Posted on 06/10/2018 2:20:23 AM PDT by GonzoII
Really? You conflate adaptation to evolution and call yourself a scientist? When did science stop being skeptical of groupthink? Name one transitory fossil.
I understand believing Creation would cost you your job, but please don’t play your games here. If God can’t create the universe then there must not be heaven or Salvation either.
If there are billions of transitory fossils you should be able to come up with one. Where is your dog/horse fossil?
Changing the definition of transitory does not make it a transitory fossil.
"Fast" meaning only tens of millions of years instead of billions?
Of course panspermia would be relatively fast, if life arrived fully developed from somewhere in outer space.
But that's all just speculation & hypotheses, nothing confirmed and no actual data beyond the fossil evidence of possible primitive life over three billion years ago.
PeterPrinciple: "Your abiogenesis is the essence of spontaneous generation."
Again, nothing that takes billions of years can be called "spontaneous".
Complete nonsense.
Of course, the real headline should be, the Earth isn't 6000 years old. :^) To say that the paper currently under discussion (using that term loosely) is an outlier is something of an understatement. At best it could lead to an examination of the basis for the molecular clocks used to estimate dates for mitochondrial DNA mutation branching.
...sometime between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago, much of Greenland was especially green and covered in a boreal forest that was home to alder, spruce and pine trees, as well as insects such as butterflies and beetles.
Ancient Greenland was... covered in conifer forest and, like southern Sweden today, had a relatively mild climate. Eske Willerslev, a professor at Copenhagen University, has analysed the world's oldest DNA, preserved under the kilometre-thick icecap. The DNA is likely close to half a million years old, and the research is painting a picture which is overturning all previous assumptions about biological life and the climate in Greenland... large parts of Greenland were covered by forest. This was discovered by analysing fossil DNA which had been preserved under the kilometre-thick icecap. The DNA-traces are likely close to 450,000 years old, and that means that Greenland was also covered in a large ice sheet 125,000 years ago during the earth's last warm period, Eem. This was while the climate was 5 degrees warmer than the interglacial period we currently live in... Several projects... have been drilling through the icecap on Greenland, and collected complete columns of ice all the way from the top to the bottom. The ice has annual layers and is a frozen archive of the world's climate... Eske Willerslev, who is the world's leading expert in extracting DNA from organisms buried in permafrost.... "We have found grain, pine, yew and alder. These correspond to the landscapes we find in Eastern Canada and in the Swedish forests today. The trees provide a backdrop from which we can also ascertain the climate since each species has its own temperature requirements. The yew trees reveal that the temperature during the winter could not have been lower than minus 17 degrees Celsius, and the presence of other trees shows that summer temperatures were at least 10 degrees"... Furthermore Willerslev found genetic traces of insects such as butterflies, moths, flies and beetles... He analysed the insects' mitochondria, which are special genomes that change with time and like a clock can be used to date the DNA. He also analysed their amino acids which also change over time. Both datings showed that the insects were at least 450,000 years old... radioactive dating. "We can fix when the ice was last in contact with the atmosphere," says Jørgen Peder Steffensen... the special isotopes, Beryllium-10 and Chlorine-36 both have a particular half-life of radioactive decay... The relation between them can date when the ice and dust were buried and no longer came in contact with the atmosphere. The dating of dust particles also showed that it has been at least 450,000 years ago... That signifies that there was ice there during the Eemian interglacial period 125,000 years ago. It means that although we are now confronted with global warming, the whole ice sheet will not melt and bring about the tremendous sea-level rises...
The ice core showed the Northern Hemisphere briefly emerged from the last ice age some 14,700 years ago with a 22-degree-Fahrenheit spike in just 50 years, then plunged back into icy conditions before abruptly warming again about 11,700 years ago.
Sorry, but your "Evolution Fraud and Myths" link is itself a fraud & myth teller.
