They merge. Two objects become one. Fusion.
S
i know isaac asimov's answer, which makes sense to me.
anyone else have any answer to the question about what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?.
They merge. Two objects become one. Fusion.
S
weird!.
http://ilynca.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/unforgettable-memorial.html?spref=fb.
Too funny. Like, if macdonalds stopped giving burgers for burgers. 'Course, they do have a 'Truth' without any truth. Its a natural followthrough.
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
But, they THOUGHT sharks were less evolved. They were wrong. As evolutionists, we were required to believe that sharks were less evolved.
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
A search for 'sharks more evolved', https://www.google.ca/search?as_q=&as_epq=sharks+more+evolved&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights= yields 300,100 hits. I was told emphatically by our evolution authority that 'more evolved' is a wrong concept. How can this be?
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
I didn't say ignorant. I said i may not have all the terms down pat. Its not enough for me to believe in evolution and have a general knowledge about it, is it? I must not criticise science and evolution. Ok, got it, sister viviane.
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
Have a conversation w yourself about it.
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
I think my points were made.
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
'What new ideas?'
Bater.
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
While i don't have all the terms down pat, i do subscribe to evolution. Some have the know-it-all attitude and smack down new ideas without considering them or understanding them - a fundamentalist type of reaction. Some people cut themselves a lot of slack, but, are unwilling to do so for others.
S
http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.
i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..
that's not the case, however.
Yes, i was.
' fundamnetalist evolutionists thought they knew that all things are equally evolved, except for the shark and a few other species. Now, since this discovery, they again think that they know all species are equally evolved (except for a few species).'
See?
S