|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 13/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Great Creationist Fossil Failure | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: Not at all. They can be related. But if you are relying on physiology as your evidence of evolution, and that physiology is inconsistent it ruins your evidence. They could be related or they could be unique species. There is in some cases a recently adapted clade which can be convincing, other than that most evolutionary sequences are unconvincing because of these sudden jumps in physiology in one feature which ruins the sequence and seems to indicate a unique species. I know under evolutionary assumption they remain related because of their close physiology, but as evidence against creationism the sequence is ruined if it is not completely convincing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: One determines similar physiology between two fossils by looking at the physiology of both fossils. If one cannot find any earlier fossil of similar physiology then that fossil can be regarded as "fully formed". Fully formed fossils are evidence that favors creationism. Unfortunately many many organisms just appear fully formed with no evidence of any predecessor.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: Creationism predicts that all kinds were created at one moment in the past. Therefore all current organisms will be found through all layers in approximately the same form as modern organisms. After the flood , ark animals were too small in number to reflect significant fossilisation. In the pre-Cambrian, alive organisms are less likely to be buried, it is the organisms of short life spans that would have been buried in precambrian strata. Much (not all) of the early landscape was marine anoxic and sulfuric with limited species therein. The angiosperm non-aquatic low oxygen landscape of today was restricted to Siberian highlands in pre-flood times (before the transgression /regression of the PT boundary). This is the only early landscape that would explain the sudden later appearance of fully formed grasses and mammals (rabbits). Late Permian to early Triassic layers are largely flood related. First marine reptiles then large flightless birds dominated the post-flood landscape (Triassic/Jurassic) until mammals spread out from the ark. There was an impact event that cause the eventual extinction of the dinosaurs and large flightless birds , and the subsequent dominance of ark mammals on most landscapes. Thus mammals were not numerous enough and were possibly confined to Turkey during the period that these previously marine reptiles dominated the continents during the Triassic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: That is very unfair of you to say. I am replying to a lot of questions and if I do not get to all of them rapidly this is no excuse or subject change. In fact I do not find any question this thread challenging at all. Due to the evidence favoring creationism and a later flood as reflected in the geology of the PT boundary which shows this strong transgression and regression at the PT boundary. And it is evolutionists who have the excuses, it is creationists that have the evidence of the sudden appearance of multiple organisms fully formed as expected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: All you say about evolution is nice in theory. My point is that an evolutionary sequence simply has to be convincing. And with zero convincing sequences what is evolution left with. An interesting concept. Interesting theory you guys have. But if your evidence for this great theory of yours is faulty, do not expect it just to be accepted because you say so. If one species in your sequence does not fit, it should be disregarded as evidence. I state the obvious.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
You seem to dispute a widespread transgression/regression event at the PT boundary. The following link references many studies about this matter as listed below. The evidence shows that both occurred. The bible indicates this widespread flood followed by a rapid regression, which explains the evidence. Often a regression will cause a hiatus, washing away the evidence of the transgression, but generally the signs of both occurring are widespread at the PT boundary:
http://www.geo.tu-freiberg.de/...eminar/os03_04/herrmann.pdf""Sea level changes at Permian Triassic boundary are a widespread discussed subject in the last three decades and there are still discussions about it. Every theory has facts that seem to be correct. In comparison to palaeoclimatology a transgression is to be favoured, because of the decline of the ice sheet in the Upper Permian in combination with a heating. On the other hand isotope studies from HEYDARI et al. (2001) show another trend, which also seems to be true. In general, there is no trend that sedimentological analysis gave other results as geochemical, in every scientific field of geology there is confusion. What theory is the right, isn't presume to say"" [ Long cut-n-paste of the references from the above link deleted, please see link for the references. --Admin ] Edited by Admin, : Remove long list of references.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: That is a bit rich coming from evolutionists who are the masters of bad excuses for their lack of fossils. The Siberian highlands is the niche environment most obviously matching today's common environment. So of course that is the place to look for ancient representations of modern organisms. Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: Yes yes, I have heard that before. Yet the only evidence presented for human transitions is a pic of some skulls, unlabelled may I add. Unless I have missed a post which actually tries to present some evidence. Maybe I missed a post? If so I would like to deal with it. Label them with their species name, I will look up the transitionary sequence and see if it is logical. If your sequence is not logical your point is irrelevant. I dare you. show me your so-called evidence for evolution. A list of species, named, and dated , in a transitionary sequence from non-human apes and leading to modern humans. Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: ? Have they discovered a hidden cache of lovely PreCambrian intermediate fossils to explain the sudden appearance of most phyla in the Cambrian Explosion?? I think not. When things just appear, the better explanation is that they just appeared. That is what the evidence is showing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: Please be more specific about the trace fossils. If arthropods existed earlier than expected this could merely be confirmation of earlier trilobites not necessarily confirmation of their PREDECESSOR. ie please post more detail about the physiology of the earlier arthropods to make your point relevant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: Please post your proof of evolution. Instead of a pretty picture, a list of actual species over time that show changes beyond a clade. What is outrageously ridiculous is your claim that evolution exists without any proof. The more you guys mock the obvious location of a biome similar to ours in Siberia, the more I mention .... ahem...... the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION.... hehe Sure we are both missing fossils. You keep digging in the PreCambrian desperately hoping for some evidence that evolution exists, in the meantime I will watch the evidence to come out of the Siberian highlands. Deal?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
You seem to dispute flooding at the PT boundary. Kindly refer to my recent post showing evidence for a significant transgressive and regressive event at the PT boundary.
quote: I seemed to miss your evidence of Paleozoic fossils from specifically the Siberian highland area of the Paleozoic. Kindly post a link. It is that precise area which would have the climatic/atmospheric conditions conducive to modern prevalent lifeforms (angiosperms/mammals/birds)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: So in fact you have no evidence for any predecessor to the trilobite. Nothing. Yes sure you can surmise they existed, but that is on the level of fantasy. Reality is they suddenly appeared fully formed as did MANY phyla at that time, the evidence favors creationism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
This is an evidence based website. I posted my evidence about an earlier "boreal cradle" of life showing traces of angiosperms, ie an environment like today in the Paleozoic. I admitted my lack of mammal/bird fossils but pointed to where they will be found, giving my reasons. I posted my evidence that most phyla appear fully formed in the Cambrian without any intermediates. I posted my evidence of flooding at the PT boundary.
I have done my research. I have even admitted where I lack. All you can do is appeal to the fact that evolution is widely accepted. Yet no-one has the guts to post anything to support it. If the evidence is so widespread, where is it? You guys are posting pictures of so-called transitionals without detailed explanations. Hmmm pretty damning to evolution if you guys represent the theory.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2689 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
quote: Thank you for the graph in post 1054. Yes that is what I am looking for. I missed this post earlier. Give me a day or two to look into it. I appreciate the attempt to give evidence for your position. Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024