I'm sure you'll be relieved that this is what is being taught today.
Posted on 03/08/2016 10:19:08 AM PST by JimSEA
If paleontology were hard science then they wouldn’t have taught generations of school children that the dinosaurs were reptiles.
“Our genes do demonstrate our relationships to other species. In fact, our branch of the tree of life can be traced back to other “branches” easily and in that manner validate relationships suggested in paleontology. It’s a matter of determining common ancestors.”
Yes. Therefore my comment: If their theory is worth anything, it should be able to predict relations of currently existing species.
Good point.
They were fin-ished, to give us a leg up...
A mutation is new information any way you look at it
Again, a graduate from the school of teenage mutant ninja turtles. Enough time and some magic, that explains it.
This article CLAIMS the fossils exist, yet they fail to produce them.
The reason is that they THEORIZE a change in function without actually finding fossil evidence.
I’d doubt that having a foot up your ass would give you a competitive advantage making your genetic survival likely.
Great post!
Great post!
What evidence do you have that the fossils don’t exist?
It’s been a long time that dinosaurs have been differentiated from reptiles.
My answer is that it does.
I'm sure you'll be relieved that this is what is being taught today.
That happened in someones mind. Not in reality.
they did’t present them!
My all time favorite evolutionary tidbit I think came from a BBC documentary on dinosaurs.
What I do remember is they said life on Earth was created when another planet hit Earth, broke it in two, and created what we now know as Earth and Earth’s moon.
A similar article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_impact_hypothesis
Now let’s assume this to be fact like those leftist nutjobs do, just how do they know this, other than computer modeling? Oh, sorry I asked, global warming is based on a model, so then it all has to be true.
Really, Hank Johnson’s theory about Guam tipping over is easier to believe.
You'll notice he introduces an expanded understanding of stasis. Basically why should a successful organism change if the environment remains largely the same. His study emphasized periods of rather drastic environmental change as a cause of evolutionary change. You'll note that he concentrated on extinction events. He also gave time for the cascade of changes to occur. Since 1972, an awful lot of additional fossils have been found, some being transitional.
Good illustration.
Roger that. Typical evolutionary “goo to you through the zoo.” They fail to understand that their beliefs are just as much faith-based as those of us who believe in the Creator. They have no proof. Merely theory and conjecture, colored by their evolutionary beginning assumptions. Historical science is not in the same category as operational science.
Problem is, throwing a bunch of chemicals together and expecting them to form into the most “simple” (stupendously complex) single-celled organism is utterly laughable. When men thought that cells were just blobs of protoplasm, it’s understandable they could reach such a conclusion. We know better now.
And, instead of adding new information, mutation always reduces information, and usually makes the organism less viable. Thousands of generations of fruit flies have been artificially irradiated and, although some of them look freaky, they’re still just fruit flies.
I’m sure any of the many creation scientists would love to be published in secular publications. But we’ve recently seen how they go into full on freak-out when the word “creator” is even mentioned in one of their publications. There must be abject, debasing apologies for any hope of future research work.
Politely but firmly, evolution does not exist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.