Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: BrandtMichaels
Truthfully neither evolution nor creation can be considered science because you can not go back and repeat history. On a micro/natural adaptation level - yes - proven, confirmed and agreed on by both groups [see last link below].

No, you can't go back in time to observe history, but there is enough evidence in the fossil record to piece together how evolution has proceeded throughout the last few billions of year.

Well what evidence do you [or evolution] have exDemMom to prove macro-evolution? Change from one kind into another has never been proven and zero missing links found.

Seriously, I find ridiculous the creationist claims that a lightning-fast process of microevolution is in effect, but the gradual process of macroevolution cannot possibly occur. If, in fact, rapid microevolution occurred, humans should have seen massive speciation occurring after the biblical floods that presumably wiped out all life (plant and animal) on earth, except for the few organisms that Noah could cram aboard his boat (along with enough food and bedding to last several months). That kind of speciation within the last 4-5 thousand years would have been recorded in written history. It's not. The literal creationist concept of rapid microevolution is supported neither by science nor by the Bible.

I should also point out that the idea of "missing links" is a red herring. Since we cannot produce from the fossil record an example of every generation of any species to show its evolution over time, literal creationists will always bring up that claim of "missing links".

462 posted on 03/08/2012 3:42:30 AM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies ]


To: exDemMom; BrandtMichaels; Alamo-Girl; metmom; spirited irish; GourmetDan
... there is enough evidence in the fossil record to piece together how evolution has proceeded throughout the last few billions of year.

Please note: There is a dearth of evidence to support the theory of a common ancestor. Yet Darwinists continue to promote the idea of a common ancestor: They want there to be a common ancestor; for it obviates the need for a creator God.

There was nothing "gradual" about the Cambrian explosion. And predecessor transitional life forms are simply absent from the fossil record.

Macroevolution is perhaps the greatest Myth of our age....

475 posted on 03/08/2012 11:10:00 AM PST by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies ]

To: exDemMom; metmom; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; GourmetDan; allmendream

Dear exDemMom,

I had hoped you took so long in responding b/c you were busy reading the links I provided [posts #443 & #451 of this thread iirc] and possibly expanding your mind regarding the many varied possibilities for interpreting the geologic and fossil evidence.

Question1: If we assume a much shortened time span for the Earth and Universe, say something corresponding to mankind’s written history, would we not also expect to see that natural adaptations have, in fact, taken place at a very much increased pace over evolutionary speculations?

Question2: If we assume a worldwide flood, could that natural disaster and subsequent smaller ones have dramatically increased the stress and micro-evolutionary changes for those same affected lifeforms?

I perused your homepage and must assume that you are 10 or more years younger than I [50] and have been heavily submersed in liberal academic circles that do not allow other biblical speculations regarding natural history. I pray for you to continue reading and studying much of that with which you currently dis-agree [as I did over the last 10-15 years].

Seriously, I find obvious the evolutionist claims that a lightning-fast process of microevolution [which has been observed] is in effect, but the gradual process of macroevolution cannot possibly occur b/c it has neither been observed nor fossil evidence found.

If, in fact, the Bible specs for Noah’s Ark are true then we could conclude:

a.) loads of storage space for approx 20k animal kinds ~ say something on the order of a 3 tiered modern day ocean going barge,

b.) worldwide evidence of quickly buried and fossilized lifeforms in situ among many varied sedimentary layers representing the uniqueness of both for each and every environmental habitat, &

c.) several ancient civilizations to have recorded similar legendary stories...

http://shipsonstamps.org/Topics/html/arche.htm

I should also point out that the idea of “missing links” is NOT a red herring. Since we have produced from the fossil record an examples of more species in history than are found today.

In fact Dr. Walt Brown PhD has speculated with his hydroplate theory all my prior claims and much more in the link:

Center for Scientific Creation - In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/IntheBeginningTOC.html


482 posted on 03/08/2012 6:38:28 PM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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