Evolutionists, explain..

[Sir_Loin]

Evolutionists say that life began in the Precambrian layer, which was to have ended 600 million years ago. When we visit the Cambrian layer, it is filled with 1000s of fossils and all of these creatures are diversified and complex- life immediately and suddenly appears! In the Precambrian layers of the Proterozoic Era, there is no multi-cellular life at all- NONE; NIL; NADA. But in the Cambrian layer life teems; it suddenly bursts into existence- without transistion, without EVOLUTION. So all kinds of life, when seen in geological strata, appears suddenly and animals appear COMPLETE. Bats are true bats, whales are true whales, sharks are true sharks, anything is a genuine whatever it is- it shows no evolving at all, no gradual changes or transitions.

When you see it in geological record, species are just as you see them today..

 

[Breathe]

But this is wrong.
And do you realize how difficult it is to find surviving remains? This isn't like going into a graveyard and getting your choice of bone.

 

[Sir_Loin]

"But this is wrong

Geologically, how is it wrong?
Evolutionists have yet to find a transitional species/fossil. And when they do claim to find they are frauds!!
All fossils found are their own species, not transitional species.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"But this is wrong

Geologically, how is it wrong?

We have fossils of multicellular life that predates the Cambrian explosion. We also have significant portions of the evolutionary "tree" that didn't arise until after the Cambrian explosion... plants, for instance.

 

[metis]

Once cells began to collectivize, the living world would never be the same because all sorts of possibilities arise as far as various combinations. Where's the transition? Actually it's fairly obvious since the multi-celled organism on the average gain more complexity as time went on, and it doesn't take a genius to figure out what the implications are. For us to somehow find the exact life-form where this first occurred would make looking for a needle in a haystack seem like child's play.

Now, the minute one attributes the Cambrian Explosion to God, as problem arises, namely that God, according to the creation accounts if taken literally, stopped creating after the 6th day. There's nothing in the scriptures that states that He kept on creating after that.

 

[Breathe]

Geologically, how is it wrong?
Evolutionists have yet to find a transitional species/fossil. And when they do claim to find they are frauds!!
All fossils found are their own species, not transitional species.

Because it is wrong.
You can google "transitional fossils". Wikipedia even has a big list.
"Transitional fossils", from a creationist's perspective, is usually completely misunderstood, as well. The "transition" happens on a minor scale over huge lengths of time. It's not like giving birth to a chickenosaurus.

 

[Nyingjé Tso]

Ooooh this is going to be so good

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Evolutionists say that life began in the Precambrian layer, which was to have ended 600 million years ago. When we visit the Cambrian layer, it is filled with 1000s of fossils and all of these creatures are diversified and complex- life immediately and suddenly appears! In the Precambrian layers of the Proterozoic Era, there is no multi-cellular life at all- NONE; NIL; NADA. But in the Cambrian layer life teems; it suddenly bursts into existence- without transistion, without EVOLUTION. So all kinds of life, when seen in geological strata, appears suddenly and animals appear COMPLETE. Bats are true bats, whales are true whales, sharks are true sharks, anything is a genuine whatever it is- it shows no evolving at all, no gradual changes or transitions.

When you see it in geological record, species are just as you see them today..

So what are you thinking... that we should be able to catch a lifeform in mid-evolution? A shark with only half a body?

Can you describe what a transitional form would look like?

 

[Breathe]

Ooooh this is going to be so good

Or it will end up with 320 posts and talking about beer or something near the end.

 

[HonestJoe]

Evolutionists say...

Why are you asking an entirely scientific question on a Religious Debates forum? Surely if you were really interested in the answer, you'd be reading and posting on any of the countless scientific resources all over the internet.

 

[Breathe]

Why are you asking an entirely scientific question on a Religious Debates forum? Surely if you were really interested in the answer, you'd be reading and posting on any of the countless scientific resources all over the internet.

Good question.
To be honest, I tend to doubt the authenticity of such questions at the best of times.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Because it is wrong.
You can google "transitional fossils". Wikipedia even has a big list.
"Transitional fossils", from a creationist's perspective, is usually completely misunderstood, as well. The "transition" happens on a minor scale over huge lengths of time. It's not like giving birth to a chickenosaurus.

