Dinosaurs

Standard memberAMX
Spirituality 22 Nov '05 23:40
  1. where I am......
    Joined
    09 Aug '05
    Moves
    28205
    22 Nov '05 23:40
    I'm curious, how come Dinosaur fossils are of complete dinosaurs? Where are the fossils from the millions of years of supposed development??
  2. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    Just another day
    tinyurl.com/y8wgt7a5
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    22 Nov '05 23:43
    Originally posted by AMX
    I'm curious, how come Dinosaur fossils are of complete dinosaurs? Where are the fossils from the millions of years of supposed development??
    I don't understand the question. We have fossils from stromatolites 3.5 bya through those of humans.
  3. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    22 Nov '05 23:44
    Originally posted by AMX
    I'm curious, how come Dinosaur fossils are of complete dinosaurs? Where are the fossils from the millions of years of supposed development??
    There are dozens of fossils of dinosaur foots which eventually grew into legs and then trunks, etc. etc. etc. Within millions of years entire dinosaurs evolved from one reptilian big toe.
  4. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    23 Nov '05 00:44
    Originally posted by AMX
    I'm curious, how come Dinosaur fossils are of complete dinosaurs? Where are the fossils from the millions of years of supposed development??
    What would you expect the transitional forms to look like? Not-dinosaurs? A half a dinosaur?
  5. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    23 Nov '05 00:49
    Originally posted by David C
    What would you expect the transitional forms to look like? Not-dinosaurs? A half a dinosaur?
    I think he means a progression. Some kind of developmental stage over the years.
  6. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    23 Nov '05 00:53
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    I think he means a progression. Some kind of developmental stage over the years.
    They're there. One only has to remove the biblical blinders.

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
  7. Standard memberHalitose
    I stink, ergo I am
    On the rebound
    Joined
    14 Jul '05
    Moves
    4464
    23 Nov '05 07:50
    Originally posted by David C
    They're there. One only has to remove the biblical blinders.

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
    From your long-winded site:

    "Ideally, of course, we would like to know each lineage right down to the species level, and have detailed species-to-species transitions linking every species in the lineage. But in practice, we get an uneven mix of the two, with only a few species-to-species transitions, and occasionally long time breaks in the lineage."

    It then continues to spout wishful thinking on why there are such huge gaps in the fossil record.

    There is no clear cut solution.
  8. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    23 Nov '05 07:56
    Originally posted by Halitose
    From your long-winded site:

    "Ideally, of course, we would like to know each lineage right down to the species level, and have detailed species-to-species transitions linking every species in the lineage. But in practice, we get an uneven mix of the two, with only a few species-to-species transitions, and occasionally long time breaks in the lineage."
    ...[text shortened]... inking on why there are such huge gaps in the fossil record.

    There is no clear cut solution.
    ...and the quote continues:

    "Many laypeople even have the (incorrect) impression that the situation is even worse, and that there are no known transitions at all. Why are there still gaps? And why do many people think that there are even more gaps than there really are?"

    The long-windedness to which you refer ensues. Don't bother reading through it...there's no feel-good bible quotes in there.

    There is no clear cut solution.

    Fine. Can we at least agree that the biblical version of creation is complete nonsense?
  9. Standard memberHalitose
    I stink, ergo I am
    On the rebound
    Joined
    14 Jul '05
    Moves
    4464
    23 Nov '05 08:12
    Originally posted by David C
    ...and the quote continues:

    "Many laypeople even have the (incorrect) impression that the situation is even worse, and that there are no known transitions at all. Why are there still gaps? And why do many people think that there are even more gaps than there really are?"

    The long-windedness to which you refer ensues. Don't bother reading through it. ...[text shortened]... .


    Fine. Can we at least agree that the biblical version of creation is complete nonsense?[/b]
    I haven't read any feel-good Bible quotes lately, would you like to point me to some?

    Origin science is a matter of indoctrination/belief and mindset - add a little bit of non-scientific-method-type-science here. Both ends are only provable by their its own axioms and principles. A vicious circle, I'm afraid.
  10. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    23 Nov '05 09:011 edit
    Originally posted by Halitose
    I haven't read any feel-good Bible quotes lately, would you like to point me to some?
    Tho:16 (Patterson/Meyer) "Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war. For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."

    Not sure if that's feel-good or not. What do you think?
  11. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    23 Nov '05 09:011 edit
    whoops.
  12. Standard memberHalitose
    I stink, ergo I am
    On the rebound
    Joined
    14 Jul '05
    Moves
    4464
    23 Nov '05 09:051 edit
    Originally posted by David C
    Tho:16 (Patterson/Meyer) "Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war. For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."

    Not sure if that's feel-good or not. What do you think?
    Lol, no. I doesn't quite make the feel good notch for me.

    Edit:Rec'ed.
  13. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    23 Nov '05 09:071 edit
    Originally posted by AMX
    I'm curious, how come Dinosaur fossils are of complete dinosaurs? Where are the fossils from the millions of years of supposed development??
    One only has to remove the biblical blinders.
    If you were truly curious you would know the answer. But you are not curious you only wish to disprove evolution or at the least create some doubt around it because you believe that it does not fit well with your religous beliefs.

    Anyway, just in case I am wrong here is the answer:
    There is no such thing as a complete dinsoaur if what you mean by that is a fully evolved dinosoar. Evolution is not a progression from a non-evolved creature to a fully evolved creature but rather a continuous unending process. All living things today are in a continuous state of evolution. Some of the confusion amoungst the uneducated is caused by the attempts by biologists to classify living things and thus they have created definitions such as species for the purposes of classification. However you must not therefore think that one species evolves from one to another and is somehow a non-species while in between. Human beings for example come in various colours and sizes and although biologists have clasified them as one species because of thier ability to reproduce amoungst races, it is never the less clear to anyone who cares to look that every race/ tribe and group of humans has evolved into a slightly different being and continues to do so according to the rules of evolution which are far more complex than you probably realise. The assumption for example that Humans should evolve towards a more inteligent being is totaly unfounded. In fact it may be that humans in general are evolving the other way due to the tendancy for less wealthy people to bear more children. But to call them less evolved due to thier apparently simpler brains would be a total missunderstanding of evolution.
  14. Standard memberHalitose
    I stink, ergo I am
    On the rebound
    Joined
    14 Jul '05
    Moves
    4464
    23 Nov '05 09:13
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    [b]One only has to remove the biblical blinders.
    If you were truly curious you would know the answer. But you are not curious you only wish to disprove evolution or at the least create some doubt around it because you believe that it does not fit well with your religous beliefs.

    Anyway, just in case I am wrong here is the answer:
    There is no suc ...[text shortened]... evolved due to thier apparently simpler brains would be a total missunderstanding of evolution.[/b]
    And this can all be verified by the scienfic method? Smashing.
Back to Top