The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.

Religions > Atheism > The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 1

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"Kant"
Date:	09 Sep 2005 05:01:02 AM
Object:	The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.
If life has always been in a continual stream of transmutation from one form
to the other,as evolutionists insist,then we should certainly expect to find
as many fossils of the intermediate stages between different forms as of the
distinct kinds themselves.Yet no fossils have been found that can be
considered transitional between the major groups of Phyla.
From the very beginning these organisms were just as clearly and distinctly
set apart from each other as they are today.Instead of finding a record of
fine gradations preserved in the fossil record,we invariably find large
gaps.
This fact is absolutely fatal to the general theory of evolution.
Consider well these immense Gaps:
1. The imagined jump from dead matter to living protozoans is a transition
of truly fanciful dimension,one of pure conjecture which overlooks the works
of Redi,Spallanzi, and Pasteur,who disproved spontaneous generation.
2.There is a gigantic gap between one-celled microorganisms and the high
complexity and variety of the metazoan invertebrates.
3.The evolutionary transition between invertebrates and vertebrates is
completely missing.This is absolutely incredible since evolutionists propose
100 million years of developmental time between the two,which would have
involved billions of transitional forms,Yet,not one has ever been found.
4.The evolutionary advance from fishes to Amphibians is totally
nonexistent.The timeline allegedly took millions of years....(30
million)...and yet no one has been able to produce even one fishibian.
5.There are no connecting links between and the altogether different
reptiles.Seymouria has been offered as such a link,but it allegedly occurs
in the geologic column some 20 million years after other reptiles had
already appeared.
6.There are no transitional forms between mammals and reptiles.
7.There is no connecting evolutionary link between reptiles and
birds.Archaeopteryx was once highly acclaimed as such a link but has since
been acknowledged by Paleontologists to have been a true bird.
8.There are no intermediate fossils leading up to man from an apelike
ancestor.Fossil hominids and hominoids cited by evolutionists are actually
either fossils of ape or a man or neither.There is no valid Scientific
evidence to suggest that they are fossils of animals intermediate between
men and apes.
I an attempt to explain the complete lack of transitional forms,some
scientists have recently proposed the idea that evolution occurs via sudden
large leaps rather than through gradual small modifications.This
concept,known as punctuated equilibrium,has been advanced by paleontologists
Gould and Eldredge (1977).This concept has also been termed the "hopeful
monster" mechanism by Goldschmidt who proposes that at one time a reptile
laid an egg and a bird hatched from it!
Creationists prefer to believe are the ones who have laid an egg,maintaining
that such ideas are pure speculation,completely devoid of any scientific
evidence.
To summarize,the fossil record reveals a sudden appearance of highly diverse
and complex forms with no evolutionary ancestors,demonstrates fixity in
kinds,and is devoid of the all-important transitional forms.These facts are
however,in complete agreement with the expectations of the Biblical creation
model.The rocks do indeed proclaim,"Creation!"
--
"There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane
history."
Sir Isaac Newton [1642-1727]
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 11:46:05 AM

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "Ash"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absenceof transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 02:31:44 PM

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 02:51:50 PM

Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion

And the polar bear.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "DanielSan"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absenceof transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 02:50:06 PM

Elroy Willis wrote:

Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion

And the polar bear.

And the human.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "If God had intended us to walk, he wouldn't *
* have invented roller skates." --Willy Wonka *
****************************************************
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 03:13:37 PM

DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion

And the polar bear.

And the human.

And every animal which isn't an exact clone of its parents...
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "David H."
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 05:06:30 PM

"Elroy Willis" <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:m093i1d2i7li51a9g2lk9v6co08chauo9i@4ax.com...

DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence
of
transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion

And the polar bear.

And the human.

And every animal which isn't an exact clone of its parents...

I think that last post pretty much puts an extinction event in this
sub-thread.
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 05:31:05 PM

David H. <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message

DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence
of transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion

And the polar bear.

And the human.

