Summations Only

Bs'dYes. "The Eldredge-Gould concept of punctuated equilibria has gained wide acceptance among paleontologists. It attempts to account for the following paradox: Within continuously sampled lineages, one rarely finds the gradual morphological trends predicted by Darwinian evolution; rather, change occurs with the sudden appearance of new, well-differentiated species. Eldredge and Gould equate such appearances with speciation, although the details of these events are not preserved. .... The punctuated equilibrium model has been widely accepted, not because it has a compelling theoretical basis but because it appears to resolve a dilemma. Apart from the obvious sampling problems inherent to the observations that stimulated the model, and apart from its intrinsic circularity (one could argue that speciation can occur only when phyletic change is rapid, not vice versa), the model is more ad hoc explanation than theory, and it rests on shaky ground."Ricklefs, Robert E., "Paleontologists Confronting Macroevolution," Science, vol. 199, 1978, p. 59Robert E Ricklefs is an evolutionist and professor biology at the University of Missouri te St. Louis:
Robert E

Bs'dFor sure not in the fossil record, and that's the point of this discussion. I say it is more in line with the evidence.

Bs'dMy story is: God created them.I'm just trying to show that really there is no known alternative.

Bs'dThere we have it: When they agree with the ET the layers are correct, if they don't; they are inverted.With this kind of "science" you can proof about everything.

Bs'dIf nobody can tell me how new attributes are formed, then it is a kind of useless trying to learn about it....

Bs'dThe facts are the opposite. What the fossil record shows is that the fossils exhibit STASIS, non-change, even during millions of years in the fossil record. The fossil record shows that new species pop up suddenly, fully formed, without any link to supposed predecessors:Stasis, or non-change, of most fossil species during their lengthy geological lifespans was tacitly acknowledged by all paleontologists, but almost never studied explicitly because prevailing theory treated stasis as uninteresting nonevidence for nonevolution. .... The overwhelming prevalence of stasis became an embarrassing feature of the fossil record, best left ignored as a manifestation of nothing (that is, non-evolution)."Gould, Stephen J., "Cordelia's Dilemma," Natural History, 1993, p. 15
.
.
."Paleontologists just were not seeing the expected changes in their fossils as they pursued them up through the rock record. ... That individual kinds of fossils remain recognizably the same throughout the length of their occurrence in the fossil record had been known to paleontologists long before Darwin published his Origin. Darwin himself, .... prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search .... One hundred and twenty years of paleontological research later, it has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin's predictions. Nor is the problem a miserly fossil record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction is wrong.
The observation that species are amazingly conservative and static entities throughout long periods of time has all the qualities of the emperor's new clothes: everyone knew it but preferred to ignore it. Paleontologists, faced with a recalcitrant record obstinately refusing to yield Darwin's predicted pattern, simply looked the other way."Eldredge, N. and Tattersall, I., The Myths of Human Evolution, 1982, p. 45-46.
.
."Paleontologists have paid an enormous price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we almost never see the very process we profess to study. .... The history of most fossil species includes two features particularly inconsistent with gradualism:
1. Stasis. Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless.
2. Sudden appearance. In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed."Gould, Stephen J. The Panda's Thumb, 1980, p. 181-182
.
.
."The fossil record flatly fails to substantiate this expectation of finely graded change."Eldredge, N. and Tattersall, I., The Myths of Human Evolution, 1982, p. 163
.
.
."Given that evolution, according to Darwin, was in a continual state of motion .... it followed logically that the fossil record should be rife with examples of transitional forms leading from the less to more evolved. .... Instead of filling the gaps in the fossil record with so-called missing links, most paleontologists found themselves facing a situation in which there were only gaps in the fossil record, with no evidence of transformational evolutionary intermediates between documented fossil species."Schwartz, Jeffrey H., Sudden Origins, 1999, p. 89.Schwartz, Jeffrey H is professor anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh and also evolutionist, writer of boek about evolution: Sudden Origins, a provocative new theory on how evolution works by sudden leaps and bounds:
'Sudden Origins : Fossils, Genes, and the Emergence of Species' by Jeffrey H. Schwartz
.
.
."Species that were once thought to have turned into others have been found to overlap in time with these alleged descendants. In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another."Stanley, S.M., The New Evolutionary Timetable: Fossils, Genes, and the Origin of Species, 1981, p. 95, speaking about the Bighorn basin in Wyoming USA.S.M. Stanley is an American paleontologist and evolutionary biologist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
He wrote many articles, also together with Niles Eldredge, de co-inventor of the punctuated equilibrium theory.
One of his articles is Paleontology and earth system history in the new millennium which has been published in Geological Society of America
For more info about prof Stanley look here: Steven M. Stanley - Wikipedia
.
.
.I can go on like this for a while, but I assume you got the picture by now: The fossil record shows STASIS and sudden appearance of new fully formed species, and not evolution.
.
.
.

