DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892478 said:Oceanic ;6892474 said:DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892468 said:Oceanic ;6892465 said:DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892461 said:Oceanic ;6892456 said:DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892445 said:Oceanic ;6892438 said:DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892425 said:Oceanic ;6892420 said:DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892413 said:Oceanic ;6892402 said:DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892389 said:A fish has the opportunity to decide it wants to leave water, survive on land, grow legs
![]()
Show me the fish growing legs. Oh yeah that's how God created it. Never mind.
Evolution doesn't occur over the course of minutes.
Right, because it happens over the course of billions of years which in fact no one has ever witnessed it taking place.
Sounds credible......shaq face
We have thru the fossil record and many skeletons today show vestigial remnants of appendages that were once in use but no longer are.
DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892424 said:Oceanic ;6892418 said:DoUwant2go2Heaven?;6892409 said:Oceanic ;6892391 said:J-Breezy;6892385 said:Oceanic ;6892360 said:And evolution doesn't consciously change one species into something else so it can't just break down a pig and put it back together as some new form Willy nilly
Aaaaand why not?
Evolution says we evolved from single cell organisms into multi cell organisms.
In fact how did this happen? Real question btw
Science tells us that you need life to create life.
You take some dna from here and some dna from over there put it together and BOOM you have life.
That is an undisputable fact
At what point was this single cell organism able to create all kinds of life from itself?
Even if it did reproduce (assuming it was asexual) wouldn't its offspring have the same genetic makeup?
Single cell + single cell = multi cellular organism??
I thought if you mate two organisms you were going to get a copy, not something else.
wait, what?
Bruh, I said that evolution doesn't consciously make decisions to create a species. In other words, there is no person controlling evolution .. Nature does not work toward an end goal and on the flipside, animals don't consciously decide their evolutionary paths as you suggested. A pig can't DECIDE that he wants to fly and boom, pigs grow wings.
So who tells the fish to leave its natural habitat, somehow finagle it's way on land, some how survive on land, somehow grow legs?
No one tells it to.
So if no one is directing the fish to leave its natural habitat, why would said fish leave?
Anything that would cause a water dwelling animal to move closer to land, for example shallower waters. Animals that
had the propensity to move around better would survive and have children that carried on their traits.
Fish swims in ocean that comprises 75% of the earth, but yet fish says ocean isn't big enough for me to have genetically gifted offspring. I got a bright idea, says fish, I will move on land where I will better thrive and one day morph into a zebra!
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!
There are smaller bodies of water than an ocean.
The premise is still absurd regardless of how you try to justify it. Fish don't grow legs, survive on land, and morph into elephants. It's absolute madness!
Yeah, I know right. They turn into amphibians.
Oh that really makes it plausible now! Look frogs and snakes turning into flying wombats, gorillas, and kangaroos!
That makes sense!
It doesn't cuz frogs and snakes evolved into neither one of those.
Amen. A frog is a frog and a snake is a snake. Been like that since God made them at the beginning.
Nah, wombats, gorillas and kangaroos evolved from different forms but they weren't snakes and frogs.. Is what I'm saying.
In other words, you're being ignorantly extreme.