| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jim" |
| Date: |
16 Jun 2005 10:38:58 AM |
| Object: |
Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
Another discredited chart used by evolutionists is that showing the
development of the horse from Eohippus to modern horses. The following
selection of quotes show how an idea becomes entrenched and continues
to be
promoted in even in some of today=B9s public school textbooks.
"The ancestral family tree of the horse is not what scientists have
thought
it to be. Prof. T.S. Westoll, Durham University geologist, told the
British
Association for the Advancement of Science at Edinburgh that the early
classical evolutionary tree of the horse, beginning in the small
dog-sized
Eohippus and tracing directly to our present day Equinus, was all
wrong."
("Science News Letter," August 25, 1951, p. 118).
"Dr. Eldredge [curator of the Department of Invertebrates of the
American
Museum of Natural History in New York City] called the textbook
characterization of the horse series 'lamentable.'
"When scientists speak in their offices or behind closed doors, they
frequently make candid statements that sharply conflict with statements
they
make for public consumption before the media. For example, after Dr.
Eldredge made the statement [in 1979] about the horse series being the
best
example of a lamentable imaginary story being presented as though it
were
literal truth, he then contradicted himself.
"=2E . . [On February 14, 1981] in California he was on a network
television
program. The host asked him to comment on the creationist claim that
there
were no examples of transitional forms to be found in the fossil
record. Dr.
Eldredge turned to the horse series display at the American Museum and
stated that it was the best available example of a transitional
sequence."-
L=2ED. Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma (1988), p. 82.
"The supposed pedigree of the horse is a deceitful delusion, which . .
in no
way enlightens us as to the paleontological origins of the horse."-*
(Charles Deperet, "Transformations of the Animal World," p. 105).
"Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the
fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a
million
fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of
evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even
fewer
examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time.
"By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in
the
fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America,
have had
to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information.
What
appeared to be a nice, simple progression when relatively few data were
available now appears to be much more complex and much less
gradualistic. So
Darwin's problem [with the fossil record] has not been alleviated."
(David
M=2E Raup, in "Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin" 50, 1979, p.
29).
"It was widely assumed that [Eohippus] had slowly but persistently
turned
into a more fully equine animal . . [but] the fossil species of
Eohippus
show little evidence of evolutionary modification . . [The fossil
record]
fails to document the full history of the horse family." ("The New
Evolutionary Timetable, pp. 4, 96).
"The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so
dear
to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in
nature."- * George G. Simpson, Life of the Past (1953), p. 119.
.
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
16 Jun 2005 10:44:47 AM |
|
|
"Jim" <willcoxjim@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1118936338.025981.99680
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Another discredited chart used by evolutionists is that showing the
development of the horse from Eohippus to modern horses. The following
selection of quotes show how an idea becomes entrenched and continues
to be
promoted in even in some of todayıs public school textbooks.
"The ancestral family tree of the horse is not what scientists have
thought
it to be. Prof. T.S. Westoll, Durham University geologist, told the
British
Association for the Advancement of Science at Edinburgh that the early
classical evolutionary tree of the horse, beginning in the small
dog-sized
Eohippus and tracing directly to our present day Equinus, was all
wrong."
("Science News Letter," August 25, 1951, p. 118).
"Dr. Eldredge [curator of the Department of Invertebrates of the
American
Museum of Natural History in New York City] called the textbook
characterization of the horse series 'lamentable.'
"When scientists speak in their offices or behind closed doors, they
frequently make candid statements that sharply conflict with statements
they
make for public consumption before the media. For example, after Dr.
Eldredge made the statement [in 1979] about the horse series being the
best
example of a lamentable imaginary story being presented as though it
were
literal truth, he then contradicted himself.
". . . [On February 14, 1981] in California he was on a network
television
program. The host asked him to comment on the creationist claim that
there
were no examples of transitional forms to be found in the fossil
record. Dr.
Eldredge turned to the horse series display at the American Museum and
stated that it was the best available example of a transitional
sequence."-
L.D. Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma (1988), p. 82.
"The supposed pedigree of the horse is a deceitful delusion, which . .
in no
way enlightens us as to the paleontological origins of the horse."-*
(Charles Deperet, "Transformations of the Animal World," p. 105).
"Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the
fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a
million
fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of
evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even
fewer
examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time.
"By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in
the
fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America,
have had
to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information.
What
appeared to be a nice, simple progression when relatively few data were
available now appears to be much more complex and much less
gradualistic. So
Darwin's problem [with the fossil record] has not been alleviated."
(David
M. Raup, in "Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin" 50, 1979, p.
29).
"It was widely assumed that [Eohippus] had slowly but persistently
turned
into a more fully equine animal . . [but] the fossil species of
Eohippus
show little evidence of evolutionary modification . . [The fossil
record]
fails to document the full history of the horse family." ("The New
Evolutionary Timetable, pp. 4, 96).