I don't understand why some people believe something that is impossible can be achieved with a certain amount of time- even millions of years. (Don't get me wrong, I believe certain things can happen given an infinite amount of time)
It's like the Infinite monkey theorem in where it is stated that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard will end up typing up the complete works of Shakespeare. In theory, I agree, it could be possible, but we're talking about an INFINITE not a LIMITED or CERTAIN amount of time (600 million years)

Anyway, I digress...

Evolutionists are deceived by their own principles of arrangements. Today, on this Earth, we have Shetland Ponies. And then, on the other hand, we can observe the tremendous Clydesdale horses. But between these two creatures are intermediate forms all the way through. We have the zebra, the bronco, the saddle horse, the Arabian horse, and the Percheron! They are all here, all in the same kind (but not the same species or transitional species as evolutionists so commonly mistake when they find two similar fossils).
Let's suppose that all the animals I mentioned above die and get buried in the mud and the aforementioned mud hardens. 10 million years from now, men digging in that mud (let's forget about Social Media reports and other record-keeping for now) find the fossil skeletons of the animals. "Oh Lord!", says the Evolutionist, "this is a fantastic case for Darwinism!" "Look here, a little Shetlandius Poniescus (Shetland Pony), look there the great Clydesdalesus (Clydesdale). The other man says, "Yes! This small one must have evolved into these medium sized ones, and then into a great big beast!"

^That is a classic example and to that I say: "No, that did not happen". They were all contemporary. That's my point.
I then proceed to log-on to my iPhone 976S (This is the future after all!) and go to the religious forums and begin a debate only to be confronted by the two men in the story told above who then proceed to try and defend their point.

 

[Breathe]

I don't understand why some people believe something that is impossible can be achieved with a certain amount of time- even millions of years. (Don't get me wrong, I believe certain things can happen given an infinite amount of time)
It's like the Infinite monkey theorem in where it is stated that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard will end up typing up the complete works of Shakespeare. In theory, I agree, it could be possible, but we're talking about an INFINITE not a LIMITED or CERTAIN amount of time (600 million years)

... 600 million years is a long time.

Evolutionists are deceived by their own principles of arrangements. Today, on this Earth, we have Shetland Ponies. And then, on the other hand, we can observe the tremendous Clydesdale horses. But between these two creatures are intermediate forms all the way through.

Give it longer.

We have the zebra, the bronco, the saddle horse, the Arabian horse, and the Percheron! They are all here, all in the same kind (but not the same species or transitional species as evolutionists so commonly mistake when they find two similar fossils).

Nobody knows what is a 'kind'. Please define a 'kind'.

Let's suppose that all the animals I mentioned above die and get buried in the mud and the aforementioned mud hardens. 10 million years from now, men digging in that mud (let's forget about Social Media reports and other record-keeping for now) find the fossil skeletons of the animals. "Oh Lord!", says the Evolutionist, "this is a fantastic case for Darwinism!" "Look here, a little Shetlandius Poniescus (Shetland Pony), look there the great Clydesdalesus (Clydesdale). The other man says, "Yes! This small one must have evolved into these medium sized ones, and then into a great big beast!"

That isn't how it's done.

 

[Sir_Loin]

... 600 million years is a long time.

It is still not an infinite amount of time...

Give it longer

.

?

Nobody knows what is a 'kind'. Please define a 'kind'.

I'm sorry for the lack of clarity. I meant kind as in horses have four legs; Hooves, and tails..

That isn't how it's done.

+10 points for input!

 

[Breathe]

It is still not an infinite amount of time...

Infinity is unnecessary.

I'm sorry for the lack of clarity. I meant kind as in horses have four legs; Hooves, and tails..

So, it's what, exactly?
Class: Mammalia
Order: Perissodactyla
Family: Equidae
Genus: Equus
Species: E. ferus
Subspecies: E. f. caballus

So a zebra is a "kind" of horse?
Is a lion a "kind" of cat? Or is it limited only to the felis category, so sand cats and jungle cats?
Is a fox a dog? What about coyotes, jackals, wolves?

+10 points for input!