And every animal which isn't an exact clone of its parents...

I think that last post pretty much puts an extinction event in this
sub-thread.

What?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "David H."
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 06:09:35 PM

"Elroy Willis" <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:3lh3i118bk700etb46fnh9fihpn4rtugm1@4ax.com...

David H. <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message

DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the
absence
of transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at
the
seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion

And the polar bear.

And the human.

And every animal which isn't an exact clone of its parents...

I think that last post pretty much puts an extinction event in this
sub-thread.

What?

Maybe not worded well. What I was trying to say was that your last
post covered the point in toto - nothing else to say. Therefore, this
branch of the thread dies. Goes extinct.
I just should have said, "And that's that."
David H.
aa #2217
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	10 Sep 2005 02:04:51 PM

David H. <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message

David H. <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message

DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in alt.atheism

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the
absence of transitional fossils.

You don't need fossils to see transition in progress. Look at
the seal. It's a perfect example of a living transitional animal.

and the Sea lion

And the polar bear.

And the human.

And every animal which isn't an exact clone of its parents...

I think that last post pretty much puts an extinction event in this
sub-thread.

What?

The thread seems to have died off, so I guess you were right. :)
I didn't see a single reply from the Kant fellow who started the
thread, did you?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "Mark Stahl"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 12:34:06 PM

"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in message
news:hG8Ue.81$Ij1.13471@news.uswest.net...

If it were a fact (and it's not; it's just a complete and utter falsehood)
it wouldn't even be inconvenient for the general theory of evolution, as we
can simply compare the genomes of living species to trace the phylogenetic
tree. Not one fossil would be required for evolution theory to have been
synthesized (though it would have taken longer). The fact that we have
literally hundreds of the "transitional fossils" you ignorantly claim we do
not have only strengthens the case in favor of, well, science and against
your crackpot rantings.
Please go away.
.

User: "Joseki"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 01:44:13 PM

"Kant" posted something.
It was stolen without credit from:
http://associate.com/ministry_files/The_Reading_Room/Evolution_n_Creation_1/Gaps_In_The_Fossil_Record.shtml
I am going out on a limb and state because you use his sig line and
follow his MO of quoting without attribution that you are runt
previously know as "I don't believe in Atheists".
Sorry folks, he is impossible to debate with. He steals an
anti-evolution screed from somewhere on the 'net, posts it, and then
counter argues with no sequitors and insults. He just isn't worth your
time. IDBIA is clearly documented as a liar and a plagiagist. Hence a
new ID to try to gain some crediability.
.

User: "Steve"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 05:52:37 AM

--
"Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote in message
news:hG8Ue.81$Ij1.13471@news.uswest.net...
<major snippage of the usual drivel>

The rocks do indeed proclaim,"Creation!"

That would be the ones between your ears .. right?

"There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any

profane

history."

hehehehe ... . . see even a genius can be brainwashed

Sir Isaac Newton [1642-1727]

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.

User: "Don Kresch"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 01:25:10 PM

In alt.atheism On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 22:01:02 -0700, "Kant"
<Kantis@inhell.com> let us all know that:

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

The most serious defects of Kant were his dual-realm ontology
and his deontological ethics.
The most serious defect of the poster with the name of Kant is
that it is a troll.
Don
.

User: "chibiabos"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 08:58:47 PM

In article <hG8Ue.81$Ij1.13471@news.uswest.net>, Kant
<Kantis@inhell.com> wrote:

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is in my bathroom
mirror every morning.

-chib
--
Member of SMASH
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
(email: change out to in)
.

User: "Chris Johnson"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 07:07:23 AM

Kant said:
-snip-
While it's nice of you to bring up these unanswered questions (If they
are all unanswered. I don't know. Biology is not my field, so I'm not
at the forefront, and can hardly be said to be trudging along behind.
Though I know for a fact that point 1 is misleading.), your conclusion
that some faerie created everything is a bit flawed. You're taking our
gaps of knowledge and filling them with magic, which is not at all
helpful towards finding the answers. Indeed, it was by breaking free of
that mentality that we have discovered so much.
Incidentally, shouldn't you be bringing these points up to experts? You
know, biologists, paleontologists, and the like? Because it would seem
that by posting to alt.atheism instead of getting answers from people
who are at the forefront of scientific research (and not those ID
frauds), you're just trolling. So *****.
.

