If anything, I think it kinda proves it. It's like those transitional beings that creationists are always claiming we don't have. It's half bird, half mammal. How much more "transitional" can you get?
2007-05-20 12:49:47 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
half bird in terms of it's features. it has a beak, webbed feet, lays eggs.
yes it's scientifically classified as a mammal--that doesn't mean it doesn't have duck-like features.
2007-05-20 12:58:37 · update #1
Emiliano: while you and I are aware of this, your average non-acceptor of evolution is not. seeing as they think we come from monkeys, i thought i'd just start out small :)
2007-05-20 17:16:10 · update #2
lol. Yes, an egg laying mammal with very simplistic features is not proof of evolution. lol.
Stupid fundies.
2007-05-20 12:53:23 · answer #1 · answered by Squishy Mckay 2 · 5⤊ 3⤋
HOAH!!! NO NO NO! fellow evolutionist!
I don't know why creationists say platypus is a proof that evolution isn't real. But it is NOT one TRANSITIONAL being between birds and mammals!!! Birds came from dinossaurs, (a group called saurischia that includes the Velociraptor, which by the way had feathers) while mammals came from a whole diferent group of primitive reptiles, the primitive sinapsida (animals who have only one temporal hole [i don't know if this is the scientific term in english]).
Therefore, The platypus IS NOT a half bird, half mammal being. It probably came out of a very primitive branch in the mammalian tree of life, but it has NOTHING to do with birds, at least in regards to evolution (no more than you and me do, at least)..... So, although your argument isn't accurate, I can't see why the platypus is a proof that evolution isn't real
2007-05-20 20:12:39 · answer #2 · answered by Emiliano M. 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, the Creationists are right about this. According to evolution , mammals came from the pre-triassic Dimetrodon, not birds or dinosaurs, and it was not classified as a dinosaur because it supposedly did not have an evolutionary ancestors that were in the order of Dinosauria. So, if evolution is true, the platypus does not prove evolution. It is a strange contradiction.
2007-05-20 20:05:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Most of them refuse to even look at the evidence or make any effort to understand evolution. The only thing they will accept as proof Is a monkey giving birth to a human.
2007-05-20 19:59:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The platypus proves that Noah's ark wasn't real. Why aren't there platypusses in Turkey?
By the way, it's not half bird. It's 100% mammal.
2007-05-20 19:54:46 · answer #5 · answered by Resident Heretic 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
I think that the platypus is proof that God has a sense of humor.
2007-05-20 21:53:50 · answer #6 · answered by mormon_4_jesus 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
also, don't people know that there was a dinosaur that had bird like qualities? Birds might have evolved from reptiles. And that whales used to be land and sea-dwelling? If they'd ever taken biology, they'd know. What do they teach in high school these days?
2007-05-20 19:53:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
I starred your question because it's exactly the kind of question religious people should be reading and pondering. Sadly, they will ignore it. They don't want to think about it. I bet not one of them comments (intelligently) on your point.
2007-05-20 19:59:30 · answer #8 · answered by Miltant_Agnostic 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
These are the same people that say the (domesticated) banana was designed to fit perfectly in our hand and our mouth. I guess we just try our best to ignore them.
Very good point you make.
2007-05-20 19:53:11 · answer #9 · answered by KS 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
God certainly wouldn't make a platypus on purpose would He?
2007-05-20 19:54:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