schaef21: This is simply not true...I know there are a lot of text books that say that...but it’s not true. The fossil record shows stasis. It does not show gradual change.
schaef21: I know....I’m a liar. I guess I’ll have to back up what I say with a few more quotes from evolutionists."
My statement above is literally true, and so you are a liar, despite your quotes, for attempting to deny what is obviously the case.
The fact is, the geological column inerrantly shows life moving in only one direction: from primitive to more advanced. There are, for examples, no elephants mixed in with dinosaurs, and no dinosaurs found in Precambrian rocks. That's a simple fact which you cannot honestly deny. Indeed, if it were ever truly found to be false, then all of science (!) would be overturned. But to date it has never been.
Your quotes from Eldridge and Scientific American (1975!) deal with the question in evolution about the rates of change in species over time. Darwin assumed that species changes were slow, gradual and continuous.
More recent research has shown this not to be the usual case, that where a species is well adapted to its environment, and the environment doesn't change much, then neither will the species -- sometimes for hundreds of millions of years.
Possibly the best known example of that is crocodiles, which are pretty much the same today as the fossils found of them in geological strata long BEFORE the dinosaurs!
But, where the environment changes rapidly, it can force many extinctions, AND relatively rapid evolution on the survivors.
This is what the fossil record obviously shows, and to deny it is to deny what's obviously true, and does not speak well of your character.
It’s getting late so I’ll have to deal with some of your other stuff at a later time....but I just thought that I’d give one more refutation to the “Schaef21 is a liar” refrain.
****My statement above is literally true, and so you are a liar, despite your quotes, for attempting to deny what is obviously the case. The fact is, the geological column inerrantly shows life moving in only one direction: from primitive to more advanced.****
Science Magazine and Nature Magazine...they play on your team I think:
“It is commonly believed that complex organisms arose from simple ones. Yet analyses of genomes and of their transcribed genes in various organisms reveal that, as far as protein-coding genes are concerned, the repertoire of a sea anmone - a rather simple, evolutionarily basal animal-is almost as complex as that of a human.”
U. Technau, “Evolutionary Biology: Small regualatory RNAs Pitch In” Nature 455 (2008) 1184-1185
“Nevertheless, comparative genomics has confirmed a lesson from paleontology: Evolution does not proceed montonically from the simpler to the more complex.”
C. G. Kurland, L. J. Collins, D. Penny, “Genomics and the irreducible nature of eukaryote cells” Science 312 (2006) 1011-1014
As I’ve told you, BroJoe. I won’t say it if I can’t back it up.
****This is what the fossil record obviously shows, and to deny it is to deny what’s obviously true, and does not speak well of your character.****
Do you really want to get into the fossil record with me? The fossil record is not something that can be observed in the present it is therefore forensic and subject to bias in interpreting the findings. I’ll play if you want.....It might poke a hole in some of your pre-conceived notions....bring on the argument.