Difference between revisions of "User talk:LeonardO"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Oh, don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good article! I do not believe in Evolution, and the reason why I asked for more information is because I am curious about the details, and also because I believe that adding a paragraph about its claws would improve the quality of the article and make it stronger! I would write something myself but I haven't done any research on the matter. | Oh, don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good article! I do not believe in Evolution, and the reason why I asked for more information is because I am curious about the details, and also because I believe that adding a paragraph about its claws would improve the quality of the article and make it stronger! I would write something myself but I haven't done any research on the matter. | ||
So, if I am correct, the development of claws in the wings of the hoatzin goes against Evolution because it would represent an unexplicable evolutionary step backward for the species? If I can find the right wording I might already add a stub paragraph to the article :) --[[User:LeonardO|Leo-from-UK]] 11:42, 22 June 2011 (EDT) | So, if I am correct, the development of claws in the wings of the hoatzin goes against Evolution because it would represent an unexplicable evolutionary step backward for the species? If I can find the right wording I might already add a stub paragraph to the article :) --[[User:LeonardO|Leo-from-UK]] 11:42, 22 June 2011 (EDT) | ||
| + | :You hit the nail on the head; it is an unexplicable - ''unexplainable'' - evolutionary step backward. In order to properly explain this animal, evolutionists have to explain a reason for it to get these claws back, which means giving the hoatzin an intelligence it doesn't possess. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 11:48, 22 June 2011 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 15:48, June 22, 2011
Hoatzin
Basic stuff for now - just to get a structure going - but feel free to add to it as much detail as possible, up to and including why a stupid bird should decide on its own to get back the claws abandoned by its supposed ancestors. Karajou 11:38, 22 June 2011 (EDT)
Oh, don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good article! I do not believe in Evolution, and the reason why I asked for more information is because I am curious about the details, and also because I believe that adding a paragraph about its claws would improve the quality of the article and make it stronger! I would write something myself but I haven't done any research on the matter. So, if I am correct, the development of claws in the wings of the hoatzin goes against Evolution because it would represent an unexplicable evolutionary step backward for the species? If I can find the right wording I might already add a stub paragraph to the article :) --Leo-from-UK 11:42, 22 June 2011 (EDT)
- You hit the nail on the head; it is an unexplicable - unexplainable - evolutionary step backward. In order to properly explain this animal, evolutionists have to explain a reason for it to get these claws back, which means giving the hoatzin an intelligence it doesn't possess. Karajou 11:48, 22 June 2011 (EDT)