:takeabow:

 

[Looncall]

Evolutionists say that life began in the Precambrian layer, which was to have ended 600 million years ago. When we visit the Cambrian layer, it is filled with 1000s of fossils and all of these creatures are diversified and complex- life immediately and suddenly appears! In the Precambrian layers of the Proterozoic Era, there is no multi-cellular life at all- NONE; NIL; NADA. But in the Cambrian layer life teems; it suddenly bursts into existence- without transistion, without EVOLUTION. So all kinds of life, when seen in geological strata, appears suddenly and animals appear COMPLETE. Bats are true bats, whales are true whales, sharks are true sharks, anything is a genuine whatever it is- it shows no evolving at all, no gradual changes or transitions.

When you see it in geological record, species are just as you see them today..

You should have some hard words with your preacher. You have clearly been systematically lied to.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Good question.
To be honest, I tend to doubt the authenticity of such questions at the best of times.

If I had to bet one way or the other, my money would be on him being a Poe. Regardless of his intentions, though, I figure that interacting with him might be useful for the people who read it. Even if he isn't being sincere, there are people who sincerely believe the sorts of things he's saying.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Evolutionists say that life began in the Precambrian layer, which was to have ended 600 million years ago. When we visit the Cambrian layer, it is filled with 1000s of fossils and all of these creatures are diversified and complex- life immediately and suddenly appears! In the Precambrian layers of the Proterozoic Era, there is no multi-cellular life at all- NONE; NIL; NADA. But in the Cambrian layer life teems; it suddenly bursts into existence- without transistion, without EVOLUTION. So all kinds of life, when seen in geological strata, appears suddenly and animals appear COMPLETE. Bats are true bats, whales are true whales, sharks are true sharks, anything is a genuine whatever it is- it shows no evolving at all, no gradual changes or transitions.

When you see it in geological record, species are just as you see them today..

Ignorance will not produce results. Your information is incredibly errant. The first evidence of bats is a mere 60 million years old, you are off by a power. These earliest forms had teeth that showed characters of both Chiropterans and Insectivores (hedghogs). Hardly “true bats,” they didn’t have anything that resembled wings. The first of what we would call a true bat appeared around 40-45 million years ago. But this is hardly the end. That one true bat has diversified into more than 900 species.

Do you realize (obviously not) that one out of every 5 species of mammal on the planet today is a bat. There are around 4,490 species of mammals. Over 900 of these are bats. That is a huge amount of diversity that has arisen from a single species in 40 million years.

You say what you see in the geological record is just what you see today? Ever heard of dinosaurs? I’ve never seen one except in the geological record.

You say anything is a genuine whatever; it shows no evolving at all? Ever heard of archaeopteryx?

The information you provided is barely worth addressing other than to say it demonstrates an absolute lack of effort, or ability, on your part to research the subject.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Infinity is unnecessary.

Infinite monkey theorem. Anyway, yes infinity is kind of unnecessary. But 600 million years wouldn't even give a monkey time to do it. The chance of replicating even one page would be very impossibly unlikely.

So a zebra is a "kind" of horse?
Is a lion a "kind" of cat? Or is it limited only to the felis category, so sand cats and jungle cats?
Is a fox a dog? What about coyotes, jackals, wolves?

No, no, no you must understand.
Leave out the classifications and all that stuff, I am talking about how similar something look to something else.
I went to the Science Museum in London quite a while ago now. I entered the main hall and the first thing I see is the skull of a New World Monkey. By the side of that there is the skull of an Old World monkey. To the right of that was the skull of an ape; and ultimately we arrive at the skull of a man. The skulls of the monkeys looked like monkey skulls to me- ANIMAL skulls. And the skull of the man's skull looked like a human skull.. Just because something looks like something else, you can't say that it is related to it. We (humans, apes, animals) all live in the same world. Therefore, we must have the same kind of apparatuses to live, right? We all need hands to grab, legs to move about on and eyes to see. (Yes, I am aware that there are fish in the world, and yes am also aware that other species without these things exist )

 

[outhouse]

Evolutionists say that life began in the Precambrian layer, which was to have ended 600 million years ago.
..

There is no such thing as a evolutionist

Are you also a gravitationalist?



Provide sources one credible person in biology makes such a absurd statement.