Dinosaur conspiracy!?

[Windmillcharge]

please explain why human embryos have gill slits, like fish embryos?

Oh I love hackles lies. Please research this again and quote scientific facts.

DNA similarities also points to strangly to a designer i.e. God.
It also does not prove that evolution has ever occured.
So believe in evolutiuon is just that belief.

 

[aspen]

Oh I love hackles lies. Please research this again and quote scientific facts.

DNA similarities also points to strangly to a designer i.e. God.
It also does not prove that evolution has ever occured.
So believe in evolutiuon is just that belief.

So you cannot explain it

 

[aspen]

You are also assuming that people who accept the science of evolution cannot be theists or Christians - this is false

 

[DPMartin]

You are also assuming that people who accept the science of evolution cannot be theists or Christians - this is false

then they don't believe what God told who ever in the writing of genius. if you don't believe what the God of Noah Adam Abraham Moses says then no you only say you are Christian, and that doesn't make you a Christian.

 

[aspen]

then they don't believe what God told who ever in the writing of genius. if you don't believe what the God of Noah Adam Abraham Moses says then no you only say you are Christian, and that doesn't make you a Christian.

Where does it say that in the Bible?

 

[DPMartin]

Where does it say that in the Bible?

it don't have to, believing God's Word is the whole principle of the bible. but Jesus is the Word of God made flesh (Joh 1:14 ) therefore one should believe Jesus seeing that He is the Word of God that John states:


Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. (this is who Jesus is)

so if you don't acknowledge that, and seek to challenge that, why are you here, shouldn't you be in the non-believer's sections of this site? are you saying you are not a Christian, though you say you are? hence if you believe Jesus then you believe the Word of God from the beginning of the bible because Jesus is the Word of God.


just because one calls them self a Christian doesn't make them Christian. just because someone calls themselves a professional baseball player doesn't mean they are one because we can't prove he is a liar, isn't that so there aspen?

 

[aspen]

it don't have to, believing God's Word is the whole principle of the bible. but Jesus is the Word of God made flesh (Joh 1:14 ) therefore one should believe Jesus seeing that He is the Word of God that John states:


Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. (this is who Jesus is)

so if you don't acknowledge that, and seek to challenge that, why are you here, shouldn't you be in the non-believer's sections of this site? are you saying you are not a Christian, though you say you are? hence if you believe Jesus then you believe the Word of God from the beginning of the bible because Jesus is the Word of God.


just because one calls them self a Christian doesn't make them Christian. just because someone calls themselves a professional baseball player doesn't mean they are one because we can't prove he is a liar, isn't that so there aspen?

‘It don’t have to’?

That’s your answer?

Right.....

 

[DPMartin]

‘It don’t have to’?

That’s your answer?

Right.....

what are you trying for job 2.0? really?

 

[bbyrd009]

So you cannot explain it

show them their tails Aspen
why do religious ppl seem to hate truth the most, you wonder

 

[bbyrd009]

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. (this is who Jesus is)

so if you don't acknowledge that, and seek to challenge that

the question becomes why do ppl choose to believe that God could not use evolution, when they can even see their gills and tails if they choose to? Isn't the answer that they have formed a belief (went into the Holy of Holies) that now cannot be assailed? That God Himself cannot budge?

 

[aspen]

 

[Helen]

show them their tails Aspen
why do religious ppl seem to hate truth the most, you wonder

Come on...you seem a bit hung-up on tails...I am 75, we are a big family and all of us have lots of friends...I've never met anyone with a tail, or even heard anyone mention that a relative or friends that had kids were born with tails.
It is hardly a common thing is it. And odd one here and there...just as we know that now and again a baby is born with 6 digits or a cleft palate. It does not prove evolution.

 

[Dcopymope]

the question becomes why do ppl choose to believe that God could not use evolution, when they can even see their gills and tails if they choose to? Isn't the answer that they have formed a belief (went into the Holy of Holies) that now cannot be assailed? That God Himself cannot budge?

Come on...you seem a bit hung-up on tails...I am 75, we are a big family and all of us have lots of friends...I've never met anyone with a tail, or even heard anyone mention that a relative or friends that had kids were born with tails.
It is hardly a common thing is it. And odd one here and there...just as we know that now and again a baby is born with 6 digits or a cleft palate. It does not prove evolution.

What people assume to be a "tail" never was an actual because it has none of the attributes of what one would call an animals tail, as explained here.

