Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 115 (8752 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-28-2017 11:57 PM
113 online now:
Coyote, DrJones*, dwise1, LamarkNewAge, Tanypteryx, xongsmith (6 members, 107 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: DeliverUsFromEvolution
Post Volume:
Total: 809,175 Year: 13,781/21,208 Month: 3,263/3,605 Week: 49/556 Day: 49/54 Hour: 2/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
7273
74
75767778Next
Author Topic:   The Great Creationist Fossil Failure
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15929
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 1096 of 1163 (795696)
12-15-2016 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1076 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 5:14 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
That is a bit rich coming from evolutionists who are the masters of bad excuses for their lack of fossils

You goddamned liar, I have proffered no such excuse. I say: WE HAVE THE FOSSILS. WE WIN.

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.

And since we find abundant well-preserved fossils in Siberia, and none of them are those requisite to your fantasies ... YOU DON'T HAVE THE FOSSILS. YOU LOSE.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1076 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 5:14 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1099 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 10:11 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 15632
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.0


(6)
Message 1097 of 1163 (795699)
12-15-2016 10:07 AM


Catching Up
I'm about a hundred messages behind, but I keep seeing the same incorrect claims over and over again, so I thought I'd reemphasize a few important points that Mindspawn keeps misunderstanding.

  • Except for fossils of species that went extinct, all fossils are transitional fossils. Transitionals actually exist at all levels of the evolutionary tree. At a relatively fine level of detail the term intermediates might be more appropriate, for example the transition from Australopithicus afarensis to Homo sapiens with Homo erectus as intermediate, while at a much more broad level of detail dinosaurs are transitional between reptiles and birds.

  • The validity of evolution does not depend upon the completeness of the fossil record in terms of transitionals and intermediates. Evolution became accepted theory while the fossil record was far less complete than it is today, and while each new fossil discovery has the potential to invalidate evolution (e.g., a Cambrian mammal), it never happens. Evolution as an explanation for life's history was accepted even before the mechanisms of heredity (also fully supportive of evolution) were understand.

  • The nested hierarchy couldn't exist were the fossils not scattered about the geological record in a very particular and specific way, the record of change never violating the hierarchy.

  • Evolutionary change is toward adaptation and not in any particular direction, such as larger or faster.

  • All fossils are of "fully formed" species. There has never been a species that wasn't "fully formed."

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 1100 by jar, posted 12-15-2016 10:13 AM Percy has responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 3802
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(2)
Message 1098 of 1163 (795700)
12-15-2016 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1075 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 5:10 AM


Re: Flood at the PT boundary
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 evidence also shows that there was, at no point in time, of a global flood. There are repeated references in this paper to dry climates, deserts and terrestrial life.

What you seem to refer to is a global tectonic event which simply isn't there. Any second- or third-order transgressions would, by definition, not be global.

It was pretty apparent to me that the discussion was about minor fluctuations in sea level and not a biblical flood.

The only real alternative you have is that the flood was so short that it left no traces in the geological record. This would be highly unlikely for what was supposed to be the most cataclysmic event in the history of the earth.

The bible indicates this widespread flood followed by a rapid regression, which explains the evidence.

Evidence that you have, so far, failed to produce.

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

Again, these fluctuations are not global. Read the article. While they are going on you have arid conditions and deserts in the North American southwest.

Please note that in all of the reconstruction images, there is emergent land. What kind of a global flood is that?

quote:
""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""

So the sea level changed with time.

And it has been the subject of discussion.

Why do we see conflicting evidence?

Have you noticed that sea level is rising right now? Is God punishing us again?

This has been going on for decades. So, why has catastrophic melting of glaciers and ice caps not already destroyed all life on earth?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1075 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 5:10 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1101 by jar, posted 12-15-2016 10:16 AM edge has responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3802
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 1099 of 1163 (795701)
12-15-2016 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1096 by Dr Adequate
12-15-2016 9:55 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
And since we find abundant well-preserved fossils in Siberia, and none of them are those requisite to your fantasies ... YOU DON'T HAVE THE FOSSILS. YOU LOSE.

Well, you should know by now that any imperfections in a record that goes back billions of years gives YECs license to make up whatever they want.

That's reeel science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1096 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2016 9:55 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28841
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 1100 of 1163 (795702)
12-15-2016 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1097 by Percy
12-15-2016 10:07 AM


Re: Catching Up
Percy writes:

Evolutionary change is toward adaptation and not in any particular direction, such as larger or faster.

