Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
According to Genesis 3:14 when God saw that the serpent had deceived Eve in the garden. God stated that the serpent from then on would travel on his belly. I use to tell people that snakes once had legs, and according to the Scriptures walked upright. Of course every non believer thought that was simply a foolish myth from the Bible.
However a recent finding now shows us that yes snakes in the past did have legs. Now science will tell you this is a riddle. Their question will be. "Why do these snake species have hind limbs? If legs were the norm for snake ancestors, it would make sense to see the species advanced anatomy as only superficially similar to more modern snakes. On the other hand, the stubby limbs on the fossil snakes might represent an evolutionary reversal.
The fact that these snake fossils have been found with legs, only confirms the Biblical account. And the belief by science that snakes not having legs today might be an evolutionary reversal. Is only believed, because they have ignored what the God of the Bible already stated.
Of course every non believer thought that was simply a foolish myth from the Bible.
It is still a foolish myth from the Bible.
Don't you see that the recent scientific discovery does nothing to show that there was once a talking snake with legs that tempted an immortal Adam and Eve. Genetic Adam (common DNA ancestor of all modern humans) and genetic Eve (common DNA ancestor of all modern humans) lived thousands of years away from each other.
PS - Funny how some believers just love and celebrate science when it produces a finding they think supports the Bible, but wholely reject the tons of findings that show a literal reading of the Bible is completely wrong.
Ummm, yeah. It's not a riddle for science. The lack of limbs is related to altered expression of some of the hox genes during embryonic development. We have known for quite some time that snakes evolved from a tetrapod ancestor, just like all the other reptiles. The vestigial hind limbs (spurs) are easily seen in most species, and I expect most people, even the authors of the bible, could surmise their ancestry just by looking.
Thinking of these appendages as "legs" that would support their body to walk in an upright or other manner of mobility is a bit of a stretch of the imagination. It does represent a nice find of an intermediary link in the evolution of snakes.
Quote:
"The fact Haasiophis had legs means that either snakes lost their legs more than once or they re-evolved them," Jacobs said. He speculates that the tiny legs on Haasiophis were somehow used in reproduction and stimulation, much like the spurs on anacondas are used today. They are too small in relation to the reptile’s whole body to have helped it move.
According to Genesis 3:14 when God saw that the serpent had deceived Eve in the garden. God stated that the serpent from then on would travel on his belly. I use to tell people that snakes once had legs, and according to the Scriptures walked upright. Of course every non believer thought that was simply a foolish myth from the Bible.
However a recent finding now shows us that yes snakes in the past did have legs. Now science will tell you this is a riddle. Their question will be. "Why do these snake species have hind limbs? If legs were the norm for snake ancestors, it would make sense to see the species advanced anatomy as only superficially similar to more modern snakes. On the other hand, the stubby limbs on the fossil snakes might represent an evolutionary reversal.
The fact that these snake fossils have been found with legs, only confirms the Biblical account. And the belief by science that snakes not having legs today might be an evolutionary reversal. Is only believed, because they have ignored what the God of the Bible already stated.
Snakes having legs first stated in the Bible, and now confirmed by science.
Did Campbell pull a use of the word (or variation) 'evolutionary' to prove his point when he figured it was necessary to use it? The Lard surely works in mysterious ways indeed.
Lets see now....That fossil was found in 95 million year old deposits....Creation supposedly happened when?....Seems to me more like you have disproven at least the time of creationism and exposed yet another biblical error....Great find Campbell.
Lets see now....That fossil was found in 95 million year old deposits....Creation supposedly happened when?....Seems to me more like you have disproven at least the time of creationism and exposed yet another biblical error....Great find Campbell.
LOL...we posted at the same time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
