Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fortheDeclaration
'Now counting the seconds before the first bald-faced liar says "THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS'-

So, where are they? There is a fossil showing one species changing into another? Now, this wouldn't be one of those evolutionist finds when they find a piece of a bone and build a whole man around it,only to find out it was a bone of a pig! Talk about 'bald-face' liars! Oh,I know,you believe that they are out there-somewhere!

From The Ultimate Creation vs. Evolution Resource [Revision 10]:

Transitional Fossils 

  1. 20 Answers from an Evolutionist

  2. A Critique of Wallace: "There are no transitional fossils"

  3. Common Ancestry Of Monkeys, Apes And Humans

  4. Evolutionary Theory FAQ

  5. Observed Instances of Speciation

  6. On Creation Science and "Transitional Fossils"

  7. Punctuated Equilibrium Example: Some Dinosaurs

  8. Proofs of Macroevolution

  9. Speciation by Punctuated Equilibrium

  10. Talk Origins:  Horse Evolution

  11. Talk Origins:  The Archaeopteryx FAQs

  12. Talk Origins:  Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ

  13. Transitional Fossils -- Age and Descent

  14. Transitional Fossils Leading to Orbulina

  15. Transitional Fossils FAQ

  16. Transitional Vertebrate Fossils


42 posted on 11/29/2001 5:46:55 AM PST by Junior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: Junior
Posting links is not argument, Junior. Those who have followed those links and reported back report that they are deeply flawed. If you wish to make a point, make it here, but do so civilly. If you ridicule or mischaracterize, it will come right back at you and you will again be made to look very foolish.
47 posted on 11/29/2001 6:12:13 AM PST by Phaedrus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: Junior
After checking out the links, this is what the author concluded on the fossil record, that there was,

A large number of gaps. This is perhaps the aspect that is easiest to explain, since for stratigraphic reasons alone there must always be gaps. In fact, no current evolutionary model predicts or requires a complete fossil record, and no one expects that the fossil record will ever be even close to complete. As a rule of thumb, however, creationists think the gaps show fundamental biological discontinuities, while evolutionary biologists think they are the inevitable result of chance fossilizations, chance discoveries, and immigration events.

In other words, the evolutionists make this stuff up as they go along. They use alot of fancy words to pretend they have real evidence, when it all comes down their own opinions.

Let us see what another branch of science has to say about evolution

Now that the black box of vision has been opened, it is no longer enough for an evolutionary explanation of that power to consider only the anatomical structures of whole eyes, as Darwin did in the nineteenth century (and as popularizers of evolution continue to do today). Each of the anatomical steps and structures that Darwin thought were so simple actually involves staggeringly complicated biochemical processes that cannto be papered over with rhetoric. Darwins metaphorical hops from butte to butte are now revealed in many cases to be huge leaps between tailored machines-distances that would require a helicopter to cross in one trip

Thus biochemistry offers a Lilliputian challenge to Darwin.Anatomy is, quite simply, irrevant to the question of whether evolution could take place on the molecular level. So is the fossil record. It no longer matters whether there are huge gaps in the fossil record or whether the record is as continuous as that of U.S. Presidents. And if there are gaps, it does not matter whether they be explained plausibly. The fossil record has nothing to tell us about whether the interactions of 11-cis-retinal with rhodopsin, transducin, and phosphodiesterase could have developed step-by-step

...The resulting realization that life was designed by an intelligence is a shock to us in the 20th century who have gotten use to thinking of life as a result of simple natural laws (Darwins Black Box, The biochemical challange to evolution, by Michael J. Behe, pp 22,252)

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools (Rom.1:22)

176 posted on 11/30/2001 11:34:42 PM PST by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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