User: "Abner Mintz"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 11:19:36 AM

Chris Johnson <effigies@gmail.com> wrote:

While it's nice of you to bring up these unanswered questions (If they
are all unanswered. I don't know. Biology is not my field, so I'm not
at the forefront, and can hardly be said to be trudging along behind.
Though I know for a fact that point 1 is misleading.),

They're not unanswered questions. Not only do we have
transitional fossils for most (perhaps all) of the transitions
he mentioned, in many cases there are actually *living*
transitionals still around from that gap. In short, he's puffing
smoke.

Incidentally, shouldn't you be bringing these points up to experts? You
know, biologists, paleontologists, and the like? Because it would seem
that by posting to alt.atheism instead of getting answers from people
who are at the forefront of scientific research (and not those ID
frauds), you're just trolling. So *****.

He did the same post in talk.origins. No reponse from him there
yet to the various people pointing out that these 30 fossils
count as transitionals to this gap, these 3 living creatures count
as transitionals to that gap ...
.

User: "Ordog"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 11:33:11 AM

Kant wrote:

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

Says who? You????
Let us put it in a way you just might comprehend!
So if we take two fossil finds, A and B, which are T years from each
other separated in time, but their morphological analysis shows that B
is a likely evolved from A than you say that this can not be since we
have found no intermediary fossil at T/2. The trouble with this
argument is that if we take a homo sapiens and a home erectus skeleton,
which are let say separated from each other in time 400 thousand years,
T/2 (200000 years) becomes to short to be of any significance.
Because you intend to disprove evolution. all you have to do is just
keep halving T until it becomes too short to allow finding transitional
species!
What a great scientific achievent!
Xtians seem to have no undestanding of geological (and biological) time
spans. Why, I do not know? Just because the Bible bullshits about
Creation!

If life has always been in a continual stream of transmutation from one form
to the other,as evolutionists insist...

They do not! Why? Because they do not exist! I know nobody who is an
"evolutionist". You know, (or should) evolution is a scietific theory
and not a dogma! Well, xtians are obsessed with non existent beings!

...,then we should certainly expect to find
as many fossils of the intermediate stages between different forms as of the
distinct kinds themselves.Yet no fossils have been found that can be
considered transitional between the major groups of Phyla.

Your ignorance is amazing!

From the very beginning these organisms were just as clearly and distinctly
set apart from each other as they are today.Instead of finding a record of
fine gradations preserved in the fossil record,we invariably find large
gaps.

Lovely! You think finding fossils is just like opening your fridge to
grab an other can of beer?

This fact is absolutely fatal to the general theory of evolution.

Fatal? It does not even cause a sneeze!

Consider well these immense Gaps:
1. The imagined jump from dead matter to living protozoans ....

has nothing to do with the theory of evolution! Moron!
But since you mention it I wonder where you got this bit of nonsense
from?
I have never ever heard anyone in scientific circles saying that
protozoa has emerged from non living matter. They are already quite a
bit up on the evolutionary ladder as anyone knows who did not sleep
through high school biology!

is a transition
of truly fanciful dimension,one of pure conjecture which overlooks the works
of Redi,Spallanzi, and Pasteur,who disproved spontaneous generation.

More blah blah!

2.There is a gigantic gap between one-celled microorganisms and the high
complexity and variety of the metazoan invertebrates.

Even more blah blah blah! Bible study instead of Biology class, eh?

3.The evolutionary transition between invertebrates and vertebrates is
completely missing.This is absolutely incredible since evolutionists propose
100 million years of developmental time between the two,which would have
involved billions of transitional forms,Yet,not one has ever been found.

