Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 112 (8748 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-24-2017 4:01 AM
403 online now:
bluegenes, CRR, frako, NoNukes, PaulK, Son Goku, vimesey (7 members, 396 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: kmastes01
Post Volume:
Total: 808,933 Year: 13,539/21,208 Month: 3,021/3,605 Week: 363/933 Day: 8/97 Hour: 0/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
18192021
22
23Next
Author Topic:   The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1605
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


(2)
Message 316 of 342 (720078)
02-20-2014 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by Eliyahu
02-20-2014 6:40 AM


Fossils support the theory of evolution
quote:
The point however, remains, that the fossil record is in agreement with creation, and rebuffs evolution.

Au contraire.

What's the creationist explanation for the biological assemblage zones in the Beaufort Group of the Karoo Sequence?

You can find out more about them starting at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karoo_Supergroup

It goes like this from bottom (1) to top (7):
1. Dinocephalian.
2. Pristerognathus-Diictodon
3. Tropidostoma-Endothiodon
4. Aulacephalodon-Cistecepthalus
5. Dicynodon Lacerticeps- Whaitsia
6. Lystrosaurus-Thrinaxodon
7. Kannemeyeria-Diademodon

It goes from the Permian Adelaide subgroup (bottom) to the Triassic Tarkastad subgroup (top).

Oh, and don't even try to find a creationist 'explanation' for them. They haven't even tried yet, apart from claiming some vague references to a magical Fluddy.

And also be very careful in explaining those jaw bones, from a creationist 'worldview'. Jaw bones don't get 'hydrologically sorted' not even without the rest of the fossils...

Oh, and if you want it, I can privately send you copies (if the mods allow it) of the pages of where I got my information from . Pages 535 to 548 of

South African Committee for Stratigraphy (SACS), 1980. Stratigraphy of South Africa. Part 1 (Comp. L.E. Kent). Lithostratigraphy of the Republics of South Africa, South West Africa (Namibia), and the Republics of Bophutatswana, Transkei and Venda: Handb. geol. Surv. S. Afr., 8

In it there's also a whole list of peer-reviewd geological and palaeontoloical articles on the subject (at least 78 direct references). I can also send you more than 30 more recent references on the subject. Your pick.

Edited by Pressie, : Changed the references.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Eliyahu, posted 02-20-2014 6:40 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15616
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.4


(3)
Message 317 of 342 (720085)
02-20-2014 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by Eliyahu
02-20-2014 6:40 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Disappear for a week, ignore the rebuttals, declare your assertions anew as if the prior discussion had never happened.

Nice strategy.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Eliyahu, posted 02-20-2014 6:40 AM Eliyahu has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 322 by Eliyahu, posted 02-23-2014 2:05 AM Percy has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13023
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 318 of 342 (720118)
02-20-2014 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by Eliyahu
02-20-2014 6:40 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Eliayahu writes:

I can come up with MANY questions that evo's cannot answer.


You mean you won't accept the answers.

Eliyahu writes:

The point however, remains, that the fossil record is in agreement with creation, and rebuffs evolution.


That "point" has been thoroughly flushed down the toilet in this thread. The only point you have established is that you don't understand your own sources.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Eliyahu, posted 02-20-2014 6:40 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


(5)
Message 319 of 342 (720130)
02-20-2014 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by Eliyahu
02-20-2014 6:40 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
I can come up with MANY questions that evo's cannot answer.

And yet you can't even come up with one.

The point however, remains, that the fossil record is in agreement with creation, and rebuffs evolution.

Buying a trophy at the trophy shop does not make you a champion. Declaring yourself the winner while ignoring all of the evidence is extremely dishonest.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Eliyahu, posted 02-20-2014 6:40 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3427
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 7.4


(5)
Message 320 of 342 (720346)
02-21-2014 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 314 by Eliyahu
02-20-2014 6:40 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
I can come up with MANY questions that evo's cannot answer.

And I can come up with MANY questions that you, your creos, your torah and your gods cannot answer.

And the undeniable fact still remains that the fossil record, is not just in agreement with, but is the very proof of evolution and not just rebuffs but totally shreds your genesis myth.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Eliyahu, posted 02-20-2014 6:40 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by RAZD, posted 02-22-2014 12:30 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18455
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 321 of 342 (720381)
02-22-2014 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 320 by AZPaul3
02-21-2014 9:22 PM


Transitional Fossils validate evolution and the theory of evolution
And the undeniable fact still remains that the fossil record, is not just in agreement with, but is the very proof of evolution and not just rebuffs but totally shreds your genesis myth.

