybrids between different subspecies within a species

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestation_period

http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/gestation.htm

Mule

*Most mules are sterile.

A female mule that has estrus cycles and thus, in theory, could carry a fetus, is called a "molly" or "Molly mule," though the term is sometimes used to refer to female mules in general. Pregnancy is rare, but can occasionally occur naturally as well as through embryo transfer.

Sterile hybrids are not species in their own right.
Synonyms
Equus mulus

A mule is the offspring of a male donkey and a female horse.[1] Horses and donkeys are different species, with different numbers of chromosomes. Of the two F1 hybrids between these two species, a mule is easier to obtain than a hinny (the offspring of a male horse and a female donkey). The size of a mule and work to which it is put depends largely on the breeding of the mule's dam. Mules can be lightweight, medium weight, or even, when produced from draught horse mares, of moderately heavy weight.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammal_hybrids#Mammalian_hybrids

salty..<<..If the most knowledgeable theologians accept Evolution as 'Science' and as the True Means by which 'life' has developed on Earth (including our own development), And accept that Genesis is only a 'story', Why Can't You?>>

WHERE GREAT CHUNKS OF DNA NEED..TO BE ADDED
EXTREME OUT CROSS ALONE COULD PROVIDE 'NEW'..INFO
WE CAN HAVE CROSSOVER/THAT CHANGES LOCATION..BUT BY PAIRING IF OFTEN OF NULL AFFECT[And the few cases it has affect..LETHALITY [DEATH]..by FATAL recessives..THE POSSIBILITIES ARE LIMITED

but in a world of hybrids..THE INTER-RELATEDNESS WOULD ALLOW EVOLUTION/but just as Darwin..said re the blue barred pigeon's..MICRO/EVOLUTIONS[AND DITTO 'DOGS/CATs/breeds of sheep goATS HORSE-BREEDS GOAT BREEDS RABBIT BREEDS EVEN FRUIT-FLY 'BREEDS...ALL HAVE A SLOW Reversion to the [+]wildtype..that IN THE CASE OF DOGS =WOLVES..AND IN PIGIONS = THE BLUE BAR ROCK-DOVE..[OF COURSE DOMINANTS ARE EASIER TO detect than recessives..but one a domminant gene is gone..iTS FULLY GONE/BUT RECESSIVES CAN LIE HIDDEN..FOR MILLENNIAL/TILL IT Finally recombines WITH ITSELF AND GAINS EXPRESSION

YOUR OWN THEORY..SAYS salamanders frogs evolved INTO TURTLES BIRDS ETC..WHATS THE BIG ISSUE WITH THE PIG ANCESTOR MATING WITH A HUMAN ANCESTOR..LONG AGO..[IE A TRUE MISSING Link]..YET..STILL/THE..GAPS/ARE..HUGE.

chIMP TO CHIMP..ONLY PRODUCES CHIMPS
A HUMAN TO HUman..never..can produce a CHIMP[..SURE WE GOT CLOSE]

anyhow..i know thAT SCIENCE HASNT..ONE PURE EXAMPLE FOR evolution..of new genus..all this guff of little changes only ensure the new species IS FIXED..IM NOT GOING TO BE FOOLED BY STONES THAT LOOK LIKE THINGS[phenotype/BUT..NOT GENOTYPE]...[SCIENCE..NEEDS PROOF.

[YOU CANT ARGUE THE FACTS]..SCIENCE Never..evolved a new genus[and gene splicing means you have to add IN A VIRUS[ie not just the genes/only virus plus the gene]

WE TRUST THESE..SCAMErS FAR TOO MUCH
Two dogs will only breed two dogs
unless..one wasnt a dog

thats the only place the EXTRA NEW GENES CAN COME FROM
even virus cant add in that extra info..[I RESENT THE UNSPOKEN THING..THAT SELECTUS IS IMPLIED TO HAVE ONLY MATED WITH SELECTUS..AND APE ONLY WITH APE..WE NEED BE HONEST MUCH HYBRIDIZATION Lies at the roots of evolving..we are more interrelated than we wish to believe.

hiding/behind..just/any truth wont help
if/itS SIMPLE AVOIDANCE..its...not science.

Short sequence repeats..are distributed throughout the genome..(King 1997)...Presumably.. their most probable means of expression will vary,..depending on their location.

In proteins[edit]

In mammals,..20% to 40% of proteins..contain repeating sequences of amino acids caused by short sequence repeats..(Marcotte 1998)...Most of the short sequence repeats..within protein-coding portions of the genome...have a repeating unit of three nucleotides,[..since that length will not cause frame-shift mutation (Sutherland 1995).

