“Asanta wrote, ‘You DO realize that ALL mammals nurse their young, don’t you?’ What about the duckbill platypus? It is an exception to the idea that all mammals nurse their young.”
W4U,you missed my point about Db P. Asanta had said that ALL mammals nurse their young. I pointed out that the mammal known as platypus is an exception to that statement.
Of course I know the platypus is classified as a mammal! I was awake when that animal was mentioned in bio class.
Strawman argument. Your original OP asked how it could be possible for a mother to deliver milk to a baby, taking into account all the conditions that need to be present. A Platypus is a mammal because it produces milk and delivers it to her baby. The fact that she does not do so by means of a teat, actually confirms the evolutionary process. A Platypus has no teats because its baby has no mouth with lips. And please don’t nitpick the term “nursing”.
Even high school students are not allowed to use wiki as a source when writing a paper for English class.
Another strawman argument. And obviously detrimental to the use of English language. I am from Holland and I cringe when listening to conversations or reading articles, by HS graduates. It is a wonder that some can spell their name.
8 in 10 Students Turn to Wikipedia for Research
By your def I am certainly a freethinker because I am a skeptical thinker when it comes to macroevolution! (Be sure to look up *macroevolution* in wiki.)
A philosophical discussion of whether macroevolution is reducible to microevolution, or if it stands as a separate process in evolution
Whether or not there are barriers that prevent microevolution, which creationists accept, from becoming macroevolution, which they reject
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution
The Scientific Case for Common Descent
Copyright © 1999-2011 by Douglas Theobald, Ph.D.
[Last Update: September 30, 2011]
Thousands of new species are discovered yearly, and new DNA and protein sequences are determined daily from previously unexamined species (Wilson 1992, Ch. 8). At the current rate, which is increasing exponentially, nearly 30,000 new sequences are deposited at GenBank every day, amounting to over 38 million new bases sequenced every day. Each and every one is a test of the theory of common descent. When I first wrote these words in 1999, the rate was less than one tenth what it is today (in 2006), and we now have 20 times the amount of DNA sequenced.
Based solely on the theory of common descent and the genetics of known organisms, we strongly predict that we will never find any modern species from known phyla on this Earth with a foreign, non-nucleic acid genetic material.
And yes, I have read the entire paper. Can’t quote it unless you know what it contains no?
‘What’s up with you “Upwardlook1”?’ My upward look, of course!
Seems that the question remains, to what?