Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Too late. And as always, they're completely dishonest in their selective editing.
As I've said for years.....it's impossible to advocate creationism in an honest manner.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Modern man like footprints found, evolution theory in doubt.
- Thread starter dad1
- Start date
As I've said for years.....it's impossible to advocate creationism in an honest manner.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Lol, it happens, but no one knows why, do you ? Remission occurs but is always considered temporary when there are no other possible interventions possible. It does not explain the complete disappearance of mets to every organ and bone structure in a very short period of time that lasts for decades with death ensuing from another cause. I know quite a bit about this since my wife died of cancer, to every organ and skeleton at age 35. God saves some, and some he does not, it is totally up to him,
dad1
Active Member
Science wasn't around. How would you like the events in history demoed exactly?
On the other hand, when someone claims there was, say, radioactivity or something at that time, we would ask, how do you know?
dad1
Active Member
For what, something you can't post, or specify, only allude to?
Can you show that man would have left remains and fossilized if he lived say, in the Cambrian layer time?
Can you give evidence there was radioactive decay at that time, or modern genetics? Get down to the nitty gritty and defend your beliefs.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
It's fascinating how some Christians, in their desperation to deny the findings of science, so easily slip into solipism and are apparently fine with arguing that we can't know anything at all, ever. Of course they don't put that into practice in their daily lives and instead just use it as a last-ditch escape clause in debates, but it's interesting to watch nonetheless.
dad1
Active Member
So? I already know there is intelligent creation. Your problem is that sciences of origins has no relation to intelligence! They look at the universe and life therefore as if they also had no intelligence. As for science being a basis for 'ID' well, not really. Science is a godless philosophy and belief set and methodology that omits God by design. Fanatical little closed minded religion that it is.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
I quoted Gould exactly. I also have the quote you used. I have made it abundantly clear that there is no fossil record of transitional forms BETWEEN SPECIES. Gould agrees with this and so does his quote. Transitional forms within species is micro evolution. Evolutionists propose that one species gradually with many transitional forms turned into another species. THIS CANNOT BE PROVEN BY THE FOSSIL RECORD. So what category do you fall into, do you hold on to a theory that cannot be proven by the evidence out of stupidity, or blind faith, or both ? Don't get angry at me because what you preach can't be proven, it isn't my fault.
dad1
Active Member
Lurkers...the earliest kings of Egypt on the Turin king list were spirits. If gnostie wants to offer up that as support of ages, or anything else, he must wear it! Then there was the issue of the list being scrawled on the back of an actual document, by some totally unknown person. No wonder they admit the list is not reliable for ages. Ha.
Now, unless you want to keep flogging king lists as relevant to the age of Egypt and dating, get down to the real way they determine dates...radioactive decay dating. Be honest.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Always the CRUTCH, we haven't a clue now, but that doesn't mean we won't. Pure, unadulterated faith in no knowledge now, but maybe some at some future date. What a pitiful excuse for scientific knowledge and lack thereof
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Most "evolutionists" are not atheists (defined as a belief there are no deities), with a great many of them believing in "theistic evolution". Indeed, even most Christian theologians (about 70% of them according to the last survey I saw) take that position as well.
Apparently you didn't catch Raup's context, which was a historical account of the early days studying evolution where indeed things were far less clear than they are now, which still may b believed by some people not aware that we know that this model is flawed.
What Raup is saying is that Darwin's concept of a nice neat evolutionary process that gradually evolves to new species is not the correct model since evolution is neither smooth nor always predictable.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Obviously you didn't, since Gould was quite clear that transitional fossils are "abundant" and said anyone trying quote him as saying otherwise is either dishonest or stupid.
Gould said transitionals between species are "generally lacking", not completely absent. Try and pay better attention.
First, yes it can. I've posted one specific example to this forum multiple times, i.e., the virtually complete fossil record of foraminifera, which shows multiple gradual speciation events.
Second, the evolution of new species is a repeatedly observed fact. Multiple people have posted examples here many times. How did you manage to miss them?
Don't project your faults onto me.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but you are dead wrong and no intelligent believer in creationism needs to deny science. For thousands of scientists who believe in God, thus ID, science is a God given tool.
dad1
Active Member
Nope. Oklo is a silly fable with no proof at all. They claim this magic elevator ride miles down below the earth, for example! Why? Because they need it away from the surface for eons, to explain the reactions in this nature! Then they resurface it at just the right time, for n apparent reason because...it needs to be up again in their imaginary model. Etc etc. You kidding??
Don't allude to things you cannot defend. Ha.
Interesting presumptuous delusion you have there.
Relax, you won't be scamming folks here.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
When you get anywhere near a coherent point, let us know.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Double talk, he said what he said and it applied to the time he was speaking. He was a leader in trying to explain the gaps.,
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Perfectly coherent, apparently you lack reasoning coherence when it comes to your faith.
dad1
Active Member
Let's see then? Post something intelligent! We will see if it gets a god peer review. Why would I care about ID? That has zero to do with God, the bible or creation. Correct?
Define ID? Let's look at that 'tool'. How do we use it? What does it do? Why is it needed?