Bs'dSo what you are saying is: Mutations make new species with totally different attributes.The only problem is: Mutations cannot do that. The DNA is like a very long, very complicated code. When you start throwing monkey wrenches in the code, which is what mutations do, then you ruin the code, and not make it any better.Here are some expert opinions on the subject:
"Point mutations are, for an important part, responsible for what is sometimes called micro-evolution, or molecular evolution, that is to say: the continually progressing replacement of bases in homologous genes and of amino acids in the corresponding proteins during evolution. However, they probably were not involved much with the phenomenon which comprises much more of evolution, and led to the origin of increasingly complex life forms. Point mutations appear to have occurred with the same frequency throughout the entire evolutionary process and show no correlation to events that at certain moments have led rather abruptly to the emergence of new species."
Prof Christian de Duve, Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, De levende cel (The living cell), part 2."Point mutations or chromosomal rearrangements are themselves a limited source of variation for evolution because they can only alter a function or change on kind of function into another."An Introduction to Genetic Analysis, A.J.F. Griffiths, (university of Britisch Columbia) J.H. Miller, (university of California, Los Angeles) D.T. Suzuki, (university of Britisch Columbia) R.C. Lewinton, (Harvard University) W.M. Gelbart (Harvard University) 1996, blz 794"Evidence is accumulating which suggests that protein sequence evolution is not the only or even the most important basis of organismal evolution."
Biochemistry, pp. 131.http://www.weloennig.de/...of-Law-of-Recurrent-Variation.pdf"In accord with the law of recurrent variation, mutants in every species thoroughly examined (from pea to man) − whether naturally occurring, experimentally induced, or accidentally brought about − happen in a large, but nevertheless limited spectrum of phenotypes with either losses of functions or neutral deviations. Yet, in the absence of the generation of new genes and novel gene reaction chains with entirely new functions, mutations cannot transform an original species into an entirely new one. This conclusion agrees with all the experiences and results of mutation research of the 20th century taken together as well as with the laws of probability. Thus, the law of recurrent variation implies that genetically properly defined species have real boundaries that cannot be abolished or transgressed by accidental mutations."

Bs'dI can come up with MANY questions that evo's cannot answer.The point however, remains, that the fossil record is in agreement with creation, and rebuffs evolution.

Bs'dWell, I do have a life besides this forum... I'm glad you like it.Oh, and only in the fantasy of the evo's there is something rebutted.The fossil record shows only STASIS, non-change, and sudden appearance of new species, without a link to supposed predecessors.So really no evolution, but the opposite.Nothing is rebutted about that.The facts remain the facts."Species that were once thought to have turned into others have been found to overlap in time with these alleged descendants. In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another."Stanley, S.M., The New Evolutionary Timetable: Fossils, Genes, and the Origin of Species, 1981, p. 95, speaking about the Bighorn basin in Wyoming USA.
S.M. Stanley is an American paleontologist and evolutionary biologist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
He wrote many articles, also together with Niles Eldredge, de co-inventor of the punctuated equilibrium theory.
One of his articles is Paleontology and earth system history in the new millennium which has been published in Geological Society of America
For more info about prof Stanley look here: Steven M. Stanley - Wikipedia.
.
.