Indeed, there is even a thread on that topic: Transitional Fossils Show Evolution in Process.

Fossils are a test of the theory of evolution, each new find has the potential to challenge the theory and none have.


we are limited in our ability to understand
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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by AZPaul3, posted 02-21-2014 9:22 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 286
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 322 of 342 (720411)
02-23-2014 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 317 by Percy
02-20-2014 9:26 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Disappear for a week, ignore the rebuttals, declare your assertions anew as if the prior discussion had never happened.

Bs'd

Well, I do have a life besides this forum...

Nice strategy.

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: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_M._Stanley

.
.
.



"Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory."

Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Percy, posted 02-20-2014 9:26 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by Percy, posted 02-23-2014 2:36 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 324 by edge, posted 02-23-2014 10:12 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 325 by edge, posted 02-23-2014 10:24 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 330 by Taq, posted 02-24-2014 11:24 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 331 by AZPaul3, posted 02-25-2014 6:49 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 332 by RAZD, posted 03-04-2014 9:18 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 333 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-04-2014 2:42 PM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15616
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 323 of 342 (720412)
02-23-2014 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Eliyahu
02-23-2014 2:05 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Hi Eliyahu,

This isn't a discussion if your responses ignore the rebuttals while repeating your position. It's witnessing or preaching, not discussion.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Eliyahu, posted 02-23-2014 2:05 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 3800
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 324 of 342 (720426)
02-23-2014 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Eliyahu
02-23-2014 2:05 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
The fossil record shows only STASIS, non-change, and sudden appearance of new species, ....

So, you are saying that going from Cambrian fossil communities through the Paleozoic communities and on to Mezozoic dinosaurs, and then on to mammals and ultimately humans is stasis? Please explain.

... without a link to supposed predecessors.

So, then, tiktaalik does not provide a link between marine species and land-dwelling species? Why not?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Eliyahu, posted 02-23-2014 2:05 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3800
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(2)
Message 325 of 342 (720427)
02-23-2014 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Eliyahu
02-23-2014 2:05 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Probably a wast of time, but with respect to your Stanley quote:

"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: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_M._Stanley

I'm sure that you have been taken to task on this quote mine before but, just for the record, I will refer you to a more complete quote from Stanley:

A more complete quote would be:

"Superb fossil data have recently been gathered from deposits of early Cenozoic Age in the Bighorn Basin of Wyoming. These deposits represent the first part of the Eocene Epoch, a critical interval when many types of modern mammals came into being. The Bighorn Basin, in the shadow of the Rocky Mountains, received large volumes of sediment from the Rockies when they were being uplifted, early in the Age of Mammals. In its remarkable degree of completeness, the fossil record here for the Early Eocene is unmatched by contemporary deposits exposed elsewhere in the world. The deposits of the Bighorn Basin provide a nearly continuous local depositional record for this interval, which lasted some five million years. It used to be assumed that certain populations of the basin could be linked together in such a way as to illustrate continuous evolution. Careful collecting has now shown otherwise. 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. Furthermore, species lasted for astoundingly long periods of time. David M. Schankler has recently gathered data for about eighty mammal species that are known from more than two stratigraphic levels in the Bighorn Basin. Very few of these species existed for less than half a million years, and their average duration was greater than a million years."

So we see that Stanley wasn't talking about the fossil record in general, but the fossil record in the Bighorn Basin.

- Jon (Augray) Barber
(emphasis added)
http://www.talkorigins.org/...uotes/mine/part1-1.html#quote7


I repeat my earlier commentary that quote mining is not just lying, it is stealing.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Eliyahu, posted 02-23-2014 2:05 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by RAZD, posted 02-23-2014 11:16 AM edge has responded
 Message 327 by NoNukes, posted 02-23-2014 12:39 PM edge has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18455
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 326 of 342 (720429)
02-23-2014 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 325 by edge
02-23-2014 10:24 AM


Re: Fossils display evolution in spades ...
I'm sure that you have been taken to task on this quote mine before but, just for the record, I will refer you to a more complete quote from Stanley:
quote:
He wrote many articles, also together with Niles Eldredge, de co-inventor of the punctuated equilibrium theory.

quote:
So we see that Stanley wasn't talking about the fossil record in general, but the fossil record in the Bighorn Basin.

And he was not saying that evolution did not occur, nor was not evident in the fossil record, but that there was stasis observed in many species, that parent species continued to exist after daughter species appeared, and he was comparing punk-eek to gradualism.

None of this disproves evolution.

Note that this is also the location and timing for the Pelycodus fossil transitions mentioned in Msg 5: falsification by evidence: the fossil record does show evolution:

quote:
When punctuated equilibrium occurs there is an explanation for it, but it isn't a universal occurrence.

