- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
Originally posted by RJHindsThe difference being that I can point to scientific evidence in support of evolution. Can you
Wel, I also believe evolution of ape to man is nonsense and the idea of a fish to man is stupid.
refer to any verifiable information suggesting that all paleontologists lies about in what
strata they find fossil X, whenever it doesn't seem to support evolution?
Originally posted by C HessHe doesn't have to. All he has to do is to refer to his worship of ancient Egyptian mythology.
The difference being that I can point to scientific evidence in support of evolution. Can you
refer to any verifiable information suggesting that all paleontologists lies about in what
strata they find fossil X, whenever it doesn't seem to support evolution?
3 edits
Originally posted by C HessThere is absolutely no indication, from the fossil record, that evolution has ever occurred on our planet!
The difference being that I can point to scientific evidence in support of evolution. Can you
refer to any verifiable information suggesting that all paleontologists lies about in what
strata they find fossil X, whenever it doesn't seem to support evolution?
"We still do not know the mechanics of evolution in spite of the over-confident claims in some quarters, nor are we likely to make further progress in this by the classical methods of paleontology or biology; and we shall certainly not advance matters by jumping up and down shrilling, ‘Darwin is god and I, So-and-so, am his prophet.’ "—*Errol White, Proceedings of the Linnean Society, London, 177:8 (1966).
Evolutionists admit that evolution (one type of animal changing into another) never occurs today.
"No biologist has actually seen the origin by evolution of a major group of organisms."—*G. Ledyard Stebbins, Process of Organic Evolution, p. 1. [Stebbins is a geneticist.]
The lowest strata level is called the Cambrian. Below this lowest of the fossil-bearing strata lies the Precambrian.
The Cambrian has invertebrate (non-backbone) animals, such as trilobites and brachiopods. These are both very complex little animals. In addition, many of our modern animals and plants are in that lowest level, just above the Precambrian. How could such complex, multicelled creatures be there in the bottom of the Cambrian strata? But there they are. Suddenly, in the very lowest fossil stratum, we find complex plants and animals—and lots of them, with no evidence that they evolved from anything lower.
"It remains true, as every paleontologist knows, that most new species, genera and families, and that nearly all categories above the level of families, appear in the [fossil] record suddenly and are not led up to by known, gradual, completely continuous transitional sequences."—*George G. Simpson, The Major Features of Evolution, p. 360.
Paleontologists (the fossil hunters) call this immense problem "the Cambrian Explosion," because vast numbers of complex creatures suddenly appear in the fossil strata—with no evidence that they evolved from any less complicated creatures!
The fossil record purportedly contains a record of all the billions of years of life on earth. If it takes "100 million years" for an invertebrate to evolve through transitional forms into a fish, the fossil strata should show vast numbers of the in-between forms. But it never does!
The rock strata are not dated by the radioactive minerals within them. The dating was all worked out decades before anyone heard or thought of radioactive dating. The strata are said to be dated by FOSSILS!
But wait a minute! We cannot even use 99 percent of the fossils to date them by, since we can find the same type of fossils in one stratum as in many others! And in each stratum are millions of fossils, representing hundreds and even thousands of different species of plant and/or animal life. The result is a bewildering maze of mixed-up or missing strata, each with fossil prints from a wide variety of ancient plants and animals that we can find in still other rock strata.
The strata are dated by what the evolutionists call "index fossils." In each stratum there are a few fossils which are not observed quite as often in the other strata. As a pretext, these are the fossils which are used to "date" that stratum and all the other fossils within it!
But then, just as oddly, the magic disappears when the index fossil is found alive:
"Most of the species of maidenhair are extinct; indeed they served as index fossils for their strata until one was found alive." "The youngest fossil coelacanth is about sixty million years old. Since one was rediscovered off Madagascar, they are no longer claimed as ‘index fossils’—fossils which tell you that all other fossils in that layer are the same ripe old age."—Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution (1984), pp. 186, 198.
In reality, within each stratum is to be found an utter confusion of thousands of different types of plants and/or animals. The evolutionists maintain that if just one of a certain type of creature (an "index fossil" ) is found anywhere in that stratum, it must automatically be given a certain name,—and more: a certain date millions of years ago when all the creatures in that stratum are supposed to have lived. Yet, just by examining that particular index fossil, there is no way to tell that it lived just so many millions of years ago! It is all part of a marvelous theory, which is actually nothing more than a grand evolutionary hoax. Experienced scientists denounce it as untrue.
http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-12a.htm
Originally posted by RJHindsThat's your big anti-evolution rant? crap from 50 years ago? I thought you could do better than that, to put up 50 year old opinions. This is just a guess, but I THINK science has advanced a BIT in the last half century.
[b]There is absolutely no indication, from the fossil record, that evolution has ever occurred on our planet!
"We still do not know the mechanics of evolution in spite of the over-confident claims in some quarters, nor are we likely to make further progress in this by the classical methods of paleontology or biology; and we shall certainly not advanc ...[text shortened]... ientists denounce it as untrue. [/b]
http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-12a.htm[/b]
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsYou know, slapping book-long, outdated quotes of nervous creationist ramblings in my lap
[b]There is absolutely no indication, from the fossil record, that evolution has ever occurred on our planet!
"We still do not know the mechanics of evolution in spite of the over-confident claims in some quarters, nor are we likely to make further progress in this by the classical methods of paleontology or biology; and we shall certainly not advanc ...[text shortened]... ientists denounce it as untrue. [/b]
http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-12a.htm[/b]
does nothing to further your position in this conversation. You might try a more focused
(distilled) approach, using up to date material.
It's just an advice my friend.
6 edits
Originally posted by C Hess
You know, slapping book-long, outdated quotes of nervous creationist ramblings in my lap
does nothing to further your position in this conversation. You might try a more focused
(distilled) approach, using up to date material.
It's just an advice my friend.
slapping book-long, outdated quotes of nervous creationist ramblings
He always does that ( and much worse ) and he always will because he is massively opinionated and he doesn't want to learn but rather just push his religious agenda. This is why I have installed software to block his posts so at least I don't see them -his endless moronic posts would otherwise just make me groan every time and clutter up my view and I just know it is always futile to respond to them because he is also a big time-waster.
I noticed that you speak polity to him just like I used to initially until I learned better. You will learn with time that he will through that back into your face -because he is just a truly horrible uncivilized man ( just a friendly warning )