Any more jokes?

There is no need to do that!

5.There are no connecting links between and the altogether different
reptiles.Seymouria has been offered as such a link,but it allegedly occurs
in the geologic column some 20 million years after other reptiles had
already appeared.

6.There are no transitional forms between mammals and reptiles.

7.There is no connecting evolutionary link between reptiles and
birds.Archaeopteryx was once highly acclaimed as such a link but has since
been acknowledged by Paleontologists to have been a true bird.

8.There are no intermediate fossils leading up to man from an apelike
ancestor.Fossil hominids and hominoids cited by evolutionists are actually
either fossils of ape or a man or neither.There is no valid Scientific
evidence to suggest that they are fossils of animals intermediate between
men and apes.

You qualify as a living fossil! You speak like an ape, think like an
ape, jump like an ape and smell like an ape but believe that you are
human!

I an attempt to explain the complete lack of transitional forms,some
scientists have recently proposed the idea that evolution occurs via sudden
large leaps rather than through gradual small modifications.This
concept,known as punctuated equilibrium,has been advanced by paleontologists
Gould and Eldredge (1977).This concept has also been termed the "hopeful
monster" mechanism by Goldschmidt who proposes that at one time a reptile
laid an egg and a bird hatched from it!
Creationists prefer to believe are the ones who have laid an egg,maintaining
that such ideas are pure speculation,completely devoid of any scientific
evidence.

And saying that the world was created a few thousand years ago as
creationists do is not "pure speculation, completely devoid of any
scientific evidence"?

To summarize,the fossil record reveals a sudden appearance of highly diverse
and complex forms with no evolutionary ancestors,demonstrates fixity in
kinds,and is devoid of the all-important transitional forms.These facts are
however,in complete agreement with the expectations of the Biblical creation
model.The rocks do indeed proclaim,"Creation!"

Those rocks should fall on your thick skull and crack it slightly so
that some rudimentary knowledge could get a chance to actually find its
way in.
Ordog
"Beware of the man whose God is in the skies." Bernard Shaw
.

User: "Matt Silberstein"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 02:15:08 PM

On 9 Sep 2005 04:33:11 -0700, in alt.atheism , "Ordog"
<odbok001@sneakemail.com> in
<1126265591.945718.203840@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
[snip]

Xtians seem to have no undestanding of geological (and biological) time
spans. Why, I do not know? Just because the Bible bullshits about
Creation!

Plenty of Christians sure do understand this stuff. Do not accept the
fundamentalist claim that they are the only Christians or that their'
is the only way.
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 02:48:34 PM

Matt Silberstein wrote in alt.atheism

Ordog <odbok001@sneakemail.com> wrote:

Xtians seem to have no undestanding of geological (and biological) time
spans. Why, I do not know? Just because the Bible bullshits about
Creation!

Plenty of Christians sure do understand this stuff. Do not accept the
fundamentalist claim that they are the only Christians or that their'
is the only way.

Once a person accepts evolution, and that man evolved from earlier
species of apes and hominids, what use is the Bible or other religious
texts which claim a special one-time creation of man?
Out the window goes original sin, and the need for priests to appease
some creator god by sprinkling blood around on some altar, or
sacrificing a cow or lamb or chicken to it, or in the case of Jesus,
an actual human sacrifice, just to appease some god who refuses to
forgive human people without some kind of bloodshed.
People die because we're animals just like all the rest of the animals
on the planet, not because of some curse or original sin that the
priests and rabbis want people to believe in.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "Matt Silberstein"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 03:32:05 PM

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 14:48:34 GMT, in alt.atheism , Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> in
<4173i110olad2gjmf3gktkdu86gr6ilcj2@4ax.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote in alt.atheism

Ordog <odbok001@sneakemail.com> wrote:

Xtians seem to have no undestanding of geological (and biological) time
spans. Why, I do not know? Just because the Bible bullshits about
Creation!

Plenty of Christians sure do understand this stuff. Do not accept the
fundamentalist claim that they are the only Christians or that their'
is the only way.

