New Dinosaur Species Found in India

AP ^ | August 13, 2003 | RAMOLA TALWAR BADAM

[DittoJed2]

I have little confidence in the same scientists who say that I have "gill slits" as identifyng bumps on a whale embryo as "limb buds."

[Virginia-American]

As we study genetics more broadly, and the scientists demonstrate that two or more subjects in a population of different decent have acquired the same "fossilized" viral DNA sequence, will you acknowledge that genetics disproves evolution by common descent?

The same viral sequence in the same place would be a big blow to standard biology. Perhaps some anti-evo group like DI or ICR could start doing (peer-reviewed, reproducible) research to try to find such things. AFAIK, none are known at present - the only animals with the same virus in the same place are already known to be related, things like apes and people, or whales hippos and cows. Oh well.

Another example of evos making a prediction which, if it weren't fulfilled, would falsify the theory. Compare this one to "if viral remains are found in the same place in whale and cow dna, they will also be in the same place in hippo dna"

The anti-evos have yet to make any such predictions, showing that they're not practicing science. What possible observation would be evidence against "[the designer] just did it that way?"

[Virginia-American]

I'm not sure what the Hebrews knew of such things, other than what appears in scripture, but the Greeks had all that stuff figured out by the time of Aristotle (around 300 BC), if not before. It seems quite obvious that they knew a lunar eclipse was caused by the earth's shadow.

Pythagoras is traditionally credited with the first proof that the Earth is a sphere. His logic was that its shadow, seen on the Moon during an eclipse is always round, no matter where in the sky or where on the Moon the eclipse is taking place. The only solid that always casts a round shadow is a sphere. QED

[balrog666]

Invincible ignorance placemarker.

[VadeRetro]

Babinski documents a better case for whale atavisms than Wieland seems to think possible. Lots of drawings and photos. How is he doing that?

Wieland also says this:

Pakicetus was claimed to be a ‘walking whale’ — yet the type specimen consisted only of jaw and skull fragments.

For a long time, we had no post-cranial Pakicetus bones. Since 2000, we do.

Pakicetidae.

Some creationist sources are still running around pretending that we don't know what Paki looked like post-cranially. Creation science is somehow allowed to use old sources in misleading ways for some greater good.

Pakicetus is not the only such case among the cetaceans. See also: Ambulocetus Has No Pelvis and is Largely Incomplete? AiG strikes again!

[VadeRetro]

Why no photos today of whales with legs hanging off of them? Surely if this were something different from a freak overgrowth then you would see some actual evidence.

Where did you check besides AiG? ICR?

[Junior]

Placemarker.

[PatrickHenry]

Kinder, gentler P L A C E M A R K E R

[DittoJed2]

And evolutionist posters are allowed to misrepresent creationist sources.
This so-called "evidence" of whale "evolution" has been addressed along with the newer findings by the largest Creation research organization in the world.

[DittoJed2]

You have an opportunity to produce a photo of a whale with legs. A photo, as in something that one takes and develops with photographic developer.

[PatrickHenry]

Whale fossil with legs. HERE.

[DittoJed2]

BR>Incidentally, I don't care what his ear bone or other features look like, this

Looks more like this (he does have a tail, its tucked between his legs)
Than any of these

[AndrewC]

Whale with legs.

[VadeRetro]

Did you read the Babinski link or not?

There's a lot more material on the web page. Reading it before replying would have been a good idea.

What are you even trying to say in 2039?

Remember how we got here? I mentioned that the designer not only filled the sea with fish but then used mammal parts to make whales, but he left a trail of funny fossils that seems to show land animals gradually losing their legs and becoming sea creatures.

You denied that any such thing exists at all. Was that a lie? We're past the point whether such a thing exists. We're now discussing whether you can get each species thrown out on a technicality. Pakicetus -- "They changed their story!" Ambulocetus -- "Crucially, the all-important pelvic girdle was not found (see diagram, right)." I refuted this in my previous post. So here's you back again with the same troll for suckers. Does me no good to anticipate, does it? You're just going to reach in your little box of AiG tracts and pull out number 11 anyway.

Here's the Ambulocetus a little bigger. Most people can see the pelvic bones. Maybe you can get Dr. Sarfati's attention.

[DittoJed2]

First of all, the photo on your link is of a whale skull. Second, the appendages that evolutionists are calling "legs" on a skeleton help to control whale reproduction. Ligaments attach to them and, well, without them he wouldn't be able to procreate. You have not shown a photo of an actual whale with legs. You have provided an article about a portion of bone within the whale that is not connected to his spine that kinda free floats and has two bones hanging off of it that evolutionists interpret as being legs because they want them to be legs.

Incidentally, are legs necessary in any mammal in order for them to procreate? These bones help a whale procreate. I don't know (and could be wrong) of any other species of mammal where the ligaments that help the creature sexually are dependent upon leg bones.

[VadeRetro]

Incidentally, I don't care what his ear bone or other features look like ...

If you don't care about the details, you think a whale is a fish and a thylacine is a dog. Your ignorance is not science.

[DittoJed2]

Missing link. And surprise, he's a liberal.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for the additional information!

I realize you do not see a paradox here - and I have found one scholar (Chris King) who also dismisses it with a Hellenistic hand wave. But the other scholars I've read are not so easily convinced.

