Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8803 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-20-2017 11:17 PM
360 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: DC85
Post Volume:
Total: 822,733 Year: 27,339/21,208 Month: 1,252/1,714 Week: 95/365 Day: 51/44 Hour: 1/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2728
29
30313233Next
Author Topic:   Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win.
Admin
Director
Posts: 12534
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 421 of 489 (776270)
01-11-2016 9:58 AM


Moderator On Duty Soon
I was moderator for this thread when it first opened, but later transitioned to a participant role. Now I'm transitioning back to my moderator role, beginning tomorrow.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13874
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 422 of 489 (776271)
01-11-2016 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 418 by Blue Jay
01-10-2016 10:33 PM


Blue jay writes:

I don't know about you, but personally, I think I'm better at identifying fake photographs than I am at identifying fake fossils;


I'm not talking about us personally. I'm talking about the scientific community.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 418 by Blue Jay, posted 01-10-2016 10:33 PM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 558 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(1)
Message 423 of 489 (776272)
01-11-2016 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 415 by jar
01-09-2016 10:46 PM


jar writes:

Ah, yes. If the evidence for giants really did get out it would certainly derail the plans to ... to ... to...

Downsize.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence


This message is a reply to:
 Message 415 by jar, posted 01-09-2016 10:46 PM jar has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13874
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 424 of 489 (776273)
01-11-2016 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 419 by Big_Al35
01-11-2016 9:38 AM


Big_aL35 writes:

This says to me that you need to do some background reading first. I can't and more importantly won't do this for you.


This is a science forum, so that is in fact exactly what you have to do if you want to be taken seriously - present your evidence. Otherwise, you might as well be Dr. Seuss.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Big_Al35, posted 01-11-2016 9:38 AM Big_Al35 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 425 by RAZD, posted 01-11-2016 10:46 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19220
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 425 of 489 (776276)
01-11-2016 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 424 by ringo
01-11-2016 10:40 AM


Don't insult Dr Seuss.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 424 by ringo, posted 01-11-2016 10:40 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15972
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 426 of 489 (776286)
01-11-2016 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 419 by Big_Al35
01-11-2016 9:38 AM


Imagine the globalists have plans A, B, C, D, E and F. Now imagine that plan F was to supress all knowledge of giants. It's hard to understand why they would want to do that isn't it?

But if you have an inkling of what other globalist plans there are on the table it might be easier to believe that they want to proceed with plan F too. I know you are now going to ask me 'what are their other plans'? Well if you were to ask me that question it suggests to me that you have no idea of ANY globalist plans. Heck, some have even asked me what the hell a globalist is.

This says to me that you need to do some background reading first. I can't and more importantly won't do this for you. Some here would like it if I spoon fed them all the data but sadly that's not going to happen. Others might already have the information and some won't lift so much as a finger to find out. That's up to them.

So the ball is pretty much in your court. If you don't know what a globalist is - YOU need to find out. If you don't know ANY of their plans - YOU need to find out. And if you don't want to find out - I couldn't give a monkeys.

But I do remember Big Al being so much smarter than this. He used to be pretty much the most reasonable creationist we had. And he never mentioned the evil globalists.

So, I'm gonna call it. Big Al, you're just trolling us now, aren't you? You're having fun, right?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Big_Al35, posted 01-11-2016 9:38 AM Big_Al35 has not yet responded

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 558 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(2)
Message 427 of 489 (776294)
01-11-2016 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 419 by Big_Al35
01-11-2016 9:38 AM


Waiting for Bartleby
Big_Al35 writes:

This says to me that you need to do some background reading first. I can't and more importantly won't do this for you. Some here would like it if I spoon fed them all the data but sadly that's not going to happen. Others might already have the information and some won't lift so much as a finger to find out. That's up to them.

So the ball is pretty much in your court. If you don't know what a globalist is - YOU need to find out. If you don't know ANY of their plans - YOU need to find out. And if you don't want to find out - I couldn't give a monkeys.

So if you make claims without evidence in the future, no one should bother asking for evidence, and the less we ask, the less you'll say?

Cool.

Personally, I'd suspend your big fat al for refusing to honor your agreement to abide by the rules of the forum, but that's just me.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence


This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Big_Al35, posted 01-11-2016 9:38 AM Big_Al35 has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12534
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.8


(3)
Message 428 of 489 (776331)
01-12-2016 7:37 AM


Moderator Rulings
I have a few rulings:

  • The Globalists are off topic. Anyone who would like to discuss the Globalists or other conspiracy theories should open a thread in Coffee House.

  • Discussion should be related to the topic, which is fossil support for the theory of evolution. For example, any discussion of giant humans must be accompanied by legitimate fossil evidence, and it should be made clear how they constitute evidence against evolution.

