Were there even lions and tigers 40 million years ago?
9/12/2010 6:13:02 PM
Evolution tends to make creatures more likely to survive in their environment. If the environment doesn't change, the species won't either. Hence, the Incredibly Unchanging Jellyfish!
9/12/2010 6:16:29 PM
I thought that was religions' philosophy. More science equals more metaphors.
9/12/2010 6:19:17 PM
refuter of fundy vermin
Why do fundies make things up in regards to creation?
Because they stupidly insist on ignoring true science & the scientific method and stick to the false doctrine of 'The Bible says so, therefore it must be true'.
Get your head out of your ass, Frizby.
9/12/2010 6:26:34 PM
Evil-ution ain't no adaptation to no environment or nothin'. Evil-ution means a cat matin' with a dog and givin' birth to a horse. Them evil-utionists is so dumb, us smart folks gots to tell them what their own belief system is.
9/12/2010 6:41:02 PM
Not modern lions and tigers, no. Animals like Smilodon, and other early predatory cats. 40 million years is not all that long of a time span, geologically speaking. Not that Frizby would realize that.
9/12/2010 7:14:42 PM
If you would just fucking listen when we tell you it takes millions of years in the first place then this would be less of an issue.
Not my fault you can't be bothered to understand.
9/12/2010 7:41:29 PM
Percy Q. Shunn
9/12/2010 7:49:06 PM
The bible is true! Here's proof...
9/12/2010 7:51:01 PM
Take a fucking biology class, kid.
9/12/2010 8:09:32 PM
Lol, you have to look at the page. There were like 25 responses explaining how evolution occurs due to environmental pressures so its possible for species well adapted to their environment to not evolve.
There was ONE response talking about how "everything," including contradictions, is the rule in the "dogmatic world of Darwinism."
Guess which answer this bozo choose as the best one? If you are determined not to learn, you will not learn.
9/12/2010 8:12:59 PM
They are changing. Just because their bones look similar does not mean that no change has taken place. You do realize that there are other things that can change, right? Such as internal organs, behaviors, fur color, etc.
9/12/2010 8:27:57 PM
Because they don't fucking need to! If you're already the best equipped for survival in your habitat, then why the hell would you NEED to evolve further?
It's so damn simple it amazes me that people like you can't see it...
9/12/2010 8:52:17 PM
If something's working out for a creature and conditions don't favor members of its species with deviant traits, then the norm abides, Frizby.
9/12/2010 8:57:47 PM
The person who told you that is lying. We have evidence to show that they are. Evolution makes changes in accordance with environmental pressures. High pressure means dramatic changes. Low pressure means minor changes.
9/12/2010 9:35:30 PM
Certain animals, dofus! Not every animal.
If the environment doesn't change, why should that certain lifeform change?
We don't believe in evolution; we accept it as fact.
9/12/2010 10:49:46 PM
And why do creationists always lie? I'll take a big fat  on those 40mya lions and tigers, given that the earliest fossil records of the modern felid ancestors come from a period of just under 10 million years ago.
9/12/2010 11:13:43 PM
9/12/2010 11:29:13 PM
"Were there even lions and tigers 40 million years ago?"
No. Hell, I don't think Panthera leo and Panthera tigris existed *5* million years ago...
9/13/2010 12:01:56 AM
Why even ask a question if you're going to reject the answers before you even hear them?
I have no idea exactly when lions and tigers appear in the fossil record, but I do know that it's a lot more recently than 40 million years ago. There are, however, species that have stayed more or less the same for that long due to being well adapted to their environment. Modern populations wouldn't be identical to those existing 40, 50 or 60 million years ago, but in most of the ways that count, there wouldn't be major differences. Many species of shark are a good example of this. To understand why this happens, you need only spend some time studying natural selection.
9/13/2010 12:08:02 AM
Look who's talking about "making things up"(Sabre tooth, please?)
9/13/2010 2:43:59 AM
If you follow the link, you'll notice his source for "40 million year old" tiger and lion fossils is none other than the illustrious Harun Yahua, man more famous for proving that FISHING LURES haven't evolved in hundreds of millions of years...
9/13/2010 3:11:23 AM
40 million year old lions and tigers....? More made-up shit, by any chance?
There were sharks and crocodiles about even longer than 40 million years ago, but they were bigger than today's. And even if they were identical it would in no way whatsoever disprove evolution. Some species not evolving is not the same as all species not evolving.
9/13/2010 3:50:52 AM
Not as pathetic as your question, I promise you.
"The oldest remains of a tiger-like cat, called Panthera palaeosinensis, have been found in China and Java. This species lived about 2 million years ago, at the beginning of the Pleistocene, and was smaller than a modern tiger. The earliest fossils of true tigers are known from Java, and are between 1.6 and 1.8 million years old. Distinct fossils from the early and middle Pleistocene were also discovered in deposits from China, and Sumatra. A subspecies called the Trinil tiger (Panthera tigris trinilensis) lived about 1.2 million years ago and is known from fossils found at Trinil in Java."
Is it gullibility, stupidity, ignorance, smugness or obnoxiousness that is your most pathetic characteristic?
9/13/2010 4:09:01 AM
"I was just told that certain animals have not evolved for over millions of years because 40 million year old fossils were found that are exactly the same as the animals that exist today"
It's simple. The person who told you this was a lying creationist.
9/13/2010 4:48:18 AM