Living fossils expose evolution

Learned men? I do that all the time. And I find out that even those who have an expertise much better than mine in certain areas can indeed know details that I may not be familiar with but if their basic premise encompassing that field is wrong to begin with then no matter how well they can excel others in describing function or homology then it is no better than natives from a 3rd world country who had never seen a jet before but concluding upon their first view of one that it is a 'great silver bird!'. Such people might, in time be able to class the birds into large red ones, small blue ones, or long and short ones. They could observe that the 'great silver birds' leave chem trails, or that some could even fly much higher than others. But unlil those natives actually come into contact with the jet and its operators their entire basis of understanding is in error.So it is with Skeptic evolutionists. They do not know the Engineer of living organisms nor do have they come to trust His word that He means what He says.

On what planet? But this is the kind of thinking that keeps me from returning to the theory of evolution as even a reasonable theory. Showing photo after photo of fossils that have obviously not changed (or very little change) over millions of yrs is 'proof' of evolution?Backwards thinking indeed.It's as simple as this:A 1957 Chevy (in 1957) Compared to a rebuilt 1957 Chevy: What's the difference between the two? The hubs, the fin decoration, etc. But they are both still the same 'species' and 'family'. No one who knows cars will mistake the rebuilt car for anything other than a 57 Chevy. That is because the intelligent engineers who made it. So it is with living organisms. Variations within the kind are according to the design of the Engineer, Almighty God.

You need to stop your complaining and address the issue. It matters not to me if talk about the Creator/God disturbs you. The facts are there and they don't lie....(right?) The subject of this websiste is creation vs evolution; do you think that such a discussion will therefore leave out talk about a 'Creator'?I am nearly 60 yrs of age and have not been a student for 25 yrs.Now deal with the facts.

I did! Read carefully please. I even gave the page number.

That is so much balderdash. The definition of evolution according to Sir Julian Huxley. Evolutionists are such chamelions on this issue. They invent arguments that 'prove' the changes from one kind of organism to another and they deny that changes are made in those that won't give them the changes they hoped to see in the matter of living fossils. It's rather disgusting actually.Edited by Calypsis4, : correction, 'transition'to 'transformation'.

They are ALL in stasis, friend. Get used to it.By the way, your little chart vanished from the screen both times you posted it and was replaced by that nasty little red 'x'. I can't comment on what I can't see.

Going further with the fossils in amber that reveal no evolutionary.The phasmid encased in amber: Compared with its offspring: Where in the fossil record do we see phasmids evolving into non-phasmid?

What do you mean, 'so what?' Do you even begin to realize how many examples of no evolutionary change in living fossils I can carry this? And I fully intend to do so.Concerning your chart. I've seen nice artwork like that before. Now where are the fossils? Furthermore, and even more importantly is how you can possibly explain the anatomical/morphological changes in creatures that supposedly evolved from the oceans to dry land. How did water breathing organisms change to oxygen breathing ones? At what point did the first water breathing creature develop the ability to breathe air...before or after it left the water? How did the first mammals feed their young before mammary glands developed? Do you really believe that the whale evolved into a land animal and then evolved back into the sea as a marine creature? How did it change its breathing apparatus without drowning itself? Shall I go on?None of this even touches the necessary genetic changes that would be required of such transformations. Explain...any of them.What you posted is a joke. Edited by Calypsis4, : quotes

No, it wasn't a lie but you are going to have to take my word for it. I have been on many creation vs evolution websites and I do not remember who said this.

It's called 'stasis' and it refers to stability or something that does not change. Dictionary definition: "A condition of balance among various forces; motionlessness." Online Free Dictionary.The photos reveal that there is a 'stasis' among living organisms. That is, they don't change from one kind to another. By 'kind' I am referring to that which is on the family level down.Have a nice day.

Leave it. My statement was and I quote: "If there was a mistake it was by AOL and not I."

I taught science for 26 yrs including biology."learned men"? You mean the people who are given evidence of no evolution but pretend that it exists anyway? They are people with an emotional committment to a lie. The fossil record speaks loudly about the fact that there has been no change but they like to pretend it says something else.

Next:Long legged fly encased in amber: It's modern offspring: Flies are still flies. Modern scientists have taken drosophilas through tens of thousands of generations and seen many changes but never saw a single instance of a fly becoming anything other than a fly.

No, you didn't. I asked you 'where are the fossils?' You didn't produce any that I have seen so far. If you have a series of photos then give me the post #.But you didn't answer the most pointed questions. HOW did those organisms overcome virtually impossible anatomical/morphological changes from marine organisms to land organisms? "Gradually". How long did they have to 'hold their breath'? A minute? An hour? A day? A yr? Or millions of yrs? That does not answer the question and you are avoiding the issue. Edited by Calypsis4, : correctionEdited by Calypsis4, : No reason given.

List them. And since I changed my question above I want to know how long those morphing organisms had to hold their breath while changing from breathing water to breahing oxygen. One minute? One hour? One day? a year? Or millions of years?So far your explanations are totally unacceptable. I am an ex-evolutionist.