  • Evidence must be legitimate. Photoshopped images are not acceptable. Fabricated fossils are not acceptable.

  • Legitimate non-fossil evidence is acceptable if it can be connected to the topic.

  • Claims and assertions should be supported with evidence. Unsupported assertions from any source are not acceptable.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15972
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 429 of 489 (797350)
01-17-2017 10:19 PM


Sucky Whale
An interesting new intermediate form is described here.
  
aristotle
Junior Member (Idle past 66 days)
Posts: 16
Joined: 06-15-2017


Message 430 of 489 (812347)
06-16-2017 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dr Adequate
09-03-2015 1:02 AM


So you show some pictures of some fossils and you think that proves anything?

The fossil record should, if evolution is correct, show us each transitional species that lead on to the next. Where are they?

There are several different forms, but nothing in between.

The fossil record does not support evolution, please show me all the thousands, if not millions, of transitional species that go in between those few fossils you showed. Maybe then you'll actually have a leg to stand on.

As it is, the fossil record discovered since Darwin shows stasis and saltation. He told us to relinquish his theory if no transitional species were found, why don't you take his advice?

Regards, aristotle


"I have learned from my own embarrassing experience how easy it is to concoct remarkably persuasive Darwinian explanations that evaporate on closer inspection." - Daniel Dennet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-03-2015 1:02 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 431 by RAZD, posted 06-16-2017 6:07 AM aristotle has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19220
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 431 of 489 (812350)
06-16-2017 6:07 AM
Reply to: Message 430 by aristotle
06-16-2017 5:42 AM


So you show some pictures of some fossils and you think that proves anything?

The fossil record should, if evolution is correct, show us each transitional species that lead on to the next. Where are they?

There are several different forms, but nothing in between.

The fossil record does not support evolution, please show me all the thousands, if not millions, of transitional species that go in between those few fossils you showed. Maybe then you'll actually have a leg to stand on.

As it is, the fossil record discovered since Darwin shows stasis and saltation. He told us to relinquish his theory if no transitional species were found, why don't you take his advice?

Typical creationist baloney.

quote:
The Foram Fossils A Classic Tale of Transition

But to paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of Darwinism's death are highly exaggerated. The fossil record may be full of holes, but the venerable theory of speciation via slow change over vast stretches of time is backed by formidable evidence derived from both the fossil record and the field of population genetics. And once the findings of two FSU paleontologists become well-known, the whole restive world of evolutionary biology may wake up to find that Darwin indeed had it basically right all along.

Drs. Tony Arnold (Ph.D., Harvard) and Bill Parker (Ph.D., Chicago) are the developers of what reportedly is the largest, most complete set of data ever compiled on the evolutionary history of an organism. The two scientists have painstakingly pieced together a virtually unbroken fossil record that shows in stunning detail how a single-celled marine organism has evolved during the past 66 million years. Apparently, it's the only fossil record known to science that has no obvious gaps -- no "missing links."

"It's all here -- a complete record," says Arnold. "There are other good examples, but this is by far the best. We're seeing the whole picture of how this organism has changed throughout most of its existence on Earth."

The famous naturalist always held that new plants and animals arise from unstable varieties sprung off from old species. Competition among varieties, pressured by the law of "survival of the fittest," inevitably leads to populations that are so profoundly different that they become sexually incompatible (incapable of producing offspring) with populations other than themselves. And voila, a new species is born.

The pattern is exactly what Arnold and Parker have found in the forams. It is but one of a number of observations that the FSU team has made thus far about what arguably is nature's crowning achievement -- the act of speciation itself.

"We've literally seen hundreds of speciation events," Arnold added. "This allows us to check for patterns, to determine what exactly is going on. We can quickly tell whether something is a recurring phenomenon -- a pattern -- or whether it's just an anomaly.

"This way, we can not only look for the same things that have been observed in living organisms, but we can see just how often these things really happen in the environment over an enormous period of time."

Adherents of Darwin's theory of gradualism, in which new species slowly branch off from original stock, should be delighted by what the FSU researchers have found. The foram record clearly reveals a robust, highly branched evolutionary tree, complete with Darwin's predicted "dead ends" -- varieties that lead nowhere -- and a profusion of variability in sizes and body shapes. Moreover, transitional forms between species are readily apparent, making it relatively easy to track ancestor species to their descendants.

In short, the finding upholds Darwin's lifelong conviction that "nature does not proceed in leaps," but rather is a system perpetually growing in extreme slow-motion. This means that, in foram evolution at least, the highly touted Eldredge-Gould theory of punctuated equilibrium apparently doesn't work.

