Should at Least Make Evolutionists Consider

[Purple Knight]

Question for Debate: Why, and how, does the muntjac deer have only seven pairs of chromosomes?

Please don't look this up, at least until you've considered for a moment how weird this is. Imagine you have 20 pairs of chromosomes, and you have a baby that has sixteen pairs. He shouldn't be able to breed with the rest of your species.

Is this at least weird? A regular deer has around 40-70 chromosomes. Is it at least strange that he can even be alive having lost that much genetic information? One more halving and he'll be a fruit fly (they have 4 pairs).

[Rxlx]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #3]

Stalin is supposed to have messed about crossbreeding apes.

[Rxlx]

[Replying to marke in post #54]

Most dinosaurs all lived before The Flood and were buried in its sediments.
all dinosuars were vegetarian/herbivores until Stan perverted everything.
Some huge beasts like Behemoth obviously were around after the flood.
It is likely the medieval accounts of dragons were all references to various dinosaurs.

[Rxlx]

[Replying to marke in post #51]

Ther is zero evidence for evolution. Not a single iota or atom of anything evolved from anything else.

All scientists who claim evolution is true are GOD hating pagans.

All the supposed evlotion links are merely similar creatures that died out during The Flood - which scientists don't believe.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to marke in post #54]

Most dinosaurs all lived before The Flood and were buried in its sediments.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

all dinosuars were vegetarian/herbivores until Stan perverted everything.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

Some huge beasts like Behemoth obviously were around after the flood.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

It is likely the medieval accounts of dragons were all references to various dinosaurs.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

Do you have any evidence for the claims that you made? If not, you may want to do your due diligence before making them as this is a debate site and we all should expect to have our claims questioned.

[marke]

Rejecting science submitted by Christians

Please show where this happened or admit that you offer nothing but distractions in place of debate.

does not refute the facts that undermine popular evolutionist assumptions and narratives.

Do you even know what popular evolutionists assumptions and narratives are? If you do, please supply them so I can fight against them. I say this, because if a scientist is just going to assume things, they might as well use 'faith' and faith is required in order to believe in things that are false. Scientists (I assume that is what you mean by evolutionist) are not doing science if they are using faith and assuming things and need to be brought to task. I thank you in advance for bringing these terrible acts to our attention.

Until recently secularists refused to believe soft tissues could be found in dinosaur remains because everyone knows soft tissues cannot survive millions of years.

Why did you take the time to type these words? What should they mean to the rest of us and why did you once again quote a post of mine without addressing it. It's rude.

Until recently secularists refused to believe soft tissues could be found in dinosaur remains because everyone knows soft tissues cannot survive millions of years.

Two modern discoveries about dinosaur bones both refuted the long held erroneous assumption that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago.

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #54]

Most dinosaurs all lived before The Flood and were buried in its sediments.

Marke: Dinosaur fossils were buried by flood water sediments regardless of the alternative claims made by wannabe or incompetent paleontologists.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

all dinosuars were vegetarian/herbivores until Stan perverted everything.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

Some huge beasts like Behemoth obviously were around after the flood.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

It is likely the medieval accounts of dragons were all references to various dinosaurs.

This is a claim without evidence and will not be respected.

Do you have any evidence for the claims that you made? If not, you may want to do your due diligence before making them as this is a debate site and we all should expect to have our claims questioned.

[Clownboat]

Until recently secularists refused to believe soft tissues could be found in dinosaur remains because everyone knows soft tissues cannot survive millions of years.

Two modern discoveries about dinosaur bones both refuted the long held erroneous assumption that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago.

Do you have any evidence for the claims that you made? If not, you may want to do your due diligence before making them as this is a debate site and we all should expect to have our claims questioned.

[Clownboat]

Marke: Dinosaur fossils were buried by flood water sediments regardless of the alternative claims made by wannabe or incompetent paleontologists.

Do you have any evidence for the claims that you made? If not, you may want to do your due diligence before making them as this is a debate site and we all should expect to have our claims questioned.

[marke]

Until recently secularists refused to believe soft tissues could be found in dinosaur remains because everyone knows soft tissues cannot survive millions of years.

Two modern discoveries about dinosaur bones both refuted the long held erroneous assumption that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago.

Do you have any evidence for the claims that you made? If not, you may want to do your due diligence before making them as this is a debate site and we all should expect to have our claims questioned.

Marke: Evolutionists at first refused to believe Mary Schweitzer had found soft tissues but they were forced to alter their assumptions and beliefs over the next several years as Mary's conclusion about soft tissues was proven beyond doubt.

AI Overview
Learn more
Scientists initially questioned Mary Schweitzer's discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur fossils because it was widely believed that organic material like soft tissue could not survive for millions of years, making the idea of finding preserved blood vessels and collagen in a dinosaur bone seemingly impossible according to the established understanding of fossilization processes; this raised concerns about contamination and the validity of her findings.
Key points about the skepticism surrounding Schweitzer's discovery:
• Time scale:
The prevailing scientific view was that soft tissues would rapidly decompose, leaving only mineralized bone structures after millions of years.
• Contamination concerns:
Critics worried that the observed soft tissue could be a result of contamination from modern organisms introduced during the fossil extraction process.
• Lack of precedent:
Prior to Schweitzer's research, no one had reported finding such well-preserved soft tissue in dinosaur fossils, making her discovery seem groundbreaking and initially difficult to accept.

[Diagoras]

[Replying to marke in post #54]

all dinosuars were vegetarian/herbivores until Stan perverted everything.

Who’s this ‘Stan’ character and what did he do to the dinosaurs to turn some of them carnivorous?