Re: Are ostirches an intermediate between land animals and birds?
an ostrich is a big bird!
just like the coelacanth is just a fish-- was once thought to be an evolutionary intermediate between sea and land because it has these pseudopods sort of like muscular legs.. they are 410 million years old, thought to be extinct, but they are still found today (un-evolved)
The primitive-looking coelacanth (pronounced SEEL-uh-kanth) was thought to have gone extinct with the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. But its discovery in 1938 by a South African museum curator on a local fishing trawler fascinated the world and ignited a debate about how this bizarre lobe-finned fish fits into the evolution of land animals.
There are only two known species of coelacanths: one that lives near the Comoros Islands off the east coast of Africa, and one found in the waters off Sulawesi, Indonesia. Many scientists believe that the unique characteristics of the coelacanth represent an early step in the evolution of fish to terrestrial four-legged animals like amphibians.
Re: Are ostirches an intermediate between land animals and birds?
format_quote Originally Posted by Faisal Pervaiz
Does anyone know if graptolites evolved?
tbh, don't know, but you can see the variations in fossil records.
It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and obedience to Allâh, etc.) that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers); but Al-Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allâh, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to Al-Masâkîn (the poor), and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free, performs As-Salât, and gives the Zakât, and keep their word whenever they make a promise, and who are patient in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of persecution, hardship, and war. Such are the people of the truth and they are Al-Muttaqûn (the pious).
Re: Are ostirches an intermediate between land animals and birds?
format_quote Originally Posted by Faisal Pervaiz
Also why do Atheists still believe in Evolution even though there has not been one single intermidate fossil found.?
One reason atheists 'believe in' evolution (that is, they consider it the best explanation to certain questions regarding the origin of species) is because the statement
there has not been one single intermidate fossil found
is completely untrue. It is a claim made a few over-zealous creationists who do not understand what they are talking about.
Re: Are ostirches an intermediate between land animals and birds?
The term "intermediate species" is a bit of a loss maker, in effect one can say that every single species around you and including you are intermediate.
It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and obedience to Allâh, etc.) that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers); but Al-Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allâh, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to Al-Masâkîn (the poor), and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free, performs As-Salât, and gives the Zakât, and keep their word whenever they make a promise, and who are patient in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of persecution, hardship, and war. Such are the people of the truth and they are Al-Muttaqûn (the pious).
Re: Are ostirches an intermediate between land animals and birds?
The problem of Atheists Faisal Pervaiz, they are people who said (figuratively) "There are 2 bricks I found lying in a road , after I'm gone somewhere, I was seeing the bricks became standing. That must be because the bricks just rise themselves."
2nd, they always find the DNA scientists as their biggest enemies in declaring the truth of Evolution.
3rd, the skulls of animals like Pithecantropus, Meganthropus, Homo Paleo etc, were smaller than the skulls of human beings. And so what happened was an increase in DNA, instead of just using the word evolution, because "Adaptation," and "Competition," aren't that magnificent to change them.
4rd, There was found a giant in the Arabian desert, here:
I believe it's true and fact, eventhough IF it is hoax, I who had found a Shahih hadits which said like "Adam 'alaihi Salaam height was 60 Dzira' (30 Metres) and his descendants got shorter and shorter in height."
This is what I will be responsible in the Day of Al Qiyamah.
So it was a giant which the height more than 6 Meters.
Re: Are ostirches an intermediate between land animals and birds?
format_quote Originally Posted by Abdul Thayyib
The problem of Atheists Faisal Pervaiz, they are people who said (figuratively) "There are 2 bricks I found lying in a road , after I'm gone somewhere, I was seeing the bricks became standing. That must be because the bricks just rise themselves."
2nd, they always find the DNA scientists as their biggest enemies in declaring the truth of Evolution.
3rd, the skulls of animals like Pithecantropus, Meganthropus, Homo Paleo etc, were smaller than the skulls of human beings. And so what happened was an increase in DNA, instead of just using the word evolution, because "Adaptation," and "Competition," aren't that magnificent to change them.
4rd, There was found a giant in the Arabian desert, here:
I believe it's true and fact, eventhough IF it is hoax, I who had found a Shahih hadits which said like "Adam 'alaihi Salaam height was 60 Dzira' (30 Metres) and his descendants got shorter and shorter in height."
This is what I will be responsible in the Day of Al Qiyamah.
So it was a giant which the height more than 6 Meters.
Are you saying that the skull was of propehet Adam (pbuh)?
I believe it's true and fact, eventhough IF it is hoax
It is a hoax, I'm afraid.
The image displayed above was taken from Worth1000, a site devoted to hosting contests in which entrants show off their skills at manipulating photographs using digital editing programs. This particular picture was an entry from one of the site's "Archaeological Anomalies" competitions, in which entrants vied to create the most realistic archaeological hoaxes: "Your job is to show a picture of an archaeological discovery that looks so real, had it not appeared at Worth1000, people might have done a double take."
The basis for this image was a real photograph of an excavation site near Hyde Park, New York, where scientists were working to uncover the skeleton of a mastodon. Someone then linked the altered version of the image used for the Worth1000 contest entry with a fictitious backstory based on the Islamic account of the Prophet Hud, creating the hoax quoted above — which spread especially far after being published as a seemingly real news article on the web site of The New Nation, described as "Bangladesh's Independent News Source."
A May 2007 blog entry entitled "Bhima's son Gadotkach like skeleton found"
(and attributed to a 22 April 2004 Times of India article) repeated the hoax, with the locale switched from Saudi Arabia to northern India and additional skeleton photos included.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks