|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
The fact is that NOTHING can ever disprove evolution. It's made of Silly Putty. This would: A rabbit in the precambrian. There's so many things that could disprove evolution that we even have clichs for them. The problem is that everything actually does confirm the idea. You know, 'cause its right. The problem is that nothing has ever disproved it, but not that nothing can ever. There's plenty of things that could like, literally, a rabbit in the precambrian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2877 days) Posts: 397 Joined:
|
Y'all be bad mouthin' creashun science. Faith don't like that kinda blasphemy.
"Silly putty" and "mud pies" are tuff arguments to debate. She has certainly put y'all in your place! Creation science has much to offer. There are seminars, symposia, conferences, museums and social meetups. If you are a Christian lurker, you might be asking yourself, "As an adult interested in arresting the intellectual development and curiosity of a young mind, what can I do to help?" You can engage in indoctrination for the kids, help out in summer camps, be an advisor for a club or perhaps become a teacher in a preschool program. Get 'em while they're young before the mind has matured sufficiently, otherwise they'll just laugh you to scorn.Carry on the abuse to the next generation. It's a tradition. Here's an idea for a fun new tradition. When you and your spouse bring a soul into the world speak to him/her in a made up non-existent language until they are about 12 years of age. Then watch as they try to cope with the world. It's a fun joke to play that will provide lots of entertainment! The first tradition is probably more damaging, but why limit the fun to just one!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
The fact is that NOTHING can ever disprove evolution. You may have inadvertently told the truth --- it is almost certainly the case that nothing can disprove evolution. As you are a creationist, I presume that you intended to pretend that nothing would disprove evolution, which is obviously false: lots of things would disprove it if they were actually true. For example the one thing Eliyahu is quite right about is that it would disprove evolution if there was no sign of it in the fossil record. That's why the little liar is wasting so much energy in pretending that this is the case. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
This would: A rabbit in the precambrian. Naa, you'd just "prove" it was a hoax somehow or other, and blame it on creationists too of course, or it accidentally got dislodged and displaced somehow, or you'd misidentified that layer. You'd come up with something.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
Naa, you'd just "prove" it was a hoax somehow or other, and blame it on creationists too of course, or it accidentally got dislodged and displaced somehow, or you'd misidentified that layer. You'd come up with something. If a creationist found it, yes. It would be regarded as an outright fabrication until shown otherwise by some evidence. Creationists' reputation for scientific accuracy leaves much to be desired. And it is a reputation that has been well-earned. Just look at the many creationist websites. Or your posts here. You are a poster-girl for that well-earned reputation. You think you are "winning" these debates, but in reality you are showing large numbers of lurkers just how duplicitous the creationist position really is. St. Augustine was right: Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. Yup. You're the poster-girl for this sorry state of affairs.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Naa, you'd just "prove" it was a hoax somehow or other, and blame it on creationists too of course, or it accidentally got dislodged and displaced somehow, or you'd misidentified that layer. You'd come up with something. So now you're playing make-believe about what people would do under a set of imaginary circumstances? Can I join in? If you saw a magic unicorn, you'd crap yourself. That's my imaginary made-up story, and I'm sticking to it. Of course, if you could find something which did actually disprove evolution, you wouldn't have to play make-believe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
But, unfortunately for you, creationists are not the ones likely to come up with those things. And it most certainly will not be done by cherry picking quote-mines. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
But, unfortunately for you, creationists are not the ones likely to come up with those things. And it most certainly will not be done by cherry picking quote-mines. When the bible and scripture are your sources of evidence, and rhetoric and apologetics are your methods, quote-mining is a natural way of doing things. And, as usual, the exact opposite of real science.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
There's so much that disproves evolution, where to start? Well, start with the fact that you DON'T have the transitionals Darwin said you'd have to have. You have a few paltry wannabe transitionals, but nothing like the great number and variety Darwin knew were required. But that doesn't stop evolution. 'Cuz it's Silly Putty, it can be shaped any way you like it.
