Give your one best shot - against evolution

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Philip:
[b]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Reason:
No Proven Links. Where are the links other than theory?

​

Not just where are the links? ... Where are the CHAINS (other than in theory)?

---

Ok that was four words longer, but no clearer. Would one of you like to put this in a reasonable form.Your one best shot against evolution is ... no proven links or chains? What links, what chains, are unproven?

You've heard it say "the missing link" (i.e., Lucy). But for evolution to be viable, the chain with all its linkages must be manifest in the fossil record. Aside from a few fossils constructed primarily from pig's teeth and perhaps rickets-diseased human bones (perhaps enough to fill a human grave or two) there is nothing: No linkage is apparent at all ('chains'). For a human 'chain' of linkages to viable, I need to see tens of thousands of intermediary osseous forms (really millions to be scientific) because of the osseous complexity of humanity compared with 'chimp-like' precursor-civilizations, and the uniformitarian model. Rapid P.E./survival of precursor-civilizations is unacceptable for explaining accelerated DNA-mutations here. Note: Innumerable (chains of) civilizations with flexible DNA-mutations are required for macro-evolution. This takes a lot of faith to believe. I can't even believe one DNA-mutation ever took place that was beneficial to survival, let alone the billions required.
The same is true concerning fossils of 'primal-life forms' (if there be such a thing).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:
You've heard it say "the missing link" (i.e., Lucy). But for evolution to be viable, the chain with all its linkages must be manifest in the fossil record. Aside from a few fossils constructed primarily from pig's teeth and perhaps rickets-diseased human bones (perhaps enough to fill a human grave or two) there is nothing: No linkage is apparent at all ('chains'). For a human 'chain' of linkages to viable, I need to see tens of thousands of intermediary osseous forms (really millions to be scientific) because of the osseous complexity of humanity compared with 'chimp-like' precursor-civilizations, and the uniformitarian model. Rapid P.E./survival of precursor-civilizations is unacceptable for explaining accelerated DNA-mutations here. Note: Innumerable (chains of) civilizations with flexible DNA-mutations are required for macro-evolution. This takes a lot of faith to believe. I can't even believe one DNA-mutation ever took place that was beneficial to survival, let alone the billions required.
The same is true concerning fossils of 'primal-life forms' (if there be such a thing).

---

Perhaps you could visit this site
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.htmland tell us which of the species mentioned are reconstructed from pigs' teeth, and which ones had rickets?Also, why do you say that "the chain with all its linkages must be manifest in the fossil record"? Do you think that all species that have ever lived have been fossilized? What about chimps and gorillas? No fossils of them have ever been found. Does that mean they don't exist?

The "pig's teeth" comment is probably "Nebraska Man", a "find" which never made it into the professional literature, but was announced by a newspaper. When a professional paleontologist took a look at the tooth, he pronounced it the tooth of a fossil swine.The "ricketts" comment probably refers to the attempt by an early researcher to attribute the unusual anatomy of Neandertals to having rickets. There's two things wrong with that:1. People with rickets have weak, decalcified bones, while the bones of Neandertals are much more robust than those of modern humans.2. The "deformation" attributed to that disease is precisely the opposite effect than that seen in Neandertals; the leg bones curve the wrong way.Not that it means much to someone scrabbling for some kind of excuse against evolution.222

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:
You've heard it say "the missing link" (i.e., Lucy).

---

I hear the phrase in the press as journalese for an early homind. I rarely hear palaeontologists using it except with a very broad grin. I have certainly never heard any palaeontologist claim it for Lucy, but if you find any quotes it would be fun to see them.

quote:

---

But for evolution to be viable, the chain with all its linkages must be manifest in the fossil record.