Each trinucleotide repeating sequence...is transcribed into a repeating series of the same amino acid...In yeasts,..the most common repeated amino acids are glutamine, glutamic acid, asparagine, aspartic acid and serine...These repeating segments can affect the physical and chemical properties of proteins,*.with the potential for producing gradual and predictable changes in protein action..(Hancock 2005).

For example,length changes in tandemly repeating regions..in the Runx2 gene lead to difference..in facial length in domesticated dogs (Canis familiaris),..with an association between longer sequence lengths and longer faces (Fondon 2004)..This association also applies to a wider range of Carnivora species (Sears 2007)..

*Length changes in polyalanine tracts within the HoxA13 gene are linked to Hand-Foot-Genital Syndrome,..a developmental disorder in humans..(Utsch 2002). Length changes in other triplet repeats..are linked to more than 40 neurological diseases in humans..(Pearson 2005).

Evolutionary changes from replication slippage..also occur in simpler organisms...For example, microsatellite length changes are common within surface membrane proteins in yeast,..providing rapid evolution in cell properties..(Bowen 2006). Specifically,..length changes in the FLO1 gene control the level of adhesion..to substrates (Verstrepen 2005).

Short sequence repeats also provide rapid evolutionary change to surface proteins in pathenogenic bacteria;..this may allow them to keep up with immunological changes in their hosts..(Moxon 1994)..[This is known as the Red Queen hypothesis.(Van Valen 1973).

Length changes..in short sequence repeatsin a fungus (Neurospora crassa)..control the duration of its circadian clock cycles (Michael 2007).

Gene regulation[edit]

Length changes of microsatellites..within promoters and other cis-regulatory regions can also change gene expression quickly, between generations.

The human genome*..contains many (>16,000)..short sequence repeats in regulatory regions,..which provide ‘tuning knobs’ on the expression of many genes..(Rockman 2002)...ape?/pig?/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsatellite
http://www.biophp.org/minitools/microsatellite_repeats_finder/demo.php
http://pgrc.ipk-gatersleben.de/misa/misa.html
http://www.rub.de/spezzoo/cm/cm_phobos.htm

So, OUG, what are you getting from your research?

Any breakthroughs?

IM NOT REALLY LOOKING AS SUCH
most of the definitive-texts are pay for view
but by chance..i came across this site yesterday..and it suggested a means by which the face could lengthen/without a pig outcross/hybred..

but the search for pig and ape str's..to compare with the human 16,0000 mentioned..was a step too far..so i cut the info out and posted it..just in case.

anyhow its clear the science says..we [aLL MAMMALS[ALL BIRD/ALL REPTILES..DESCENDED FROM SALAMANDER/FROG]..THATS A LOT OF INBREEDING TO SCATTER THEM GENES..micro repeating..or otherwise...[its used in paternity testing..so i thought it was worth pointing out]

im not obsessing about it..its clear we arnt directly evolved out of any pure ape 'line'..[and science saying any human/looking thing..not being related..is equally suss[if we descended from frogs/salamanders/leaving the water]

ANYHOW WHILE WRITING I NOTED ALEX TALKING ABOUT MARK OF CAin
SO I GO BACK TO LISTEN to him again
http://rss.infowars.com/20140403_Thu_Alex.mp3

anyhow im in no rush..to look upon the mutant FROM WHICH WE DESCEND
their spirit re-incarnated and evolved away from that long ago/its enough to inform..that inbreeding fixates the genes..that make this race or that species..and..

until that inbreeding EVENT..separates into an exclusive genuS..its all the more due to inbreeding GETTING THE RIGHT COMBINATION of homogenized CHROMOSOMES..GOD INVENTED TO ALLOW US OUR SMALL JOYS..to think of that ape/just doing what rouge apes do..

and the sow doing what sows in heat do..yet we can say we are goodly..PURE BETTER THAN OTHER..when we all got our feet ROOTED CLEARLY IN THE MUCk of the past[EVEN THE PURE BREEDS ARE only pure \because of the inbreeding/but inbreeding..RESULTS IN YET MORE SPORTS

sport..is the OLD WORD FOR MUTATION
most mutation is injurious..<>...Length changes in other triplet repeats..are linked to more than 40 neurological diseases in humans..(Pearson 2005]>>..SO HUMANE LOGIC MIGHT BE LINKED..to wHY BEASTS ARE BEAST.

salty/quote..re progress
in the/spirit realm/this is huge

ITS FUNNY..HOW..folks know we live..in amazing times
like just a day ago..the queen of the common wealth/met with the pope
[7 th pope apparently..but the point is the father gave the ptince georges grandma..a lapis laxuri..orb..
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRFDqqM_WMKfjx03n4Mecu03xAPewGwJ1n_dQHoa6n34KFPwQcmMuo4dFY

