This is where it started:

At which point yes, I gave it back pretty good. Then he started calling people children and babies. And I gave it back again.

Sure. Some back and forth is fine. Perserveration isn't.

I want to know where in the rules it says I can't post someone else's PM. Can you point me to where in the rules?

Just so everyone knows.

Where? Where is the "great content" here by Jibninjas? Serious post.

And seriously WTF at this claim. I barely engaged whoever that was in any form. What is the evidence/situation that I supposedly "ran off ajmargarine" in?

His recent exchange with bunny.

Okay, I could be wrong. I don't remember it how you remember it.

Take it up with the 3 people I quoted. They brought up the modding problems ITT, not me. I told them what they should do with their concerns.

PMs between Madnak and I:

WTF? That's so ****ed up you claimed that and don't have anything to post about the situation.

Okay, I hurl around accusations arbitrarily and will summary flagellate myself.

PMs:

The only prism in which that could be considered "great content" by Jibninjas would be in basically the same fashion that a flat-earther would be providing "great content" against a scientist in a debate about the shape of Earth.

An entertaining article on the evolution of whales and dolphins:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_cetaceans

The cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) are marine mammal descendants of land mammals. Their terrestrial origins are indicated by:

* Their need to breathe air from the surface;
* The bones of their fins, which resemble the limbs of land mammals
* The vertical movement of their spines, characteristic more of a running mammal than of the horizontal movement of fish.

The question of how land animals evolved into ocean-going leviathans was a mystery until recent discoveries in Pakistan revealed several stages in the transition of cetaceans from land to sea.

Can't you say they are evolving from sea to land?

He definitely has made at least one not-so-veiled threat to ban me:

For the record, I honestly believe that he's a creationist / ID'er (some would argue that the two are not synonymous, I disagree). I don't know why pointing this out should be considered a bannable offence? Especially when i believe that the majority of the forum would agree with me. And especially considering the fact that ID'ers argue that the "irreducible complexity of the eye" is evidence of a creator? Does Jib consider being called a creationist a slur of some sort?

you could try, although evidence would not be on your side. why would dolphin and whale populations put so much evolutionary "energy" into selecting for an exclusively air-breathing lung system?

If it has not already been pointed out, "single celled primordial mush" does not leave a fossil record.

But where are the bones of Adam and Eve?
That would be a separate challenge to theists.

There have been fossilised prokaryotes found haven't there?

Yes. Some in your general vicinity.

They include some of the most ancient records of life on Earth. Stromatolites are a major constituent of the fossil record for about the first 3.5 billion years of life on earth, with their abundance peaking about 1.25 billion years ago.

Now perhaps, the true believers will show us the bones of Adam and Eve. That should be easier.

Maybe I misunderstood. I reckon that's "single celled primordial mush" and I think it's worth pointing out that this (commonly thought of as the likely place to find a 'universal common ancestor') also has direct, physical evidence. Those who point out that nobody can point to a specific blob and declare that bit of sludge the Ultimate Grandfather are once again trying to test a scientific theory by evaluating a claim it doesn't make.
The lack of Adam and Eve's bones will no doubt count as a 'gap' to be filled once anyone gets around to positing that as an alternate hypothesis. So far, nobody's been willing to put forward anything better than the theory of evolution, of course. You don't have to provide evidence for faith based claims of course, which is why they shouldn't be treated as plausible competitors for genuine scientific theories.

Evolution doesn't plan anything, it has no current vision let alone future considerations. Evolution results from past events just as water running down a hill. It doesn't make choices, except figuratively. Alternatives are taken but there is no Decider.
We could say elephants are evolving into pterodactyls because of their big Dumbonian ears, but why would we?

LOL. Sorry to break it to you but, if there is a "God", then he knows what is truly in your heart. So there is no such thing as covering your bases. Imo "God" would think more of those who are "good" without being incentivized more than the "o lordie I better be good before the almighty gets me" thinkers.

grunch:

do you UNDERSTAND how long a billion years is? no, you don't, because it's beyond our ability to fully comprehend a period of time this long.

consider how frequently cells can reproduce- sometimes hourly. there is a ton of time for species to evolve into humans