In divulging this revelation, Arnold could be forgiven for taking a modicum of perverse glee, the kind a highschool smart-aleck displays when he catches the teacher in a mistake. Gould, now among the most famous scientists in the world, directed Arnold's Harvard dissertation. But there's no room for that here, he says. Arnold maintains a warm professional relationship with his former mentor, who paid his lab a visit when FSU's Distinguished Lecture Series brought him to campus last year. Gould concedes that the forams don't fit his model of punctuated equilibrium, Arnold said.

"He was characteristically pleased to be contradicted with this information.


Sorry, you assertion is false. Will you be "characteristically pleased to be contradicted with this information"?

Enjoy

... as you are new here, some posting tips:

type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:

quotes are easy

and you can type [qs=RAZD]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:

RAZD writes:

quotes are easy

or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:

quote:
quotes are easy

also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.

For other formatting tips see Posting Tips
For a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer
If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 430 by aristotle, posted 06-16-2017 5:42 AM aristotle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 432 by aristotle, posted 06-16-2017 7:37 AM RAZD has responded

  
aristotle
Junior Member (Idle past 66 days)
Posts: 16
Joined: 06-15-2017


Message 432 of 489 (812359)
06-16-2017 7:37 AM
Reply to: Message 431 by RAZD
06-16-2017 6:07 AM


Well now that is interesting! Thank you for sharing.

However, as you so astutely pointed out to me in another thread: how much change does an organism require to become an entire new species.

According to that fossil record, no new species were created, it was just the same species varying slightly.

And please link me to the 'hundreds' of supposed speciations the guy has witnessed, as I know for a fact that no mutation has ever been witnessed adding information to a genome.

Regards, aristotle

Edited by aristotle, : No reason given.

Edited by aristotle, : No reason given.


"I have learned from my own embarrassing experience how easy it is to concoct remarkably persuasive Darwinian explanations that evaporate on closer inspection." - Daniel Dennet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 431 by RAZD, posted 06-16-2017 6:07 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 433 by RAZD, posted 06-16-2017 8:58 AM aristotle has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19220
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 433 of 489 (812370)
06-16-2017 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 432 by aristotle
06-16-2017 7:37 AM


Well now that is interesting! Thank you for sharing.

You're welcome.

However, as you so astutely pointed out to me in another thread: how much change does an organism require to become an entire new species.

According to that fossil record, no new species were created, it was just the same species varying slightly.

In your opinion. In the opinion of the scientists doing the work (Dr. Philip Gingerich, Dr. Richard Haskin) there were several. But what would they know. This image shows several species in three genera, from a pdf behind a paywall:

You can also see more here (scroll down to figure 4.2), which also includes copelemur as well as pelycodus.

And please link me to the 'hundreds' of supposed speciations the guy has witnessed, ...

That would be Drs. Tony Arnold (Ph.D., Harvard) and Bill Parker (Ph.D., Chicago)

... as I know for a fact that no mutation has ever been witnessed adding information to a genome.

Just as I know for a fact that "information" is either added or the concept is irrelevant to evolution ... see Irreducible Complexity, Information Loss and Barry Hall's experiments.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 432 by aristotle, posted 06-16-2017 7:37 AM aristotle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 434 by aristotle, posted 06-16-2017 10:45 AM RAZD has responded
 Message 437 by CRR, posted 08-18-2017 6:45 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
aristotle
Junior Member (Idle past 66 days)
Posts: 16
Joined: 06-15-2017


Message 434 of 489 (812393)
06-16-2017 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 433 by RAZD
06-16-2017 8:58 AM


But what would they know.

If they're Darwinian-evolutionists then they don't know much about species, as he couldn't even define the term.

If they don't even know exactly what a species is, how can they tell when there are different ones?

That link gives hardly any information about the differences between the supposed species, in the picture of all the varying ones, the all look pretty much the same.

And any changes that did appear in those single-cell organisms cannot be compared to higher animals, which are far more complex.


"I have learned from my own embarrassing experience how easy it is to concoct remarkably persuasive Darwinian explanations that evaporate on closer inspection." - Daniel Dennet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 433 by RAZD, posted 06-16-2017 8:58 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 435 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-16-2017 11:02 AM aristotle has not yet responded
 Message 436 by RAZD, posted 06-16-2017 11:19 AM aristotle has not yet responded
 Message 447 by Taq, posted 08-30-2017 11:07 AM aristotle has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11813
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.4


(3)
Message 435 of 489 (812398)
06-16-2017 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 434 by aristotle
06-16-2017 10:45 AM


If they don't even know exactly what a species is, how can they tell when there are different ones?

If you don't know exactly where that picture transitions from one color to the other, then how can you say the top is white and the bottom is black?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 434 by aristotle, posted 06-16-2017 10:45 AM aristotle has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
2728
29
30313233Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017