The better half of the joke

[Eloi]

... is that evolutionists not only say that some animal species come from previous ones, but they also say that each plant species comes from another previous one (or that they used to say BEFORE)... This, after, according to them, plants stopped living in the water to start living on land... kind of like when fish ceasing to be aquatic to become semi-terrestrial amphibians ... or humans stopped living in caves to start building houses

Did you know this part of the story? It is never ending.

Do you think that the millions of years that the planet has existed are enough for so many SUPERDUPERULTRASLOW transformations that these scientists talk about?

[Miles]

.

How very sad.

.

[Tcg]

Do you think that the millions of years that the planet has existed...

The earth isn't anywhere near that young. If you want to question scientific facts at least get the fact you are questioning correct.


Tcg

[Eloi]

It's been calculated that planet earth is 4.54 billion years old, i.e. 4 540 000 000. It would be necessary to calculate when it was transformed into a habitable place for life, and then how long the supposed transformation of inorganic material lasted, to become everything that exists today.

You have to be realistic and see the whole picture.

[Eloi]

The fact that the time of the planet's existence and the fossil records found DO NOT SUPPORT a tree-shaped evolution, scientists speculate about genomic explosions, in which suddenly many different species arise at the same time for some reason that they continue to investigate. That is until they find the next problem, and then the next, and then the next... and we'll see how far and until when, the Creator of all lets them go.

That is, from my point of view, the clearest evidence that the theory of evolution will never be proven. Those who say and repeat that the evolution of man from apes (and incidentally the evolution of plants from others) has been proven, only repeat the same lie many times to try to get it to go further and last longer.

[Eloi]

A mind full of preconceived ideas may be responsible for creating a whole fictitious universe around those unreal ideas making associations with half-truths and all kinds of incomplete information... All that universe from hundreds of thousands of years ago where certain kind of apes- humanoids lived on earth and were becoming humans, it is a sample of what the repetition of constant lies can do in the collective mind. These preconceived ideas affect the correct interpretation of the facts, since they lead them to support assumptions that are already accepted as true, but that in reality are not, and thus the correct interpretation of the facts is lost.

Analyze: if that universe of ape-men had been real, note that they are talking about the supposed evolution of a living being from one genus to another, plants would also be evolving... Let's say that those primitive men would never have known, for To mention one example, a tomato, because the tomato plant would have been a plant of something else turning into something else that in a few thousand more years would have turned into a tomato plant.

Would that be the complete scenario of primitive man becoming human according to evolutionists? A world where plants were also turning into each other? What plants and animals did primitive men really eat and see in their supposedly slow evolution?

The endless story

[Eloi]

The media focus of evolutionists on the supposed transmutation of apes into humans has made people forget the real extent that this theory covers; It is not just about that, but it is claimed that the animals were transforming from one to another, with supposed slow changes that would mean a total difference between modern animals and those that existed millions of years ago.

The truth is that the fossil record DOES NOT SUPPORT this theory of slow changes that are gigantic today. I am going to cite an example; How much do you think a fly from 4 million years ago has changed to become a modern fly?

The fossil record tells the truth. After finding a fly of that age and studying it for comparison with modern ones, note what a paleontologist said to the New York Times in 1982:

''We've learned that the internal anatomy of these creatures is remarkably similar to what you find in flies today,'' says Dr. Poinar, an insect pathologist. ''The wings and legs and head, and even the cells inside, are very modern-looking.''

https://www.nytimes.com/1982/10/03/nyre ... Position=1

To this day no fossils have been found to show that they have been slowly transforming into some other animal than what they were before. What were evolutionists supposed to find to defend their much-loved theory? As a book on evolution that I studied many years ago puts it:

Also, if evolution were founded in fact, the fossil record would be expected to reveal beginnings of new structures in living things. There should be at least some fossils with developing arms, legs, wings, eyes, and other bones and organs. For instance, there should be fish fins changing into amphibian legs with feet and toes, and gills changing into lungs. There should be reptiles with front limbs changing into bird wings, back limbs changing into legs with claws, scales changing into feathers, and mouths changing into horny beaks.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/Lif ... -Creation/

So let the fossil record really do the talking.

