(10 votes, average: 3.60 out of 5)
Loading ...
Pause for a moment for a sponsor!
The Tiki Web Group
Disclaimer: Unless specifically mentioned in the post, we have no clue where this picture came from. Know where it came from? Post the link in the comments, and reap the glory! All comments are the sole possesion of the commenters and do not reflect the opinions or values of MCS. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
October 20, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Evolution gets pwnt…
October 20, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Not quite:
www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/apr/06/evolution.fossils
October 20, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Isn’t that a missing image error and not a missing link?
Evolution > *.religion.
October 20, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Evoluton …
October 20, 2007 at 11:21 pm
Hmm WTF my equation didn’t show.
Evolution >= religion
Religion > …,
October 21, 2007 at 12:28 am
lol, html
October 21, 2007 at 4:35 am
Isn’t this a repost? And yes, it would be funnier if that was a 404 instead.
October 29, 2007 at 4:25 am
Lol, yeah this would be much better with a 404 error. And BTW that article still does nothing to address the 404 error illustrated above.
Species A being related to species b species b came from species a. It’s all hypothetical. Not that the Intelligent Design camp is particularly concrete either…
October 29, 2007 at 4:28 am
That didn’t come out right. Durn html…
A lot of sensationalism going on in that article. It does not “solve” evolution. It merely makes it more plausible.
The fact that “A” is found to be closely linked, or related to “B” does not mean that “B” is a descendant of “A”…