Replies

According to Darwin's theory of descent through gradual modification (by way of random mutation and natural selection), the fossil record should contain near-infinite numbers of ever-so-slightly-different "transitional" forms, and even greater numbers of evolutionary dead ends.
[GLDNGUN] That, my friends, is the fart in the Darwinian-Evolution Religion. It stinks and it's ruining the whole charade, but all of the blindly faithful try their best to pretend it's not there.
[Scourge of God] Don’t see anyone disputing those missing fossil records.
[firebrand] For anyone to assume the so-called fossil record can tell us anything on this issue is the ultimate in hubris.
[GLDNGUN] Thanks. I'll have to use that next time a Darweiner tries to use a fossil as evidence. :-)
[JCEccles] ...and the fossil record lacks evidence of even the tiniest complement of transitory life forms that Darwin himself said his theory required.

OK, I have a request for all you creationists here who insist that there aren't any "missing links" or transitional fossils between ancient apes & modern man: Go back up to post 84. Look at fossils A and N. These are modern chimpanzee and modern human, respectively.

Now, I want you to tell me precisely which of the other fossils: B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M are. Since you deny that there are any transitional fossils, please check one of these boxes:

1. [_] Just an old chimpanzee or other ape, or

2. [_] Just an old human

Can you do it?

OK, I have a request for all you creationists here who insist that there aren't any "missing links" or transitional fossils between ancient apes & modern man: Go back up to post 84. Look at fossils A and N. These are modern chimpanzee and modern human, respectively.
Now, I want you to tell me precisely which of the other fossils: B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M are. Since you deny that there are any transitional fossils, please check one of these boxes:

1. [_] Just an old chimpanzee or other ape, or

2. [_] Just an old human
Can you do it?

I trust that the aforementioned creationists haven't responded yet because they're busy analyzing those fossil skulls from post 84. Let me just add that this request is going out to ANY of you creationsts who think there are no transitional fossils between ape & human. I just pinged these 4 because they made that claim on this thread. But surely some of you others here share their belief. So if it's true that there are no transitional fossils between apes & humans, then it should be easy for you to classify all those fossils into their proper baramin.

Of course... if they really are transitionals, then you should have a difficult time figuring out whether a fossil is the "just an early ape" created kind vs. the "just an early human" created kind. In which case I can fully understand why it's taking you a long time to come up with an answer.

Can you do it?