I think we need to point out that it is adaptation to the environment that existed at a given time and what the record shows is that those critters that were adapted to that particular environment at that particular time were the ones that passed on their DNA to the next generation. And the evidence shows that as the environment changed some traits lead to continuation while other traits led to extinction. The changes are not towards adaptation but rather those critters that happened to be adapted survived.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1097 by Percy, posted 12-15-2016 10:07 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1104 by Percy, posted 12-15-2016 10:40 AM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28841
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1101 of 1163 (795703)
12-15-2016 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 1098 by edge
12-15-2016 10:08 AM


Re: Flood at the PT boundary
Also, unlike the K/T boundary, the P/T boundary is not some line but rather a very long period of millions of years when conditions changed. The Siberian Traps (that mindspawn keeps using) actually developed over a period of a million years alone.

AbE:

Claiming the P/T boundary is the period of the Biblical flood myths is simply providing yet more evidence that the Bible is factually wrong since at the very most the Bible stories limit the flood to about one years duration, not millions of years.

Edited by jar, : see AbE:


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1098 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 10:08 AM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1103 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 10:32 AM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3802
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 1102 of 1163 (795704)
12-15-2016 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1081 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 5:39 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
It's quite revealing how your statement unintentionally illustrates the difference between actual science and YEC science:

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?

Do you see the difference?

Real scientists are out there working and gathering data.

YEC 'science' consists of just hanging out and criticizing or denying the results.

And, no. No one is 'hoping for evidence to support evolution'. There is already plenty of that. They are out there answering questions that YECs run away from.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1081 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 5:39 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3802
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 1103 of 1163 (795705)
12-15-2016 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 1101 by jar
12-15-2016 10:16 AM


Re: Flood at the PT boundary
Also, unlike the K/T boundary, the P/T boundary is not some line but rather a very long period of millions of years when conditions changed. The Siberian Traps (that mindspawn keeps using) actually developed over a period of a million years alone.

It is a fact, that many geological processes take a long time. Sure there are catastrophes, but there are thousands of them, local and otherwise. And YECs fail to account for the intervening time between events.

The 'Cambrian Explosion' is an excellent example. This has become almost scriptural to YECs and yet we know that it occurred over tens of millions of years.

The K/T event probably started a process that took hundreds of years to complete.

YECs have little understanding of time and process.

AbE:

Claiming the P/T boundary is the period of the Biblical flood myths is simply providing yet more evidence that the Bible is factually wrong since at the very most the Bible stories limit the flood to about one years duration, not millions of years.


The logical conclusion would be that the Bible speaks of something different from what YECs think.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1101 by jar, posted 12-15-2016 10:16 AM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 15632
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 1104 of 1163 (795706)
12-15-2016 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1100 by jar
12-15-2016 10:13 AM


Re: Catching Up
jar writes:

I think we need to point out that it is adaptation to the environment that existed at a given time and what the record shows is that those critters that were adapted to that particular environment at that particular time were the ones that passed on their DNA to the next generation. And the evidence shows that as the environment changed some traits lead to continuation while other traits led to extinction. The changes are not towards adaptation but rather those critters that happened to be adapted survived.

Yes, environmental change will select among existing adaptations, but that's just selection by itself. Evolution includes not just selection but descent with modification, and those together are what produce new adaptations.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1100 by jar, posted 12-15-2016 10:13 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1113 by jar, posted 12-15-2016 11:51 AM Percy has responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 3802
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 1105 of 1163 (795707)
12-15-2016 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1084 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 6:15 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
So in fact you have no evidence for any predecessor to the trilobite.

Incorrect.

We have predecessors much older than trilobites which already were showing a trend from stromatolites to the more complex Ediacaran life forms. The span of time involved makes evolution of trilobites a viable theory.

Nothing.

Denial is not a virtue.

Yes sure you can surmise they existed, but that is on the level of fantasy.

It is at the level of an explanation of the known data. Considering the more complete fossil record of more recent organisms, it is far from fantasy.

Reality is they suddenly appeared fully formed as did MANY phyla at that time,

Actually, that would be all phyla at all times.

... the evidence favors creationism.

Well, if you had a god continually creating new species based very closely on the preceding life forms over four and a half billion years and perhaps you had some kind of a prehistoric genetic laboratory artifact: well, you might have a point.

Let us know how your research goes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1084 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 6:15 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6461
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


(2)
Message 1106 of 1163 (795708)
12-15-2016 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 1057 by mindspawn
12-14-2016 5:11 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
mindspawn writes:

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.