[brunumb]

To this day no fossils have been found to show that they have been slowly transforming into some other animal than what they were before.

That's because there was no evolutionary pressure resulting in any significant change. Evolution doesn't just 'happen'. Please enlighten yourself on what drives evolution and you might then understand why there are organisms that have changed very little over eons.

[boatsnguitars]

... is that evolutionists not only say that some animal species come from previous ones, but they also say that each plant species comes from another previous one (or that they used to say BEFORE)... This, after, according to them, plants stopped living in the water to start living on land... kind of like when fish ceasing to be aquatic to become semi-terrestrial amphibians ... or humans stopped living in caves to start building houses

Did you know this part of the story? It is never ending.

Do you think that the millions of years that the planet has existed are enough for so many SUPERDUPERULTRASLOW transformations that these scientists talk about?

I can only hope that in this day and age when Science has proven it's accuracy a billion-fold, that even Religious people here see how misguided the OP is.

We'll often squabble over finer points of some religious view, like the Shroud of Turin, but generally we all agree the basic physics - that Science has described in vivid detail - are established. Things like the age of the Earth, or the Universe, or the fact of Evolution, etc. seem to generally be agreed to by most of us.

But, then, some Flat Earther, or Young Earther, or Evolution Denier, or Climate Change Denier shows up and tries restart the entire discussion as if it's never been done - because to them, it hasn't. They just woke up, read some wacky Apologetic pamphlet and decided, based on that and their love of Jesus, that they can argue against the hundreds of years of diligent Science.

It's a strange thing that gives such an ignorant person the confidence to deny such complex issues. And, worse, it's not like they are denying a few books by Darwin, or some lines in a Middle School textbook - they are arguing against detailed scientific data, formulas and processes that take years to understand, let alone apply.

For example, imagine the OP trying to seriously discuss this:

Conversion of Biosynthetic Precursors of RNA to Those of DNA by Photoredox Chemistry
Dougal J. Ritson & John D. Sutherland
Journal of Molecular Evolution volume 78, pages 245–250 (2014)

Abstract
Soon after the origin of RNA-based life, depletion of prebiotically synthesised ribonucleotides would have driven the evolution of a biosynthetic pathway to these key building blocks. Ribozyme-catalysed nucleosidation—the key biosynthetic step—requires that ribose and the nucleobases are produced by abiotic chemistry and are relatively stable to the conditions of their synthesis. The most plausible prebiotic synthesis of sugars involves photoreduction of cyanohydrins by hydrogen sulphide in the presence of copper(I) cyanide, and we therefore subjected ribose to these conditions whereupon it was partially converted to 2-deoxyribose. Furthermore, a derivative of uracil is reduced under similar conditions to thymine. Thus, DNA biosynthetic precursors can be formed abiotically from those of RNA allowing for an early evolutionary transition to life based on RNA and DNA.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 014-9617-0

He'd be lost because it doesn't include "Kinds" or "Thou Shalt Not".

[Eloi]

As I have been remembering in this topic, evolutionary theory does not only refer to apes transmuting and becoming humans but it should also apply to plants becoming other different plants, as if a banana were to become an apple over time... and it also refers to millions of animal species that we know becoming different animals, a never ending story.

And as if that were not enough, the theory also presupposes that unicellular living beings such as bacteria have become millions of years later into larger animals with millions of cells, such as mollusks and others, which, as I said before after emerging, many millions of years later, they became others, and others, and others, and others,........... different, all of it in millions and millions and other millions of years until human civilization appeared 6 millennia ago.

The truth of it all is that that story has no support in the fossil record; it is a speculative fiction that evolutionists try to make believe, while they search for something in the excavations that actually proves that this really happened. Meanwhile, the acolytes of evolutionists keep saying things like this someone said to me on this forum:

... Science discovered the truth and it replaced these outdated and demonstrably wrong ideas (for the good of all of us).

That sounds like a Nazi slogan to me.

... or this:

...
I'm a proud member of the animal kingdom (and therefore an animal ...) ...

... that sounds like a Gregorian chant to me.