"The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so
dear
to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in
nature."- * George G. Simpson, Life of the Past (1953), p. 119.
So it looks like the science of biology is working as it should. As more
evidence is found, the theories and working hypotheses are updated and
refined.
Too bad for you that none of this supports any mythical creation.
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political system for controlling people's thoughts,
lives and actions based on ancient myths and superstitions, perpetrated
through generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
16 Jun 2005 07:29:04 PM |
|
|
"Jim" <willcoxjim@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1118936338.025981.99680
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Another discredited chart used by evolutionists is that showing the
development of the horse from Eohippus to modern horses. The following
selection of quotes show how an idea becomes entrenched and continues
to be
promoted in even in some of todayıs public school textbooks.
"The ancestral family tree of the horse is not what scientists have
thought
it to be. Prof. T.S. Westoll, Durham University geologist, told the
British
Association for the Advancement of Science at Edinburgh that the early
classical evolutionary tree of the horse, beginning in the small
dog-sized
Eohippus and tracing directly to our present day Equinus, was all
wrong."
("Science News Letter," August 25, 1951, p. 118).
LOL. The above is just an adjustment to the details of a family tree. It
says nothing about the theory of evolution. This is an up to date summary
of what is known about horse evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/horses/horse_evol.html
<SNIP>
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "leo" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
16 Jun 2005 01:13:11 PM |
|
|
Another jerky thought. The only book that is not wrong are the Vedas.
I asked to an Hindu and told me the Holy Bible of the the Xians is pure
rubish. I rather believe in the Vedas than in the Genesis to
understand the diversity of life in Nature. Human science is falible,
they are reasoning with the limited resources they got at hand in each
moment. But the Genesis story is made to entertain the mental
retarded.
leo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sasha" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
16 Jun 2005 01:36:36 PM |
|
|
I rather believe in the Vedas than in the Genesis to
understand the diversity of life in Nature.
Yeah, I think the biblical Creation account is the most ridiculous,
poorly written one around. Still, I'd rather just say "I'm not sure"
and wait for science to find the answer.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
16 Jun 2005 11:00:02 AM |
|
|
Jim wrote:
Another discredited chart used by evolutionists is that showing the
development of the horse from Eohippus to modern horses. The following
selection of quotes show how an idea becomes entrenched and continues
to be
promoted in even in some of today=B9s public school textbooks.
"The ancestral family tree of the horse is not what scientists have
thought
it to be. Prof. T.S. Westoll, Durham University geologist, told the
British
Association for the Advancement of Science at Edinburgh that the early
classical evolutionary tree of the horse, beginning in the small
dog-sized
Eohippus and tracing directly to our present day Equinus, was all
wrong."
("Science News Letter," August 25, 1951, p. 118).
"Dr. Eldredge [curator of the Department of Invertebrates of the
American
Museum of Natural History in New York City] called the textbook
characterization of the horse series 'lamentable.'
"When scientists speak in their offices or behind closed doors, they
frequently make candid statements that sharply conflict with statements
they
make for public consumption before the media. For example, after Dr.
Eldredge made the statement [in 1979] about the horse series being the
best
example of a lamentable imaginary story being presented as though it
were
literal truth, he then contradicted himself.
". . . [On February 14, 1981] in California he was on a network
television
program. The host asked him to comment on the creationist claim that
there
were no examples of transitional forms to be found in the fossil
record. Dr.
Eldredge turned to the horse series display at the American Museum and
stated that it was the best available example of a transitional
sequence."-
L.D. Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma (1988), p. 82.
"The supposed pedigree of the horse is a deceitful delusion, which . .
in no
way enlightens us as to the paleontological origins of the horse."-*
(Charles Deperet, "Transformations of the Animal World," p. 105).
"Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the
fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a
million
fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of
evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even
fewer
examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time.
"By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in
the
fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America,
have had
to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information.
What
appeared to be a nice, simple progression when relatively few data were
available now appears to be much more complex and much less
gradualistic. So
Darwin's problem [with the fossil record] has not been alleviated."
(David
M. Raup, in "Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin" 50, 1979, p.
29).
"It was widely assumed that [Eohippus] had slowly but persistently
turned
into a more fully equine animal . . [but] the fossil species of
Eohippus
show little evidence of evolutionary modification . . [The fossil
record]
fails to document the full history of the horse family." ("The New
Evolutionary Timetable, pp. 4, 96).
"The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so
dear
to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in
nature."- * George G. Simpson, Life of the Past (1953), p. 119.