Once a person accepts evolution, and that man evolved from earlier
species of apes and hominids, what use is the Bible or other religious
texts which claim a special one-time creation of man?

Sorry, but I see quite a bit more to religion, and to the Bible, than
an explanation of the origin of the Universe and life's diversity. You
seem to think that all that exists is Genesis 1-16.

Out the window goes original sin, and the need for priests to appease
some creator god by sprinkling blood around on some altar, or
sacrificing a cow or lamb or chicken to it, or in the case of Jesus,
an actual human sacrifice, just to appease some god who refuses to
forgive human people without some kind of bloodshed.

People die because we're animals just like all the rest of the animals
on the planet, not because of some curse or original sin that the
priests and rabbis want people to believe in.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. This does not change the
actual fact that there are plenty of believing Christians who accept
and understand evolution and such. Facts trump theories.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 05:25:46 PM

Matt Silberstein wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> in

Matt Silberstein wrote in alt.atheism

Ordog <odbok001@sneakemail.com> wrote:

Xtians seem to have no undestanding of geological (and biological) time
spans. Why, I do not know? Just because the Bible bullshits about
Creation!

Plenty of Christians sure do understand this stuff. Do not accept the
fundamentalist claim that they are the only Christians or that their'
is the only way.

Once a person accepts evolution, and that man evolved from earlier
species of apes and hominids, what use is the Bible or other religious
texts which claim a special one-time creation of man?

Sorry, but I see quite a bit more to religion, and to the Bible, than
an explanation of the origin of the Universe and life's diversity. You
seem to think that all that exists is Genesis 1-16.

Some of the stories in the Bible are still useful and meaningful,
regardless of the time period, I agree about that. My beef is with
the people who insist the Bible was actually inspired by some god, and
that the Biblical prophets and storytellers actually spoke to some
actual creator god of the universe, when it's quite clear to me that
they didn't.

Out the window goes original sin, and the need for priests to appease
some creator god by sprinkling blood around on some altar, or
sacrificing a cow or lamb or chicken to it, or in the case of Jesus,
an actual human sacrifice, just to appease some god who refuses to
forgive human people without some kind of bloodshed.
People die because we're animals just like all the rest of the animals
on the planet, not because of some curse or original sin that the
priests and rabbis want people to believe in.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. This does not change the
actual fact that there are plenty of believing Christians who accept
and understand evolution and such. Facts trump theories.

I know there are, and I remain astounded as to why/how they keep on
believing in some religious idea that they need to be "saved" by the
priests and their rituals. It's based on ignorance and superstition,
imo.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "Ash"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absenceof transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 10:14:22 AM

Kant wrote:

Statistically, this is not unsurprising, but For an example of a
phylum-level transitional, please see THE CRUCIBLE OF CREATION, by Simon
Conway Morris, pp. 185-95. Conway Morris uses details of micro-anatomy
to connect the Cambrian fossils called _Wiwaxia_ and _Halkieria_ to each
other and also to the modern phyla of Mollusca, Brachiopoda, and Annelida
(http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/feedback/feb00.html)

No, we often find a gradual sequence

This fact is absolutely fatal to the general theory of evolution.

No it isn';t. Darwin himself discussed the imperfection of the fossil
record and how few species are liekely to be preserved and found

Consider well these immense Gaps:
1. The imagined jump from dead matter to living protozoans is a transition
of truly fanciful dimension,one of pure conjecture which overlooks the works
of Redi,Spallanzi, and Pasteur,who disproved spontaneous generation.

Of modern bacteria over a few days under modern conditions.

2.There is a gigantic gap between one-celled microorganisms and the high
complexity and variety of the metazoan invertebrates.

