creationest6
|
 |    |  Report Post
|
Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment: n/a
Rate this post:
|
One of the major evolutionary problems is that, they claim that creatures evolve into bigger beasts, if so, where does all the extra blood, muscle, skin etc, come from? If muscle evolved into skin, the creature would be 2 week 2 move. if blood evolved into extra skin, the creature would die of blood loss. so, where did all of that stuff come from.
-------
"If God wanted us to be concerned for the plight of toads, he would have made them cute and fluffy."
-Dave Barry |
| |
Posts: 451 | Posted: 09:03 AM on October 17, 2007 | IP
|
|
EntwickelnCollin
|
|   | Report Post
|
Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment: n/a
Rate this post:
|
| One of the major evolutionary problems is that, they claim that creatures evolve into bigger beasts, if so, where does all the extra blood, muscle, skin etc, come from? If muscle evolved into skin, the creature would be 2 week 2 move. if blood evolved into extra skin, the creature would die of blood loss. so, where did all of that stuff come from. |
|
Oh my God.
You know so much less about biology than I ever imagined you possibly could.
Evolution changes the DNA of offspring that have not yet been born. DNA is what decides what cells will be built and how they will be organized. It's not a matter of one type of cell turning into another. If an animal needs more cells, they EAT SOMETHING. It's called digestion.
-------
http://ummcash.org/officers.html
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/wow_1.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/a_triumphant_beginning.php
We're official! |
| |
Posts: 729 | Posted: 09:44 AM on October 17, 2007 | IP
|
|
orion
|
| | Report Post
|
Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment: n/a
Rate this post:
|
DNA is really an amazing thing. Not only does it direct how the organism grows and develops, but also when various developments within the embryo occur. There are master genes that dictate and control when development occurs.
I might also point out that evolution doesn't necessarily dictate that giant size is the desired path. Environmental conditions and natural selection have a lot to do say about that. For an example, at one point in time, before the advent of the dinosauars 225 MYA, during the Carboniferous age 300 MYA, there were giant insects which inhabited swamps and rain forests, along with giant ferns. What allowed these insects to grow to giant size? I'm no expert on this, but the climate of the early Carbonifeoous was warm, and there was a higher oxygen content in the atmosphere. As arthropods were among the first terrestrial creatures, they were among the dominate organisms on land at that time. Natural selection, working within environmental conditions, drove the developments of these large insects.
But since the end of the Carboniferous epoch, insects have gotten smaller. So you see, size can work in either direction depending on the conditions, competition, and other forces driving natural selection.
But insects and single cell organisms are still among the most successful creatures on earth.
|
| |
Posts: 1435 | Posted: 10:34 AM on October 17, 2007 | IP
|
|
Demon38
|
| | Report Post
|
Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment: n/a
Rate this post:
|
One of the major evolutionary problems is that, they claim that creatures evolve into bigger beasts, if so, where does all the extra blood, muscle, skin etc, come from?
Where does all the blood, muscle, skin and bone come from when a baby grows into an adult?
If muscle evolved into skin, the creature would be 2 week 2 move
Muscle doesn't evolve into skin and individual organisms don't evolve.
|
| |
Posts: 1664 | Posted: 7:28 PM on October 17, 2007 | IP
|
|
|
[ Single page for this topic ]
|
|
|
Creationism vs Evolution Debates