The mere appearance of created things disproves it, so clearly the result of a Creative Intelligence, not mindless physical and chemical accidents. But you deny that too, pretend an Intelligence is not needed. Invent scenarios, Interpretations, call them Fact, say This happened, That happened, as if it really did. Silly Putty. Then there's the Flood, which so nicely accounts for the strata and the fossils but you can just assert it doesn't and make up Likely Stories out of bits and pieces of known fact but mostly sheer imagination, say you've disproved the Flood. Yes, just say it, that's all you have to do, name it and it's true. Silly Putty. Darwin declared that what was known to have genetic causes, i.e. microevolution or the well known variation within Species, which is the ONLY known "descent with modification," was capable of producing new Species. Simply declared it, no evidence, no proof, just rename things and there you have it. And ever since that's all that's happened, the renaming of everything. Silly Putty. Mental transformation. Word Magic. It's all a mass delusion. Fascinating. Amazing. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 2288 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
And the deception that those quote mines employ is outline here: Quote Mine Project: "Lack of Identifiable
Phylogeny" Bs'd OK, just copy and paste a few here and we'll discuss them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
OK, just copy and paste a few here and we'll discuss them. BfD Want to discuss evidence instead? I know creationists are big on rhetoric and apologetics, but scientists prefer to rely on evidence. You know, data! Got any?Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 2288 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
About the part of your message from where you say "I'll say something about them" up until where you say "If you want me to say more about the fossiles, just let me know", isn't that all just unattributed cut-n-pastes from the web? Bs'd Yes it is. And that's because those people are all evolutionistic paleontologists or zoologists, or something like that, so they know much more about the subject than me. Therefore I quote them. If you want to know who exactly said what, then you can look HERE.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
And that's because those people are all evolutionistic paleontologists or zoologists, or something like that, so they know much more about the subject than me. Therefore I quote them. I also know a lot more about the subject than you do. That was half of my study for several years preparing for my Ph.D. exams. And since you like quotes, you can quote me on this: "You are wrong." OK?Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 2288 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
I've seen the fossil record, something you cannot claim. I studied it intensely for several years for my Ph.D. exams. Your use of quote-mined quotations as "evidence" does not impress me. Bs'd So what you are trying to say is, all those big evolutionists like Gould, Eldredge, and all the others mentioned HERE, who say with one voice that the fossil record shows only STASIS, and not evolution, they are all wrong, and only you are right. Sorry for not believing that. There is a very simple and irrifutable proof that my quotes are right, and that is the punctuated equilibrium theory. If the fossil record showed species turning into other species, who would need PE? PE is a desperate attempt to give an explanation for the total lack of evolution in the fossil record. Therefore PE says that the evolution happened very quickly in short burst, seperated by long periods of stasis, in geographically isolated regions. And that is why we cannot find any proof for it. Thus the evo's try to explain the fact that there is not the slightest proof for evolution in the fossil record. But, like I said, the fossil record is totally in line with creation, and disproves evolution. And that's just the way it is. "It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. .... Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and (we) both reject this alternative." Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1987, p. 229. Richard Dawkins is very well known evolutionist en author and professor zoology at the Oxford university. Yes! I am DELIGHTED by the fossile record!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
BfD
So what you are trying to say is, all those big evolutionists like Gould, Eldredge, and all the others mentioned HERE, who say with one voice that the fossil record shows only STASIS, and not evolution, they are all wrong, and only you are right. When you rely only on quote-mining, and have no idea of what the actual evidence says, you could come to that erroneous conclusion.
Sorry for not believing that. There is a very simple and irrifutable proof that my quotes are right, and that is the punctuated equilibrium theory. If the fossil record showed species turning into other species, who would need PE? Your understanding of the PE theory, and all of evolution, is faulty. The standard theory, before there was a lot of data either way, seemed to show a gradual progression. The PE theory suggested that in some cases evolution went in spurts. That's not such a big jump, now is it?
PE is a desperate attempt to give an explanation for the total lack of evolution in the fossil record. Therefore PE says that the evolution happened very quickly in short burst, seperated by long periods of stasis, in geographically isolated regions. So? Why should we believe that the pace of evolutionary change was the exact same in all places, for all species, throughout all of time? That would be pretty silly, now wouldn't it?
And that is why we cannot find any proof for it. In science we look for evidence. Proof is left to mathematics, distilling, and photography.
Thus the evo's try to explain the fact that there is not the slightest proof for evolution in the fossil record. But, like I said, the fossil record is totally in line with creation, and disproves evolution. And that's just the way it is. No, that's the way you believe it is. What you believe and what the evidence shows are clearly widely separated. But you go ahead and rely on rhetoric and apologetics. Just leave science alone. You are clearly unqualified to render any opinion in that field. And just once more: your reliance on "proof," which characterizes creationists all over the world, is very telling. It shows you are ignorant of the scientific method. Here are a couple of definitions which, if you actually learned them, might make a difference: Proof: Except for math and geometry, there is little that is actually proved. Even well-established scientific theories can't be conclusively proved, because--at least in principle--a counter-example might be discovered. Scientific theories are always accepted provisionally, and are regarded as reliable only because they are supported (not proved) by the verifiable facts they purport to explain and by the predictions which they successfully make. All scientific theories are subject to revision (or even rejection) if new data are discovered which necessitates this. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024