3.The evolutionary transition between invertebrates and vertebrates is
completely missing.This is absolutely incredible since evolutionists propose
100 million years of developmental time between the two,which would have
involved billions of transitional forms,Yet,not one has ever been found.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC211.html

4.The evolutionary advance from fishes to Amphibians is totally
nonexistent.The timeline allegedly took millions of years....(30
million)...and yet no one has been able to produce even one fishibian.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1a.html#amph1

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1b.html#rept1

6.There are no transitional forms between mammals and reptiles.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC211.html

7.There is no connecting evolutionary link between reptiles and
birds.Archaeopteryx was once highly acclaimed as such a link but has since
been acknowledged by Paleontologists to have been a true bird.

Untrue, it has many reptillian features that are not found in birds.
What you may be confused by is the tendancy to put organisms in classes.
There is no "Reptile bird" class, so a species with characteristics of
both will either be placed as a bird or as a reptile. This in no way
alters the fact it has transitional features

8.There are no intermediate fossils leading up to man from an apelike
ancestor.Fossil hominids and hominoids cited by evolutionists are actually
either fossils of ape or a man or neither.There is no valid Scientific
evidence to suggest that they are fossils of animals intermediate between
men and apes.

As explained before, this is because they are put in those categories
for convenience. It is as if someone decided to class all people as
either tall or short. This would not alter the fact that people show a
continuous range of heights.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html shows the difficulties
here

Only by the ignorant or dishonest who do not understand or care what
Gould and Eldridge proposed

Creationists prefer to believe are the ones who have laid an egg,maintaining
that such ideas are pure speculation,completely devoid of any scientific
evidence.
To summarize,the fossil record reveals a sudden appearance of highly diverse
and complex forms

Over a period of 10-100 million years. Hardly sudden
with no evolutionary ancestors,demonstrates fixity in

kinds,and is devoid of the all-important transitional forms.

Apart from, for example, dinsaur-bird, reptile-mammal,
amphibain-reptile, hominids, whales, horses
These facts are

however,in complete agreement with the expectations of the Biblical creation
model.The rocks do indeed proclaim,"Creation!"

Other than there are far too many fossils for a flood and they are
sorted in a logical order, with organisms not being found out of place
Well, rarely have (OK, maybe not that rarely) I seen a post so full of
untruths. ignorance and misinformation
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 10:42:37 AM

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 22:01:02 -0700, "Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote:
:

3.The evolutionary transition between invertebrates and vertebrates is
completely missing.This is absolutely incredible since evolutionists propose

:
Fraudulent liar.
.

User: "Paul Erickson"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 08:05:00 AM

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 22:01:02 -0700, "Kant" <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote:
Ever heard of punk eek?

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.
If life has always been in a continual stream of transmutation from one form
to the other,as evolutionists insist,then we should certainly expect to find
as many fossils of the intermediate stages between different forms as of the
distinct kinds themselves.Yet no fossils have been found that can be
considered transitional between the major groups of Phyla.
From the very beginning these organisms were just as clearly and distinctly
set apart from each other as they are today.Instead of finding a record of
fine gradations preserved in the fossil record,we invariably find large
gaps.
This fact is absolutely fatal to the general theory of evolution.
Consider well these immense Gaps:
1. The imagined jump from dead matter to living protozoans is a transition
of truly fanciful dimension,one of pure conjecture which overlooks the works
of Redi,Spallanzi, and Pasteur,who disproved spontaneous generation.

2.There is a gigantic gap between one-celled microorganisms and the high
complexity and variety of the metazoan invertebrates.

3.The evolutionary transition between invertebrates and vertebrates is
completely missing.This is absolutely incredible since evolutionists propose
100 million years of developmental time between the two,which would have
involved billions of transitional forms,Yet,not one has ever been found.

4.The evolutionary advance from fishes to Amphibians is totally
nonexistent.The timeline allegedly took millions of years....(30
million)...and yet no one has been able to produce even one fishibian.

5.There are no connecting links between and the altogether different
reptiles.Seymouria has been offered as such a link,but it allegedly occurs
in the geologic column some 20 million years after other reptiles had
already appeared.

6.There are no transitional forms between mammals and reptiles.