How can there be transitional form between species? Every individual animal, living or dead belongs to one species or another, by definition. Transitional form is a coherent idea only between groups of species.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
BALONEY. You are now backpedaling as is your wont. When you are pinned down, you immediately resort to ad hominems, when you resort to that I know you cannot refute what is posted, you resort to sophistry to hide your inadequacy So, what have you posted from the fossil record that shows many transitional forms occurring in one species evolving into another species. As I have stated, and evolutionists back to Charlie have stated, they must be everywhere, just pick a few
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Here ya go @shmogie .....
Your claims about the fossil record have been falsified.
ScienceDirect - Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology : Paleobiogeographic patterns in the morphologic diversification of the Neogene planktonic foraminifera
EVOLUTION AT SEA: COMPLETE FOSSIL RECORD FROM THE OCEAN UPHOLDS DARWIN'S GRADUALISM THEORIES
"In recent years, however, scientists began revisiting the oceans, curious about how certain sea fossils fit models of evolutionary theory synthesized almost entirely from scattered, often puzzling evidence recovered from dry land. Some intriguing results turned up recently in the laboratories of two Florida State University (FSU) marine paleontologists.
Tony Arnold and Bill Parker compiled what may be the largest, most complete set of data on the evolutionary history of any group of organisms, marine or otherwise. The two scientists amassed something that their land-based colleagues only dreamed about: An intact fossil record with no missing links.
"It's all here--a virtually complete evolutionary record," says Arnold. "There are other good examples, but this is by far the best. We're seeing the whole picture of how this group of organisms has changed throughout most of its existence on Earth."
The organism that Arnold and Parker study is a single-celled, microscopic animal belonging to the Foraminiferida, an order of hard-shelled, planktonic marine protozoans...
...The species collection also is exceptionally well-preserved, which accounts largely for the excitement shared by Parker and Arnold. "Most fossils, particularly those of the vertebrates, are fragmented--just odds and ends," says Parker. "But these fossils are almost perfectly preserved, despite being millions of years old."
By being so small, the fossil shells escaped nature's grinding and crushing forces, which ovet the eons have in fact destroyed most evidence of life on Earth. The extraordinary condition of the shells permits the paleontologists to study in detail not only how a whole species develops, but how individual animals develop from birth to adulthood...
...Darwin termed the process gradualism, a theory that invokes the slow accumulation of small evolutionary changes over a large period of time, as a result of the pressures of natural selection. What Arnold and Parker found is almost a textbook example of gradualism at work.
We've literally seen hundreds of speciation events," syas Arnold. "This allows us to check for patterns, to determine what exactly is going on. We can quickly tell whether something is a recurring phenomenon--a pattern--or whether it's just an anomally. This way, we cannot only look for the same things that have been observed in living organisms, but we can see just how often these things really happen in the environment over an enormous period of time...
...Transitional forms between species are readily apparent, making it relatively easy to track ancestor species to their descendents. In short, the finding upholds Darwin's lifelong conviction that "nature does not proceed in leaps," but rather is a system prepetually unfolding in extreme slow motion..."
EVOLUTION AT SEA: COMPLETE FOSSIL RECORD FROM THE OCEAN UPHOLDS DARWIN'S GRADUALISM THEORIES
"In recent years, however, scientists began revisiting the oceans, curious about how certain sea fossils fit models of evolutionary theory synthesized almost entirely from scattered, often puzzling evidence recovered from dry land. Some intriguing results turned up recently in the laboratories of two Florida State University (FSU) marine paleontologists.
Tony Arnold and Bill Parker compiled what may be the largest, most complete set of data on the evolutionary history of any group of organisms, marine or otherwise. The two scientists amassed something that their land-based colleagues only dreamed about: An intact fossil record with no missing links.
"It's all here--a virtually complete evolutionary record," says Arnold. "There are other good examples, but this is by far the best. We're seeing the whole picture of how this group of organisms has changed throughout most of its existence on Earth."
The organism that Arnold and Parker study is a single-celled, microscopic animal belonging to the Foraminiferida, an order of hard-shelled, planktonic marine protozoans...
...The species collection also is exceptionally well-preserved, which accounts largely for the excitement shared by Parker and Arnold. "Most fossils, particularly those of the vertebrates, are fragmented--just odds and ends," says Parker. "But these fossils are almost perfectly preserved, despite being millions of years old."
By being so small, the fossil shells escaped nature's grinding and crushing forces, which ovet the eons have in fact destroyed most evidence of life on Earth. The extraordinary condition of the shells permits the paleontologists to study in detail not only how a whole species develops, but how individual animals develop from birth to adulthood...
...Darwin termed the process gradualism, a theory that invokes the slow accumulation of small evolutionary changes over a large period of time, as a result of the pressures of natural selection. What Arnold and Parker found is almost a textbook example of gradualism at work.
We've literally seen hundreds of speciation events," syas Arnold. "This allows us to check for patterns, to determine what exactly is going on. We can quickly tell whether something is a recurring phenomenon--a pattern--or whether it's just an anomally. This way, we cannot only look for the same things that have been observed in living organisms, but we can see just how often these things really happen in the environment over an enormous period of time...
...Transitional forms between species are readily apparent, making it relatively easy to track ancestor species to their descendents. In short, the finding upholds Darwin's lifelong conviction that "nature does not proceed in leaps," but rather is a system prepetually unfolding in extreme slow motion..."
Your claims about the fossil record have been falsified.