“None of them—and none of the reports in the literature that I know of—are actual tails. A tail has vertebrae, is a continuation of the coccyx, has developed muscles, nerves and other soft tissues, etc. The appendages described in the literature, and all of the appendages on which I have operated, are dysmorphic mesenchymal tissue, often epithelialized exophytic dermal sinus tracts, that bear a superficial resemblance to a ‘tail’. None have the structure of a tail, even in rudimentary form, and none of the ones I have operated on were attached to the coccyx in the way that a tail is.

Link: The Myth of Human "Tails": A Physician and Surgeon's Perspective | Evolution News

If it really is a tail, or a "throwback" to one of our alleged tailed ancestors, then it wouldn't have to be removed to begin with. A real tail wouldn't cause neurological disorders later on in life, because they are nothing more than defects, which is why they are always removed ASAP. The occurrence of the human "tail" is seen throughout the development of the embryo, and here is its purpose in a nutshell:

During normal human development a number of transient structures form and subsequently regress completely. One of the most prominent structures that regress during development is the human tail. We report here a histological and ultrastructural study of cell death in the cranial and caudal (tail) parts of the neural tube in 4 to 6-week-old human embryos. Initially, the human tail is composed of tail bud mesenchyme which differentiates into caudal somites, secondary neural tube, notochord and tail gut. Later on, these structures gradually regress by cell death.

Link: Morphological diversity of dying cells during regression of the human tail. - PubMed - NCBI

In other words, the purpose of this "tail" is to serve as a type of scaffolding which guides the development of other structures like cartilage and muscle cells (look up the term mesenchyme). Once the structures are complete, the "tail" regresses as it no longer serves a purpose, much like the scaffolding seen during the construction of an archway that is later removed. Such notions of this being evidence of evolution at all has long been debunked and abandoned by many evolutionists, theistic or otherwise.

 

[Helen]

Thanks @Dcopymope Very interesting information. Thumbs up!
( just two thumbs lol )

 

[Dcopymope]

Thanks @Dcopymope Very interesting information. Thumbs up!
( just two thumbs lol )

No problem.

 

[bbyrd009]

Come on...you seem a bit hung-up on tails...I am 75, we are a big family and all of us have lots of friends...I've never met anyone with a tail, or even heard anyone mention that a relative or friends that had kids were born with tails.

i'm not sure your point here, most of the time they do not present at birth, i mean you trust your doctor right? ask him, and let us know what he says, if you think...every link in google is lying, or wrong? Some of the pictures are obviously faked, i guess these tails never have any bone in them, etc

 

[bbyrd009]

or even heard anyone mention that a relative or friends that had kids were born with tails.

ha, as if, right, i mean "had a son yesterday, he was born with a tail" lol. i guess it is so upsetting to ppl that hospitals keep it from the parents even?

 

[bbyrd009]

It is hardly a common thing is it. And odd one here and there...just as we know that now and again a baby is born with 6 digits or a cleft palate. It does not prove evolution.

or fur; i've seen fur on a human myself. Prove evolution? i am just as likely to bring some evo killer post here, if i find it, i'm not trying to prove anything, Helen, honest injun. Perspectives are like...clothing, (hmm) don't like it, not meshing with the rest of your ensemble? change it.

i am totally fine with someone else believing "God made Adam out of dirt" if they want

 

[Windmillcharge]

So you cannot explain it

I can explain very easily. Babies do not go through recapulation of supposed evolutionary ancestors.
The so caled gill slits they are nothing more than folds in the region of the tiny embryo’s throat. By the 28th day of life, the embryo’s brain and spinal cord seem to be racing ahead of the rest of the body in growth. Therefore, for a time, the spinal cord is actually longer than the body, forcing the body to curl and flexing the neck area forward. (This curled embryo with the long spinal cord is mistakenly accused by some people of having a tail.) Just as many people develop a double chin when bending the neck forward, so the embryo has folds in its neck area due to this flexing.

If you want to believe a lie do so, but the science says evolution never happened.

 

[bbyrd009]

Such notions of this being evidence of evolution at all has long been debunked and abandoned by many evolutionists, theistic or otherwise.

and long been accepted by others, call the tail wings if you like. Obviously an MD is no more qualified to explain why we have gills and a tail in the correct stages of embryo development than anyone else--"dead doctors don't lie"--and pictures of tails in the womb serve me just fine, thanks.

I would not expect a vestigial tail that is supposed to be absorbed into the fetus to behave like a dog's tail, or have its properties, myself

now reason that away however you like