7.There is no connecting evolutionary link between reptiles and
birds.Archaeopteryx was once highly acclaimed as such a link but has since
been acknowledged by Paleontologists to have been a true bird.

8.There are no intermediate fossils leading up to man from an apelike
ancestor.Fossil hominids and hominoids cited by evolutionists are actually
either fossils of ape or a man or neither.There is no valid Scientific
evidence to suggest that they are fossils of animals intermediate between
men and apes.

I an attempt to explain the complete lack of transitional forms,some
scientists have recently proposed the idea that evolution occurs via sudden
large leaps rather than through gradual small modifications.This
concept,known as punctuated equilibrium,has been advanced by paleontologists
Gould and Eldredge (1977).This concept has also been termed the "hopeful
monster" mechanism by Goldschmidt who proposes that at one time a reptile
laid an egg and a bird hatched from it!
Creationists prefer to believe are the ones who have laid an egg,maintaining
that such ideas are pure speculation,completely devoid of any scientific
evidence.
To summarize,the fossil record reveals a sudden appearance of highly diverse
and complex forms with no evolutionary ancestors,demonstrates fixity in
kinds,and is devoid of the all-important transitional forms.These facts are
however,in complete agreement with the expectations of the Biblical creation
model.The rocks do indeed proclaim,"Creation!"

Slobbering Skeleton
.

User: "Matt Silberstein"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 01:16:48 PM

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 22:01:02 -0700, in alt.atheism , "Kant"
<Kantis@inhell.com> in <hG8Ue.81$Ij1.13471@news.uswest.net> wrote:

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

There are literally billions of fossils. Unless we actually have a
parent and a child there will always be a gap.

If life has always been in a continual stream of transmutation

No transmutation at all, evolution.

from one form
to the other,as evolutionists insist,then we should certainly expect to find
as many fossils of the intermediate stages between different forms as of the
distinct kinds themselves.

Why should we expect to find all of them? What about the world you see
tells you that all those fossils should be found? The world I see does
not tend to preserve many bones.

Yet no fossils have been found that can be
considered transitional between the major groups of Phyla.

ROTFLMAO. So now it is *Phyla* transitions you want. In case people
don't get this, he is asking for the transitional fossils between,
say, Enchinodermata (the phyla that contains starfish and sea urchins)
and Chordata (the phyla that contains fish and mammals and all that) .
Not simply between birds and their ancestors (which we have many of),
or fossils showing the reptile/mammals split (which we also have). IOW
he accepts the last 500,000,000 years of evolution, but not more.

From the very beginning these organisms were just as clearly and distinctly
set apart from each other as they are today.

The ancestor of all chordata, which includes fish and mammals and
birds and everything with a spinal column, was Pikaia, a tiny worm
looking thing. From that worm we get sharks and monkeys and snakes.
According to you sharks and monkeys and snakes are not distinctly
different.

Instead of finding a record of
fine gradations preserved in the fossil record,we invariably find large
gaps.

The fossil record is a very sparse sampling, less than .0001% of
organisms are fossilized, and then mostly hard shelled marine life.

This fact is absolutely fatal to the general theory of evolution.
Consider well these immense Gaps:
1. The imagined jump from dead matter to living protozoans is a transition
of truly fanciful dimension,one of pure conjecture which overlooks the works
of Redi,Spallanzi, and Pasteur,who disproved spontaneous generation.

Yeah, we don't have many fossils from 4,000,000,000 years ago. But you
don't simply want some, you want a whole gapless tree.

2.There is a gigantic gap between one-celled microorganisms and the high
complexity and variety of the metazoan invertebrates.

Now we are talking about just 1,000,000,000 years ago. And, yes, we do
have some fossils.

False. Not many, but some.
http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BIO48/33.Origin&Fossil.HTML

4.The evolutionary advance from fishes to Amphibians is totally
nonexistent.The timeline allegedly took millions of years....(30
million)...and yet no one has been able to produce even one fishibian.
5.There are no connecting links between and the altogether different
reptiles.Seymouria has been offered as such a link,but it allegedly occurs
in the geologic column some 20 million years after other reptiles had
already appeared.