Here are some of my "digs" (I found the first two sections online in several places and didn't select for the 'best' source.)

Enoch: a brief textual history

The third Enochian book, the Book of Astronomy, is considered the oldest of those preserved, thought to have been written well before the second century. It contains a description of the structure of the universe as well as the details of a 364 day solar calendar, a calendar that seems to have been popular especially in the Dead Sea Scrolls although it is well supported by another pseudepigraphic book, Jubilees.

The Apocryphal Book of Enoch

"Chaps. 72-82 The Astronomical Book, like the Book of Watchers, may date from the third century BCE; the oldest copy of it seems to have been made not long after 200 BCE. Sizable portions of the text are preserved on four copies, written in Aramaic, from Qumran cave 4. The Aramaic original appears to have been much different and much longer than the Ethiopic text, adding far more astronomical details." - James C. Vanderkam

1 Enoch is an unmistakable product of Hellenistic civilization. A world view so encyclopaediac that it embraced the geography of heaven and earth, astronomy, meteorology, medicine was no part of Jewish tradition - but was familiar to educated Greeks, but attempting to emulate and surpass Greek wisdom, by having an integrating divine plan for destiny, elaborated through an angelic host with which Enoch is in communication through his mystical travels. - Chris King.

"One of the most remarkable features of 1 Enoch is that the law revealed to Moses on Mt. Sinai plays almost no part in it at all. It could be objected that it would be more surprising if it did have a role, since 1 Enoch is, of course, about Enoch who lived before the flood (see Gen 5:21-24) and thus long before the law was revealed. The argument would be that the authors of 1 Enoch were consistent about their pseudepigraphic attribution of the material to Enoch and therefore did not commit the anachronism of having him teach and obey the law of Moses.

"But there is a flaw in that argument because at least two places in the book should mention the law revealed on Mt. Sinai. The two places are in the two principal apocalypses, the Apocalypse of Weeks and the Animal Apocalypse. Both of these revelations cover the period when Israel was in the wilderness and, according to the pentateuch, received the covenantal law." - James C. Vanderkam

The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha volume I - Charlesworth

“Some scholars believe that the original language of 1 Enoch is Hebrew; others, however, think it is Aramaic; still others contend that the book, like Daniel, was composed partly in Hebrew and partly in Aramaic.”

“We are not certain about the city or place in which 1 Enoch was, or its constituent parts were, composed. However, it is clear that the work originated in Judea and was in use at Qumran before the beginning of the Christian period.”

One comment with regard to Vanderkam's comment: the Enochian Apocalypse of Weeks is a prophesy (forward looking) and thus, IMHO, would not contain more than it does:

93.1 And, after this, Enoch began to speak from the books:

93.2 And Enoch said: "Concerning the sons of righteousness, and concerning the chosen of the world, and concerning the plant of righteousness and uprightness, I will speak these things to you, and make them known to you, my children. I, Enoch, according to that which appeared to me in the Heavenly vision, and that which I know from the words of the Holy Angels, and understanding from the Tablets of Heaven."

93.3 And Enoch then began to speak from the books, and said: "I was born the seventh, in the first week, while justice and righteousness still lasted.

93.4 And, after me, in the second week, great injustice will arise, and deceit will have sprung up. And in it there will be the First End, and in it, a man will be saved. And after it has ended, iniquity will grow, and He will make a law for the sinners.

93.5 And after this in the third week, at its end, a man will be chosen as the Plant of Righteous Judgment, and after him will come the Plant of Righteousness, forever.

93.6 And after this, in the fourth week, at its end, visions of the righteous and Holy will be seen, and a Law for All Generations, and an enclosure will be made for them.

93.7 And after this, in the fifth week, at its end, a House of Glory and Sovereignty will be built forever.

93.8 And after this, in the sixth week, all those who live in it will be blinded. And the hearts of them all, lacking wisdom, will sink into impiety. And in it, a man will ascend, and at its end the House of Sovereignty will be burnt with fire. And in it the whole race of the chosen root will be scattered.

93.9 And after this, in the seventh week, an apostate generation will arise. And many will be its deeds - but all its deeds will be apostasy.

93.10 And at its end, the Chosen Righteous, from the Eternal Plant of Righteousness, will be chosen, to whom will be given sevenfold teaching, concerning his whole creation.

The other thing of course is that over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedence in Enoch and Enoch is quoted directly in Jude. So, to the New Testament - Enoch is authentic. The difficulty after 2,000 years is piecing together "the" Enoch.

[DittoJed2]

Yes, I read the link- and I read it before replying.

What I was saying in 2309 is that you inferred that creationists are deliberately using old sources to deceive the masses about supposed whale evolution. If you look at the link I gave you, two of the four sources directly address articles from 2001. The article also directly addresses the skeleton bone find.

Second, did you read the link I posted earlier from Job? The Creator created what he created and bone-headed scientists want to convince the world that it shows what "SEEMS TO BE" animals losing their legs and becoming fish. Note, the seems to be. It is an interpretation of the evidence. It is not proof. What is a lie is to say that it is proof. It is not. It is the hopeful thinking of desperate scientists who for 140+ years have been searching the fossil record to prove that we happened by chance- to no avail.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so very much! I do hope you find them because they sound very interesting and I'd love to read them, as I imagine those following this discussion would also. Hugs!