Then creationism is falsified because that is not what we see.

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.

Then why don't we see mammals with short life spans in pre-Cambrian strata? Why don't we see a single animal or plant fossil in the pre-Cambrian terrestrial strata?

Why don't wee see a single bony fish or shark in the pre-Cambrian? Why don't we see a single flowering plant or blade of grass in the pre-Cambrian? Why don't we see any leaves or modern plants at all in the pre-Cambrian?

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).

Sorry, but that is just made up. You need to present evidence.

You claim that these animals and plants were around in the Cambrian. We aren't talking about one or two species. We are talking about entire swaths of plants and animals. WHERE ARE THEY?? Show us.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1057 by mindspawn, posted 12-14-2016 5:11 PM mindspawn has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6461
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 1107 of 1163 (795709)
12-15-2016 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 1084 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 6:15 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
mindspawn writes:

So in fact you have no evidence for any predecessor to the trilobite.

We do have evidence for human predecessors, and you continue to ignore them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1084 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 6:15 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6461
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 1108 of 1163 (795710)
12-15-2016 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1090 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 9:10 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution and Creationism is just a sorry joke
mindspawn writes:

The fact that most organisms appear fully formed supports creationism.

We already demonstrated that they aren't fully formed. We have shown you the transitional fossils.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1090 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 9:10 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6461
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


(1)
Message 1109 of 1163 (795712)
12-15-2016 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1091 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 9:20 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
mindspawn writes:

The difference with the Australian marsupials is that they are genetically proven to have a recent common ancestor.

The same applies to humans and other apes. In fact, I would bet $100 that chimps and humans share more DNA than a kangaroo and a wombat.

Additionally even though they have rapidly diversified, there are obvious common features.

You don't see any common features shared between chimps and humans? Really?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1091 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 9:20 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5789
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 3.8


(4)
Message 1110 of 1163 (795713)
12-15-2016 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1077 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 5:17 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
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?

You've missed a lot. But, here is a quick partial summary. Try the link for a lot more:

http://www.vce.bioninja.com.au/...lution/origins-of-man.html

Early - Late Hominins

Early hominins first appear in the fossil record approximately 4 million years ago
Collectively, they were very ape-like in structure - with a prognathic profile and longer arms, they were likely facultative bipeds (arms used for support)
They had large jaws, broad molars and thicker enamel, indicating a diet that was heavily dependent on nuts, grains and hard fruits
They had a relatively small cranial capacity (roughly 300 - 450 cm3), indicating smaller brains
Ardipithecus ramidus (~4.4 m.y.a) is one of the oldest fossils and was very ape-like in appearance, with wider zygomatic arches and a sagittal crest
Australopithecus afarensis (~4.0 m.y.a) and A. africanus (~2.5 m.y.a) had non-opposable big toes and were likely the first bipeds (facultative)

Early Homo

Early Homo species first appear in the fossil record approximately 2 million years ago
Compared to Australopithecines, they had a marked increase in brain size (cranial capacity ~ 700 - 1,000 cm3) and reduced sexual dimorphism
They had a reduction in the size of their teeth, indicating a change in diet and further skeletal changes to support a more erect posture
H. habilis (~2.0 m.y.a) are thought to be among the first to use stone (Oldowan) tools, with shortened digits suggesting the use of precision grip
H. erectus (~1.6 m.y.a) was the first to widely distributed thoughout the Old World, may have used fire and possessed rudimentary language

Late Homo

Late Homo species first appear in the fossil record under 1 million years ago (~800,000 y.a)
These species have a significantly increased cranial capacity (~1,300 - 1,500 cm3) and demonstrate advanced cultural and technological practises
H. heidelbergensis (~600,000 y.a) were among the first to bury their dead and are thought to be a direct ancestor of H. sapiens
H. neanderthalensis (~200,000 y.a) used Mousterian (flint-flake) tools and likely co-existed at the same time as H. sapiens
H. floresiensis (~80,000 y.a) has been nicknamed 'hobbit' for its small size; debate exists as to whether it is a separate species or a primitve human with major genetic deformities
At some point between 200,000 and 100,000 years ago, a population of early humans crossed the morphological threshold to become modern humans: Homo sapiens sapiens

You wanted a continuous sequence, here you have it.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

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

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1077 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 5:17 AM mindspawn has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1112 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 11:04 AM Coyote has acknowledged this reply

  
RewPrev1
...
7273
74
75767778Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017