6.There are no transitional forms between mammals and reptiles.

Quite, quite false.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1b.html

ROTFLMAO. That is one way to eliminate any transitional fossils,
simply declare the fossil a member of one or the other group. Archy is
a bird because we *define* birds as being all the descendents from
Archy.

Again, you are defining away the evidence. That there is disagreement
over whether a particular fossil is ape or human does not seem to
bother you, you say it is one or the other. What do you want, a fossil
that is actually changing in front of you?

Actually you are wrong yet again. What G&E said was that transitional
sequences *at the species level* were *rare*. Sequences at higher
level are there and there are species level transitional sequences.
What they said was not that evolution occurs by sudden leaps, but
rather that it tends to occur in small isolated populations. Since it
is occurring in the small populations it is *unlikely* to leave a
fossil record.

This concept has also been termed the "hopeful
monster" mechanism by Goldschmidt who proposes that at one time a reptile
laid an egg and a bird hatched from it!

No, Punk Eek is not the Hopeful Monster. Goldschmidt proposed a large
scale re-arrangement of genes. He was wrong about that.

Creationists prefer to believe are the ones who have laid an egg,maintaining
that such ideas are pure speculation,completely devoid of any scientific
evidence.

Huh?

The fossil record clearly shows that life in the past was different
than life now. It shows that the further back you go in time, the more
different life was. It shows, over and over and over, that multiple
organisms alive today can be traced back to fewer ancestors in the
past. (That is, existent population A and B both seem to have ancestor
Z.) The fossil record shows that there are organisms in the past that
did not seem to have left any descendents alive.
That is just a start. We can then look with much more detail. For a
given two organisms today we can predict the time of divergence. We
can then look for the ancestor in that layer. We often find them
(confirming the model that produced the predictions) and rarely find
the ancestor in a significantly different time. (Not finding ancestors
is unfortunately, but since there are relatively few fossils for the
number of organisms, it is not a surprise.)
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 02:08:53 PM

Matt Silberstein wrote in alt.atheism

Kant <Kantis@inhell.com> wrote:

8. There are no intermediate fossils leading up to man from an apelike
ancestor.Fossil hominids and hominoids cited by evolutionists are actually
either fossils of ape or a man or neither.There is no valid Scientific
evidence to suggest that they are fossils of animals intermediate between
men and apes.

What they want is what evolution doesn't actually predict or provide.
Things like a cat giving birth to a dog, in a single generation.
I've given up on arguing about fossils with creationists, and
currently use living examples of obvious transitional animals like the
seal I mentioned in my reply to Kant. If the creationists can't see
that a seal is in transition from a land-based dog-like animal, into a
water-based animal with flippers, I don't think anything will convince
them.
Have you seen this video before?
http://www.elroysemporium.com/videos/divingdog.wmv
Maybe creationists like Kant would label the above dog as a seal?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.

User: "Steve Kelley"
Title: Re: The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absenceof transitional fossils.	09 Sep 2005 07:55:43 PM

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 22:01:02 -0700, in alt.atheism , "Kant"
<Kantis@inhell.com> in <hG8Ue.81$Ij1.13471@news.uswest.net> wrote:

The most serious defect in the evolutionary theory is the absence of
transitional fossils.

There are literally billions of fossils. Unless we actually have a
parent and a child there will always be a gap.

If life has always been in a continual stream of transmutation

No transmutation at all, evolution.

from one form

to the other,as evolutionists insist,then we should certainly expect to find
as many fossils of the intermediate stages between different forms as of the
distinct kinds themselves.

Why should we expect to find all of them? What about the world you see
tells you that all those fossils should be found? The world I see does
not tend to preserve many bones.

Yet no fossils have been found that can be
considered transitional between the major groups of Phyla.

From the very beginning these organisms were just as clearly and distinctly

set apart from each other as they are today.