Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: snowballinhell
Yes this is very true if you use the second hole stuffer theory, problem being is WE HAVE fossils from "turbulent period" which show NO change.

Oh, indeed. And we have geological inversions with fish over mammals, and we have dino bones that occasionally show up in silurian debris. However, this is a field of inquiry with a wide amount of potential variation. A fossilized bone has no say about where chance diversions of strata will take it. Fortunately, the science of this stuff doesn't look at one bone, and try to draw a conclusion. It looks at all the data we have available, and groups it statistically, and, statistically, you have no case. It is clear as a bell, looking at the accumulations of evidence, that the trend in fossils, viewed from high above, is a rather orderly, continuous march from small to large, simple to complex, monolithic to segmented, isolated to conglomerated.

I guess I should say, it is clear as a bell, unless they have a theological iron in the fire.

165 posted on 12/07/2003 1:28:50 PM PST by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]


To: donh
It is clear as a bell, looking at the accumulations of evidence, that the trend in fossils, viewed from high above, is a rather orderly, continuous march from small to large, simple to complex, monolithic to segmented, isolated to conglomerated.
Yes and this is proven by the fact that a grain of rice has 50K genes and humans only 25K genes, or a gorillas 48 chromosoms to our 46. And from small to large most fossil data shows our current flora and fauna was once MUCH lager than todays.
169 posted on 12/07/2003 1:50:50 PM PST by snowballinhell (Me thinks something is afoot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson