Another fossil discovery confirms Biblical account. (pray, behavior, create, difference)
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.
Change within the species is going on all the time. You really don't need a fossil to see this. Just consider the different breeds of cats and dogs. And consider that most of that changed occured in just hundreds of years. The fossil found, shows the change within the snake species. And that evidence helped confirm the Biblical account.
Change within the species is going on all the time. You really don't need a fossil to see this. Just consider the different breeds of cats and dogs. And consider that most of that changed occured in just hundreds of years. The fossil found, shows the change within the snake species. And that evidence helped confirm the Biblical account.
So what...I'm sure snakes back then also had observable remnants of hind legs, but there is no way a snake could walk only three thousand years ago...Perhaps those ignorant camel herders mistook a monitor lizard for a snake...In any case it proves nothing about your myth.
The story was written some 3,000 years ago. Yet the account itself is much older. And if the Bilbe tells us that snakes did not always crawl. And science is confirming snakes from the past had legs. I would say that goes a long way in helping support the Biblical account. Only a foolish man would ignore that kind of evidence.
By your logic I can pick up the 3 little pigs, and believe wolves can huff and puff and blow a wooden house down lol..
Well if there was a fossil showing us three little pigs, and a wolf blowing their house down. I might believe you. However we only have a fossil showing us that snakes in the ancient past did have legs. Of course naturally it would take logic to understand that this is supportive evidence for the Biblicl account.
The story was written some 3,000 years ago. Yet the account itself is much older. And if the Bilbe tells us that snakes did not always crawl. And science is confirming snakes from the past had legs. I would say that goes a long way in helping support the Biblical account. Only a foolish man would ignore that kind of evidence.
A brainwashed fool does not follow the evidence, he ignores it. Even if it is true.
Yes, and that is exactly what you do, isn't it. You do not accept any evidence that disputes what you have been programmed with, therefore you have proven my point for me....Thank you.
Change within the species is going on all the time. You really don't need a fossil to see this. Just consider the different breeds of cats and dogs. And consider that most of that changed occured in just hundreds of years. The fossil found, shows the change within the snake species. And that evidence helped confirm the Biblical account.
Evidence? [Of 92M year-old age?] Species? Breeds? You sure of all them big words, Tom? [apparently not so much]
Next [not to be answered] question:
Please tell us your well-considered ideas on skeletal joint arrangements. Do they have ANY bearing on mobility? Like, say, an organism's ability to walk upright?
As in: Seals have limbs, Tom. Can they walk upright? "Why sure they can!" sez Tommo the Truthful.
Can you speed along the ground with your arms and legs out to the sides, alll properly hinged and designed to allow such motion? I'm not saying crawl, I'm saying walk or run? "Why sure I can!" sez TtT.
This fossil find only shows that a long time ago [+92M Y BCE] an existing older-aged reptile species had developed limbs to help it occupy a niche. It was obviously a different species than a legless snake.
Its' equally obvious this is no confirmation of the bible, which was written about 91.8 million years later. In fact, that age determination shows the bible's just an old rag. confirmed yet again.
Evolution & Science; the bane of the thoughtless and mentally inert....
Thanks for playing though. (Now go home and read something besides Creationist Websites. Theyz lettin' you down hard, Tom!)
Then the Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this you are cursed more than all the animals, domestic and wild. (YOU WILL CRAWL ON YOUR BELLY,)
It doesn't say that snakes did not ALWAYS crawl on their bellies as you claimed when you said..........
"The Bible tells us snakes did not always crawl on their belly."
It could just as easily mean that snakes always crawled on their bellies but your god had a plan for them not to do so some time in the future but because of what the snake did (allegedly), your god condemned it to continue crawling on it's belly as it had always done. Your claim that.........
"The Bible tells us snakes did not always crawl on their belly."
........is completely false, just like most of your other nonsense.
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.
He proves his own Sc. Illiteracy, yet again!