It debunks nothing but does repeat some very old case histories, some of them honest mistakes (Neanderthals, "ignorant, ape-like, stooped and knuckle-dragging, ") others not so much ("Haekel’s Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny?")
Regardless, it says nothing about transitional fossils.
‘Is that something you and others do at your family reunions?’
ha ha ha...
That signifies that there was ice there during the Eemian interglacial period 125,000 years ago. It means that although we are now confronted with global warming, the whole ice sheet will not melt and bring about the tremendous sea-level rises...
...
Just so people know, the Eemian or previous interglacial was warmer than the current interglacial, and long before Al Gore bought his fleets of SUVs and private jets.
still, I’m a little jealous, Eemian is a much cooler name.
Again, nothing "spontaneous" about a process which took billions of years.
The fossil record suggests possible primitive "life" four+ billion years ago, or maybe it was just complex chemistry.
The earliest clear life fossils, cyanobacteria in stromatolites, appear in the record from 3.7 billion years ago.
The so-called Cambrian explosion began circa 500 million years ago.
So, nothing "spontaneous" about it.
Many Chinese are talented & imaginative and soon figured out there is a lucrative market for certain fossils, so they provided more than were found naturally.
It's a problem today addressed more directly than at first.
Regardless, it does not imply that every fossil -- billions of them -- are faked.
brey: "Sorry, I just don’t have enough faith to believe in your myth.
I will stick to the Bible and Genesis."
Science does not ask for "belief" or "faith" or any other religious-type commitment.
It only proposes explanations that if confirmed are considered valid pending new data or better explanations.
In the case of evolution theory, over the past 150+ years science has confirmed huge volumes of new data requiring many additions to Darwin's basic ideas.
But basic evolution theory remains the foundation on which much of modern science is built.
Yes, many of us do have faith & belief that God may have used natural processes, in whole or in part, to accomplish His purposes.
You disagree?
Reily posted a link (#106) to dozens of well known transition sequences which would include millions of known fossils.
But you closed your eyes and pretended to see nothing, noooooothing!.
So it's only you who've corrupted your definition of "transitory fossils" to mean something which cannot be found -- "dog/horse transitions".
By scientific definition, every fossil is transitional from its ancestors to its descendants, if any.
By the way, I live in NC (part of the "Bible Belt") and have had my current teaching job for almost 35 years so I am really not afraid my that my Christian faith will cost me my job! In fact, my love and concern for my students is in large part a result of the fact that I was loved and raised by Christian parents and that I was first loved by God!
.
Your childish level of reply has become your trademark.
.
.
>> “ nothing is “spontaneous” about chemical processes which took billions of years.” <<
Except for the spontaneous appearance of “billions of years” when time itself was created 6000 years ago.
Yes, Yehova did expand space-time outward from Earth, but here at the point of creation, those expanded years do not exist.
.
.]
The Bible is the history of the creation of all things, including time itself.
Nobody has any problem with science, but science and evolution are polar opposites.
Science is careful honest observation, while evolution is the name of one of the absurdest lies of all time.
.
.
>> “Sure, the ‘nice picture’ shows how wings changed over 100+ million years, from Sinosauropteryx to modern crows.” <<
You’re refusing to deal with the scientific reality that here at the point of creation, all the time that exists is a bit over 6000 years.
If you wish to deal with “billions of years,” you’ll have to spend the billions of years traveling through the expanded creation to get where those years exist.
.
At least nobody will accuse you of being a anti-science Christian and can maintain your condescending attitude most Darwinists posses.
Well said!
.
The complexity you claim to admire is from the moment of creation.
You simply are rejecting the realities real science has found.
Space,time and motion are inseparable.
If you want time beyond the available 6000 years at our location, you need to find a way to get there,and you’d better hurry, because space-time is scheduled to be un-created in about 1000 years, at the end of the 1000 year demonstration of the total depravity of man. (Peter wrote about it, and so did John)
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.