Problems have been found in the Theory of Gravity so I assume you don't
believe in gravity either.
nafc
.
|
|
|
| User: "Niels van der Linden" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
16 Jun 2005 11:16:42 AM |
|
|
Dark matter might be the thing for him, as it can't be detected.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
17 Jun 2005 07:20:06 AM |
|
|
In our last episode
<1118937602.703246.53870@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, nafc pirouetted
gracefully and with great fanfare proclaimed:
Jim wrote:
Another discredited chart used by evolutionists is that showing the
development of the horse from Eohippus to modern horses. The following
selection of quotes show how an idea becomes entrenched and continues to
be
promoted in even in some of todayıs public school textbooks.
"The ancestral family tree of the horse is not what scientists have
thought
it to be. Prof. T.S. Westoll, Durham University geologist, told the
British
Association for the Advancement of Science at Edinburgh that the early
classical evolutionary tree of the horse, beginning in the small
dog-sized
Eohippus and tracing directly to our present day Equinus, was all
wrong."
("Science News Letter," August 25, 1951, p. 118).
"Dr. Eldredge [curator of the Department of Invertebrates of the
American
Museum of Natural History in New York City] called the textbook
characterization of the horse series 'lamentable.'
"When scientists speak in their offices or behind closed doors, they
frequently make candid statements that sharply conflict with statements
they
make for public consumption before the media. For example, after Dr.
Eldredge made the statement [in 1979] about the horse series being the
best
example of a lamentable imaginary story being presented as though it
were
literal truth, he then contradicted himself.
". . . [On February 14, 1981] in California he was on a network
television
program. The host asked him to comment on the creationist claim that
there
were no examples of transitional forms to be found in the fossil record.
Dr.
Eldredge turned to the horse series display at the American Museum and
stated that it was the best available example of a transitional
sequence."-
L.D. Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma (1988), p. 82.
"The supposed pedigree of the horse is a deceitful delusion, which . .
in no
way enlightens us as to the paleontological origins of the horse."-*
(Charles Deperet, "Transformations of the Animal World," p. 105).
"Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the
fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a
million
fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of
evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even
fewer
examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time.
"By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in
the
fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have
had
to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information.
What
appeared to be a nice, simple progression when relatively few data were
available now appears to be much more complex and much less
gradualistic. So
Darwin's problem [with the fossil record] has not been alleviated."
(David
M. Raup, in "Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin" 50, 1979, p. 29).
"It was widely assumed that [Eohippus] had slowly but persistently
turned
into a more fully equine animal . . [but] the fossil species of Eohippus
show little evidence of evolutionary modification . . [The fossil
record]
fails to document the full history of the horse family." ("The New
Evolutionary Timetable, pp. 4, 96).
"The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so
dear
to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in
nature."- * George G. Simpson, Life of the Past (1953), p. 119.
Problems have been found in the Theory of Gravity so I assume you don't
believe in gravity either.
nafc
And the infinities won't cancel out in quantum physics so computers don't
work!
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Masked Avenger" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
17 Jun 2005 08:30:03 AM |
|
|
Jim wrote:
Another discredited chart used by evolutionists is that showing the
development of the horse from Eohippus to modern horses. The following
selection of quotes show how an idea becomes entrenched and continues
to be
promoted in even in some of todayıs public school textbooks.
"The ancestral family tree of the horse is not what scientists have
thought
it to be. Prof. T.S. Westoll, Durham University geologist, told the
British
Association for the Advancement of Science at Edinburgh that the early
classical evolutionary tree of the horse, beginning in the small
dog-sized
Eohippus and tracing directly to our present day Equinus, was all
wrong."
("Science News Letter," August 25, 1951, p. 118).
1951 ...... yep you're up to date alright ....
"It was widely assumed that [Eohippus] had slowly but persistently
turned
into a more fully equine animal . . [but] the fossil species of
Eohippus
show little evidence of evolutionary modification . . [The fossil
record]
fails to document the full history of the horse family." ("The New
Evolutionary Timetable, pp. 4, 96).
"The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so
dear
to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in
nature."- * George G. Simpson, Life of the Past (1953), p. 119.
Oh ... getting better ... 1953 ! ....... you might be surprised to know,
science has moved on a tad since then .....
--
Masked Avenger
aa#2224
EAC Chief Technician in charge of remotely rigging Fundie 'Spell
Checkers' so they all look like hick home schooled yokels
Does Schroedinger's cat have 18 half lives ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Katt" |
|
| Title: Re: Another discredited chart used by evolutionists... |
17 Jun 2005 11:59:59 AM |
|
|
"Masked Avenger" <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:42b2d063$0$23557$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"The ancestral family tree of the horse is not what scientists have
thought
blah blah blah...
("Science News Letter," August 25, 1951, p. 118).
Exactly!
"It was widely assumed that [Eohippus] had slowly but persistently
turned
into a more fully equine animal . . [but] the fossil species of
blah blah blah...
Oh ... getting better ... 1953 ! ....... you might be surprised to know,
science has moved on a tad since then .....
Exactly!
Fantastic *modern* diagram of horse evolution *here*...
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/horses/horse_evol.html#part2
Katt.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
