neat-o. does this qualify as a fish thread?
I used to date a girl who must’ve had some sea urchin in her DNA....
Ping!
Just keep posting the same crevo crap over and over?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2221106/posts
Too much materialism in your excerpt for me.
i stepped on a sea urchin once with my full weight. it wasn’t pretty. neither was what i had to do in order to help with the pain.
Fascinating. It doesn’t push me in the direction of intelligent design over natural selection but things like this always increase my awe and respect for life.
Mr. Thomas again masters the great leap of taking a singular supposed example and making great inferences where none exist. Sea urchins are very niche specific and have no competition in that niche. They had no selective pressure to change their feeding apparatus. However, if Brian had bothered to go any farther than a cursory glance at one article he would have noted that there are over 6000 species of urchins. Fundamentally, sea urchins represent a well diversified phylogenetic tree.
“What makes these teeth so special that they can drill through rock “
Answer ... The animal’s teeth must be harder than limestone, just as diamonds are harder than glass.
Consider aslo that limestone is a sedimentary rock ... the product of sediment collecting on tue bottom of some ancient lake, river or ocean; and that limestone is a far less hard substance than granite, a metamorphic rock.
And the little reference star ("*") leads to this at the bottom of the article...
* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.
Which ieads to the question: who is Brian Thomas, and what are his credentials?
Wikipedia doesn't have him ...
There are no transitional sea urchin teeth, and sea urchins are fully sea urchins wherever they are found. Their abundance in certain rock strata need not be interpreted as representing some kind of ancient “time of sea urchins.” Rather, it represents the catastrophic burial of a sea urchin-rich habitat that occurred early in the global Flood described in Genesis. And the precisely regulated manufacturing process that forms the sea urchins’ teeth can only be the result of a supreme Designer
From the article:
“The sea urchins that were preserved in rock layers must also have had these specialized grinding teeth.”
Why *must* they have had such teeth? What leads Brian Thomas MS* to that conclusion?
The sea urchins that were preserved in rock layers must also have had these specialized grinding teeth.
Mr. Thomas could've just looked at the available evidence, but "creation science" is generally a fact-free activity.
Second is the conclusion based on the assumption:
The sudden appearance in fossils of “the mature sea urchin tooth [with] incredible structural and compositional complexity”1 contradicts Darwin’s evolutionary claim that animals “advance by the shortest and slowest steps.”4
A claim with no evidence.
And of course, evolutionary biology begins and ends with Darwin for "creation scientists", except when cosmology is involved.
Does Mr. Thomas know Darwin is dead?
God is amazing with His creation.
One thing that will never evolve: The IQ of a regular ICR reader.