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/pelycodus.html

quote:

The dashed lines show the overall trend. The species at the bottom is Pelycodus ralstoni, but at the top we find two species, Notharctus nunienus and Notharctus venticolus. The two species later became even more distinct, and the descendants of nunienus are now labeled as genus Smilodectes instead of genus Notharctus.

As you look from bottom to top, you will see that each group has some overlap with what came before. There are no major breaks or sudden jumps. And the form of the creatures was changing steadily.


oops again eh?


Probably a wast of time, ...

Seeing as he has continued to repeat falsified claims since the beginning of this thread with no admission or allowance of being invalidated he is either trolling or incapable of understanding falsification. So yeah, a waste of time as far as trying to educate him on the facts and the evidence of reality.

But the more he continues the more he shows how bankrupt this creationist type of argument is when dealing with reality.


we are limited in our ability to understand
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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by edge, posted 02-23-2014 10:24 AM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 328 by edge, posted 02-23-2014 12:58 PM RAZD has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9537
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 327 of 342 (720436)
02-23-2014 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 325 by edge
02-23-2014 10:24 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Probably a wast of time, but with respect to your Stanley quote:

Not a waste of time. One of the best single rebuttals to the topic of this thread I've read.

Eliyahu's proposition is clearly wrong. Does not mean he needs to accept the scientific position, but the idea that science is inconsistent with evolution is surely a non starter.

I repeat my earlier commentary that quote mining is not just lying, it is stealing.

Curiously enough, I find the lying part more objectionable when it occurs. But most quote mining I see here is not quite up to that level because the poster has not actually seen the source material. Almost certainly this quote is from one of the zillion web pages you can find which only present the supposedly convincing info.

Of course, I have yet to see any Creationist back off after being exposed, and the present perp is no exception.

Edited by NoNukes, : add comment about lying liars


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by edge, posted 02-23-2014 10:24 AM edge has not yet responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 3800
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(2)
Message 328 of 342 (720438)
02-23-2014 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 326 by RAZD
02-23-2014 11:16 AM


Re: Fossils display evolution in spades ...
And he was not saying that evolution did not occur, ...

It is truly a wonder that so many 'evolutionists' say so many anti-evolutionary things, isn't it?

... nor was not evident in the fossil record, but that there was stasis observed in many species, that parent species continued to exist after daughter species appeared, ...

It puzzles my why 'evos' didn't see this one coming.

... and he was comparing punk-eek to gradualism.

Oh, so many details!

But then, Eli seems also to ignore the tiny detail that PE is evolution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by RAZD, posted 02-23-2014 11:16 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 329 by RAZD, posted 02-24-2014 8:02 AM edge has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18455
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 329 of 342 (720471)
02-24-2014 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 328 by edge
02-23-2014 12:58 PM


Fossils gaps display evolution as well
But then, Eli seems also to ignore the tiny detail that PE is evolution.

And that gaps in the fossil record don't invalidate evolution.

For instance, Coelacanths were thought to have gone extinct 66 million years ago (during the CretaceousPaleogene extinction event), and then modern species were found, the first in 1938 off the east coast of South Africa, and a second species more recently in the Indian Ocean off the shores of Indonesia.

Did this group of fishes go extinct and then were re-created? Or is there a 65 million year gap in the fossil record? Have they been in stasis for 65 million years?

Nope, the living species are not the same as the prehistoric species -- they have evolved:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth

quote:
... Traditionally, the coelacanth was considered a living fossil due to its apparent lack of significant evolution over the past millions of years;[3] and the coelacanth was thought to have evolved into roughly its current form approximately 400 million years ago.[5] However, several recent studies have shown that coelacanth body shapes are much more diverse than is generally said.[6][7][8] In addition, it was shown recently that studies concluding that a slow rate of molecular evolution is linked to morphological conservatism in coelacanths are biased on the a priori hypothesis that these species are living fossils.[9]

So slow phyletic evolution over 65 million years ... a long period with little significant change.

The same can be said for other "living fossils" ... such as crocodilians.

Stasis does not mean no evolution, it means selection is towards conservation rather than change, and without significant change in the ecology there is no selection pressure for significant change.


we are limited in our ability to understand
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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by edge, posted 02-23-2014 12:58 PM edge has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


(1)
Message 330 of 342 (720492)
02-24-2014 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Eliyahu
02-23-2014 2:05 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
The fossil record shows only STASIS,

That doesn't look like stasis to me.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Eliyahu, posted 02-23-2014 2:05 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
18192021
22
23Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017