So when reptiles started developing lumps in thier sides (I'm assuming that's how wings started?) They were functional and could be used for gliding? You have jumped a little ahead. Don't evolutionists say it themselves, it took millions of years. That means it has to start out
45 comments
1. It's wasn't reptiles, it was dinosaurs. Dinosaurs are more specific.
Really when I first read this I thought he was talking about dragon evolution, which is even sillier. We aren't trying to confuse you, you're just so dumb you confuse yourself by making up straw man arguments.
You're confusing yourself.
Allow me to offer some guidance:
STUDY THE SUBJECT, YA DUMB FUCK.
i thought wings were just feathers on forearms and, in the case of bats, flaps of skin under the forearms.
But a useless bud would have been discarded! Don't try and confuse me--I'm not that dumb.
Evolution only discards traits that prohibit the entity from reproducing or that make it unfit for the environment and hence easier to kill by predators. There are plenty of useless mutations. Maybe you really are THAT dumb.
Actually, penguins are birds who transformed their wings into flippers to adapt to the environment. The reptiles, for the record, had some "lumps" on their side million of years ago. Nobody is trying to confuse you, you're a dumb and an ignorant.
PC: meet flying squirel. Flying squirel has no wings of course, and he doesn't really fly he glides on the webbing of skin between his legs.
http://www.flyingsquirrels.com/
No lumps or bumps or buds led to this. Just skin.
This would give Pure Christian a heart attack.
image
Those are skin flaps, evolved over time. No bumps required.
Start with a mistakem premis. And work from there."So when reptiles started developing lumps in thier sides (I'm assuming that's how wings started?)" Then you assume wrongly."Don't evolutionists say it themselves, it took millions of years." "That means it has to start out Appearantly you ARE that dumb. Penguin wings are DERIVED from the lying wings of ancestoral birds that DID fly.
Further down: You evolutionists try to work on the idea of confusing creationists. . No, it is not work. You are so easily confused.
Can you also backup that claim with facts and sources? Also, the Old Testment was copied with precise accuracy, sometimes even the words were counted to ensure nothing had been added or removed. I don't see why the New Testament has not also undergone the same treatment. If you believe in God, do you honestly think He would allow huge errors into His word. The first Christians were extremely careful in which letters and documents they choose to put into the New Testament, and I fully belive God guided them in thier decisions. I don't at all dispute the accuracy of the entire Bible and many Scholars don't either. Why are there fewer textual variants in the Qu'ran than the Bible?
Actually, he's hit on something. How did arms become modified into wings, since at first glance it would seem to take many generations to produce fully functional wings, and during the 'development' process there would be no survival advantage?
I think the answer may be that feathers originally evolved not for flight, but for insulation. Then, arboreal dinosaurs may have started to use their feathered limbs for gliding....and at that point the selection process towards a fully developed wing began.
A limb and its corresponding bone density will evolve in every direction and back again, but it will come across wings eventually. light bones+feathers=flight. Birds are not centaurs, one hell of a Critical Research Failure there for "not being that dumb". That last one busted my irony meter and now my stupid claims meter is busted too. Damn you.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
