Some Evidence Against Evolution

Science reporter Richard Milton says concerning the theory of evolution : "...the inability of Darwinists to demonstrate to a thinking member of the public {non Darwinist} conclusive scientific evidence to substantiate the theory ...."The larger context for the above statement is the fact that this criticism is specifically directed at the British Museum of Natural History at Teddington. With this said, I ask what museum actually possesses and displays the intermediary missing link bones ?Every museum I have encountered diplays fake bones made of rubber and plaster. These pieces are always surrounded by impressive visual presentations that insert the bones as the missing links.This is outrageous as it appears these museum displays are presenting what they HOPE to find but have not. If there is a paucity of missing link bones in museums could this mean that there are none ?

I was inaccurate, this museum is a few miles to the east of Teddington, also there should be millions and millions of bones for evolution to be true on the scale you claim it to be. The problem I have with the real bones and fossils is that they are locked away just like the Catholic Church locks away their treasures in vaults, which means we have to take someones word about the authenticity, which sounds to me like the same criticism that science levels at religion for having to take their word on it.

Richard Milton is no crank. He is a member of Mensa the I Q society group and of course he is not a creationist. You sound like a religious fundementalist in your unfounded slander toward Milton, which means you are deficent on arguments to respond with pertaining to his questions about Darwinism. Instead you attack the question asker which deflects away from besting him with merits of truth. Milton has legitimate problems with the theory and all you Darwinists can do is attack him personally.

Yes, the same Richard Milton who wrote the book in question.

I demand to know where are the transitional bones that prove humans evolved from apes ? There should be lot of them if humans evolved from apes. I contend that the amount of bones that should exist if evolution is true do not exist or every museum in the world would have some. Billions of people over eons of time should translate into millions of bones at least. There is a paucity of these types of bones for obvious reasons, in that evolution could not be true on the scale purported or we would find and possess them. Instead the ones that claim to be are locked away in vaults inaccessible to most people. The bones that do exist are bones of contention and the irony of where a lot of them were found is in the valley of Neander, who of course is a person the valley is named after, who wrote some of the greatest hymns of the Church - a creationist !

You have resonded comprehensively to my topic and posts - thank you.
I am preparing a response, my computer is down and I am using a public terminal at present. W.T.

You sound like a religious fundementalist with a closed mind. If I had answered the way you just did you would be saying the exact same thing about me that I just said about you. Why don't you post a little evidence, just a little I mean we are not talking about the uncontested existence of gravity you know.

I am so far behind in the responses you deserve. First, the museum is a few miles from Teddington so how is this so inaccurate ?
I do not want to ignore everything you have posted, but I do want to get right to the heart of my original complaint, I still have a larger response coming to everything you have taken the time to post.Richard Leakey quoting fellow paleontologist David Pilbeam : "If you brought in a smart scientist from another discipline and showed him the meager evidence we've got he'd surely say "forget it;there isn't enough to go on". Neither David nor others involved in the search for mankind can take this advice, of course, but we remain fully aware of the dangers of drawing conclusions from evidence that is so incomplete" {"Shattering the Myths of Darwinism" by Richard Milton}Question: Is there really enough transitional bones already found to prove that mankind evolved from apes ?

Milton is not a crank, he just has a brain that asks the hard questions.If you are current on the status of paranormal research then you know that no credible scientist questions the existence of the paranormal. The only questions in this subject is how and why.

I have not intentionally ignored the exhaustive evidence you have posted. It was impressive. The issue is what does it mean and is there enough evidence to justify evolution on the scale you purport it to be ? This is a quick reply I will finish the respones you deserve soon. Thank You.

Fascinating response, I assume your view is not too popular with your fellow evolutionists ?What is that common ancestor ?Also, I am surprised at the lack of response to your reply by other Darwinists. What is your response when they vehemently disagree with what you said in the reply I am responding to ?The problem I have with evolution is that it just doesn't make sense. I see brilliant scientists coming up with every explanation of the bones and fossils that they unearth, which said explanations ring hollow. It just seems like they will conclude anything and everything but God. They can DEDUCE like crazy except the one deducement that God requires which is that what is made was deliberately made so that one could deduce that a Creator made it. {Romans 1:20}

Are you saying that the long list that you posted is evidence of a fish evolving from humans, that is what you said if not implied.
Technically, I do not dispute the existence of the evidence you posted, I marvel over the fact that people , smart people have taken the time to discover and itemize these things. Yes this is science, but the simple issue is what does it mean and the leap of your final conclusion is what I and many others dispute. Being a creationist I credit a Creator initiating the process due to the sole fact that such creation could not be so amazing unless there was an intelligent Being behind it. This is a deducement I realize, but science deduces a lot of things especially the existence of celestial bodies.

I was vague, I meant evidence of the missing links that transition apes to humans.
According to Richard Milton very little if any of these evidences actually exist and he is not a creationist.
Lets assume there is SOME, and lets assume they are missing link transitional types. Why not a LOT ? It seems to be meager at best which does not justify evolution to be true on the scale that Darwinists say that it is. Thank You.

Your response was outstanding, you literally dropped a safe on my head - checkmate. Straight out, I cannot refute the evidence you presented only the conclusions.Whether you believe it or not I think responses of this magnitude are truly brilliant, I am just glad that there are people in this world that care about science and related subjects instead of the commmon dunces of this present generation that are entertainment mush heads.
If the common creationist had the dedication that you emit we would be much stronger.As I said early on I cannot and do not contest the evidence you posted - only the conclusions. Richard Milton says ape to human transitional bones do not exist WHY does he say this ?I reject evolution on the basis that it does not make sense BECAUSE it refuses to seat God as a possibilty at the creation table. The Bible says that God created in such a way that His invisible attributes can be DEDUCED from what is made. Science makes deducements all the time but it WILL not deduce the hand of God as being the initiator. To be continued.

This is a quicky, Romans 1:20 which said verse lays in the context of the 18th verse.