[and i been fact checking up on it]
what does the words say?
what is a sharp cross
it looks like malteaze/cross
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=+stone+orb+topped+with+a+sharp+cross

its has high..'sign'..signification..hrh may not know..
but doth phylum even know the meaning of the 3 coins.[orbs]?

anyhow/quote/link

<<>.For example, if we gaze on the Lapis Lazuli-orb of Gabriel, the Divine Messenger, a sacred oracle opens through the lineage of the wisdom traditions, and as though from God’s voice itself. This oracle moves us through the sands of time, to a far distant memory of the Atla Priests of Atlantis, through to the Ancient Egyptian Gods, then on to the Greek and Roman Gods and Goddesses. After a period of darkness, the line once more reappears through the light of Carl Jung’s extraordinary work, through the aspects of the 12 Archetypes he brought to our attention.

You will also see against the orb, a sacred sigil that contains, in geometric form, the essence of the Angel’s heart. Sigils are ancient mystical symbols that hold the force of an entity. In the second oracle the ANGEL HEART SIGULS, the Angels of Atlantis have given us powerful teaching about the heart as the seat of the soul.>>..

http://www.mindbodyspirit.co.uk/blog/the-angels-of-atlantis-stewart-pearce/

http://www.mindbodyspirit.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/AHS-Gabriel-708x1024.jpg

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/queen-gives-honey-to-pope-who-has-gift-for-prince-george-504197

interesting clue..of how cimps mated with pigs to make chumps
alex jones breaks down..the movie noah
http://rss.infowars.com/20140403_Thu_Alex.mp3

with some interesting stuff..re the fallen angels mating with the sons of men[or visa versa]..so who was chimp who pig ..might explain much
[around 2 hours 44 minute mark]

i wish alex had written/transcripts
[se how the stuff just keeps flowing..its natural to us all/but by living by the clock..seperates us from our own personal revelation
[and we all get them..we just need weigh where they come from[if it hurts anyone..or anything..its not of god..[only good is of god]..but our freewill rules suptreeeme[god so loves those truly repentant/who 'go and sin no more'..[and when we help other..he says see i old ya so]
and we know exactly what he means/we judge the unfinished work in progress..when god knows us each intimately..[we each have so much one to one with the only one..if we could but desperate that of us[personal freewill]..and that of god..[everything else]

BECAUSE OF POST LIMITS..I FINISH..WITH THE FIRST CELL
[by any definition..the first living cell/singular..was that sighted/described..BY ITS Inventor]

visualized recollection..as recorded...gene-sis 2
this/begat here
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16065&page=19

here gen2..is THE MOST HOLy living spirit
describing THE BOUNDS OF HIS PATENT-RIGHT
via the earliest..written NOTICE..OF INTENT?
[SEARCH ABORTED]
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=.OLDEST+RECORD+WORLD+WAS+VOID+DARK+DEEP&

OTHER ISSUES/RAISED=gen..1 ends at geN 2;3

OR GEn 2;4 states gods creATIONS
FROM ..the creations..of heaven..[HEAVEN/generations]..
AS OPPOSED TO HELLIsh/generations]..PRE-e-volution stages.[2;6-9]

OR ALTERNATE THEORIES
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/Genesis_texts.html

many readers noticed..some odd details..in the book we call Genesis. The first part of Genesis (1:1-2:3) differed from the later parts (Genesis 2:4-3:23) in interesting ways.

(1.. First,..each of these two sections of Genesis contains a different introduction for the creation story.

Genesis 1:1..launches with the eloquent...and imminently quotable, "In the beginning*..God created the heavens..and the earth...Now the earth was formless..and void,..and darkness..was over the surface/of the deep,..and the Spirit of God..[IE/holy-spirit..'of' god]..was hovering over the waters."

INVENTION REVEALING Inventor?

The text reaches its conclusion in Genesis 2:1, where the narrative voice announces, "Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array." Finis. The end..THE FIRST LIVING CELL..is birthed

However, a second introduction appears in Genesis 2:4: "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created. When the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth."

This initially seems a little redundant--at least on the surface of things. It seems to suggest a second creation story rather than one alone.

(2) The sections also differ in genre. One is written in poetry and the other is written in prose. Genesis 1:1-2:3 is a poetic text. It is metered, and probably the writer(s) intended for it to be sung as a hymnic chant.

The Genesis 1 text uses "high style" and those artistic devices common to Hebrew poetry--especially catachresis, anaphora, and parallelism. To indicate these artistic qualities here, most NIV translations reproduce the text with hanging indentation to mark the poetic structure.

Each section begins with an anaphora: "And God said . . ."

edited

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=ruach+Jahweh..OLDEST+WRITTEN+RECORD+gen2