That's the problem.
Posted on 02/12/2009 11:49:20 AM PST by EveningStar
With the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin this week, people around the world are celebrating his role as the father of evolutionary theory. Events and press releases are geared, in part, to combat false claims made by some who would discredit the theory.
One frequently cited "hole" in the theory: Creationists claim there are no transitional fossils, aka missing links. Biologists and paleontologists, among others, know this claim is false.
(Excerpt) Read more at livescience.com ...
That's the problem.
LOL
All fossils are transitional since all things are always undergoing change.
Well, no wonder you are having a problem, that’s a
rhinosaworst.
>including the “fishibian” and the “frogamander.”
Ok, what makes the “frogmander” different from a developing tadpole? Fishibian... isn’t that what they were praising about finding a catfish with short-sturdy pectoral fins so it could “stand” on the rocks against high-flow waters?
Also, if specification occurs by way of survival-of-the-fittest, why aren’t there MANY, MANY fossils of failed lifeforms? (Like the Spider-squid, or the piranha-parakeet?)
Also, these transitions would have to include the development of wings in NO LESS than three distinct families: Mammalian (bats), Avians (birds), Reptile (Dinos, though some would group them with Avians), and Insect (Beetles, etc.)
We defined thinking as integrating data and arriving at correct answers. Look around you. Most people do that stunt just well enough to get to the corner store and back without breaking a leg. If the average man thinks at all, he does silly things like generalizing from a single datum. He uses one-valued logics. If he is exceptionally bright, he may use two-valued, 'either-or' logic to arrive at his wrong anwers. If he is hungry, hurt, or personaly interested in the answer, he can't use any sort of logic and will discard an observed fact as blithely as he will stake his life on a piece of wishful thinking. He uses the technical miracles created by superior men without wonder nor surprise, as a kitten accepts a bowl of milk. Far from aspiring to higher reasoning, he is not even aware that higher reasoning exists. He classes his own mental process as being of the same sort as the genius of an Einstein. Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal.- Robert A. Heinlein.For explanations of a universe that confuses him, he seizes onto numerology, astrology, hysterical religions, and other fancy ways to go crazy. Having accepted such glorified nonsense, facts make no impression on him, even if at the cost of his own life. Joe, one of the hardest things to believe is the abysmal depth of human stupidity.
I’ve never heard a scientist say that rocks turn into living things.
But you’ve heard plenty suggest that complex animals, indeed all complex life, arose from the elements present in that picture.
Virtually every element in that photo is in you but not one scientist suggests that a rock evolved into anything.
Every human culture that has existed throughout time has lumped all phenomena they don’t understand into their peculiar version of divine intervention.
The evo agitprop begins by misunderstanding the critics, then trots out fossil evidence that does not answer the criticism.
1. No one disputes that a single species can evolve through natural selection. Just look at dogs (and wolves).
2. No one disputes that fossils of distinct species that are similar to more than one other species exist.
This is the question for the evolutionary superstitionists to answer.
If species A randomly mutated over time into a species B, which is distinct, then the fossil record would show not merely a species C that is somewhat like A and somewhat like B. The fossil record will then show a continuum of specimens that begin at A, and proceed to B like this:
A x 100%
A x 99% + B x 1%
A x 98% + B x 2%
...
A x 1% + B x 99%
B x 100%
Each specimen would be able to interbreed with the one before it and the one after it, but A would not interbreed with B.
In fact, we would not then have distinct species at all. Every living organism would be in transition and surrounded by others like it on a different stage of their transition. We would not have cats and dogs, we would have 30% cat, 60% dog and 10% crocodile in the same pet.
Try Crest with mouthwash and whitener ~ it may help.
Yes, well I see you intend to take sarcasm literally, but since the photo contains rocks (mineral elements), water, and sunlight, please explain to me how that combination of elements does turn into a giraffe. Please also duplicate the experiment for me, consistent with the scientific method, otherwise I will be forced to regard your theory, as merely that...or dare I say, nothing more than faith.
“we would have 30% cat, 60% dog and 10% crocodile in the same pet.”
Hey! I’ve got one of those! A Dogadilapus.
Far from aspiring to higher reasoning, he is not even aware that higher reasoning exists. He classes his own mental process as being of the same sort as the genius of an Einstein. Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal.
It’s pretty clear that you’ve accepted your chosen path of simpleton. There’s no way of explaining what you want me to explain because you’re talking about creation and not evolution.
When it comes to creation I say God did it but God doesn’t cause rocks to sprout legs and expecting me to explain how they sprout legs is foolish.
You will notice that my response went directly to your proposal and demonstrated that there's at least ONE item that just doesn't fit.
My approach was to cleverly, and with good humor, knock your conjecture into the trashcan of history without getting nasty about it.
So, yes, this is what passes for reasoned debate ~ because I am smart and you are not!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.