---

Why? It is most unlikely that every link in the chain would be fossilized. Is there some reason you would expect every link to be fossilized and for those fossils to be discovered?[b] [QUOTE]Aside from a few fossils constructed primarily from pig's teeth and perhaps rickets-diseased human bones (perhaps enough to fill a human grave or two) there is nothing[/b][/QUOTE]There is nothing? What about Oakley's Catalog of Fossil hominds in several volumes? What about the fossil hominid collection in the Natural History Museum in London - 3998 in the 1976 catalog ans still growing. How many fakes can you name? Could you even name a few (in the sense of not many, but more than 2)?
[b] [QUOTE]No linkage is apparent at all ('chains').For a human 'chain' of linkages to viable, I need to see tens of thousands of intermediary osseous forms (really millions to be scientific) because of the osseous complexity of humanity compared with 'chimp-like' precursor-civilizations, and the uniformitarian model.[/b][/QUOTE]Wow! Now its millions of fossils required! You guys don't just move the goalposts, you dematerialise them, convert them into anti-matter and reassemble them in a parallel universe. [b] [QUOTE]Rapid P.E./survival of precursor-civilizations is unacceptable for explaining accelerated DNA-mutations here.[/b][/QUOTE]Why?[b] [QUOTE]Note: Innumerable (chains of) civilizations with flexible DNA-mutations are required for macro-evolution.[/b][/QUOTE]What's with the "civilizations?" The first recognizable civilisations appeared a long after modern man evolved. There are some pehistorians who like to push the word a little and talk of cultures as "quasi" civilisations.
[b] [QUOTE]I can't even believe one DNA-mutation ever took place that was beneficial to survival, let alone the billions required.[/b][/QUOTE]I can drink cows milk thanks to my lactose tolerance - a mutation my chinese colleague Zhao does not share. Being able to drink milk and eat milk products enabled pastoralism to flourish in communities which otherwise would have been severely disadvantaged to survive.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Brachinus:
[B] Perhaps you could visit this site
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.html
and tell us which of the species mentioned are reconstructed from pigs' teeth, and which ones had rickets?---What I found most amusing was that several of the alleged pre-homo sapien sapien species in the site were predicated upon one, or simply a partial, skeletal finding."Kenyanthropus platyops
This species was named in 2001 from a partial skull found in Kenya with an unusual mixture of features (Leakey et al. 2001). It is aged about 3.5 million years old. The size of the skull is similar to A. afarensis and A. africanus, and has a large, flat face and small teeth."Australopithecus garhi
This species was named in April 1999 (Asfaw et al. 1999). It is known from a partial skull. The skull differs from previous australopithecine species in the combination of its features, notably the extremely large size of its teeth, especially the rear ones, and a primitive skull morphology. Some nearby skeletal remains may belong to the same species.Australopithecus aethiopicus
A. aethiopicus existed between 2.6 and 2.3 million years ago. This species is known from one major specimen, the Black Skull discovered by Alan Walker, and a few other minor specimens which may belong to the same species. It may be an ancestor of robustus and boisei, but it has a baffling mixture of primitive and advanced traits.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:

Rapid P.E./survival of precursor-civilizations is unacceptable for explaining accelerated DNA-mutations here.

​

---

PE doesn’t require accelerated mutations, EXACTLY the same number of germ line mutations will suffice. What PE explains is the increased chance of FIXATION of said mutation in the population due to a small, isolated population. Every single sperm carries many mutations, & the chance of getting them fixed in the population is related to the population size. Therefore evolution (change in allele frequency) occurring is greatly enhanced in a small population, even if the mutation is neutral, the advantage is even greater if the mutant gene increases fitness.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:

Note: Innumerable (chains of) civilizations with flexible DNA-mutations are required for macro-evolution. This takes a lot of faith to believe.

---

This makes no sense.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:

I can't even believe one DNA-mutation ever took place that was beneficial to survival, let alone the billions required.
The same is true concerning fossils of 'primal-life forms' (if there be such a thing).

---

Here’s two links showing advantageous mutations. http://www.accessexcellence.org/AB/BC/Bacterial_Mutations.htmlhttp://www.nmsr.org/nylon.htmMark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by leekim:
What I found most amusing was that several of the alleged pre-homo sapien sapien species in the site were predicated upon one, or simply a partial, skeletal finding.

---

Why amusing? Strange choice of words.What you might like to do is look at some of the diagnostic features of these species. If you can find it in your local library or local museum's library the excellent "Introduction to Human Evolutionary Anatomy" by Aiello and Dean gives great detail on how taxonomists identify species by diagnostic features. You will find, if yu study evolutionary anatomy, that the three examples you quote have (ironically) excellent diagnostic features - and most importantly that these features are specifically examined with potential disease pathologies in mind.What you either forget or do not know is that palaeo-anthropology is an exceptionally aggressive field of science: any mistake in attribution of a species as the result of poor diagnostics would be (and is) pounced upon with glee by the various rival factions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
Well, I did get a speeding ticket about 12 years ago...

---

​

Around the time quicksink was born, eh? Is there something we should know?

---

LOL!!

quote:

---

I can't even believe one DNA-mutation ever took place that was beneficial to survival, let alone the billions required.

​

I can drink cows milk thanks to my lactose tolerance - a mutation my chinese colleague Zhao does not share. Being able to drink milk and eat milk products enabled pastoralism to flourish in communities which otherwise would have been severely disadvantaged to survive.

---

I never grew any lower wisdom teeth, and I consider that quite an advantageous mutation.Let's also remember that there is a mutation that gives people either partial resistance or total immunity to HIV, depending upon if they got a single or double copy of the mutation. I would say that this would be considered a beneficial mutation, and it EXACTLY what is predicted by Evolutionary Biology. Because of massive genetic diversity in our population, random mutations which convey an advantage when the environment changes (i.e a virulent new disease agent has emerged) are selected by the environment. Read more about it here: http://www.sciam.com/0997issue/0997obrien.html

​

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-24-2002]

[QUOTE][b]Wow! Now its millions of fossils required! You guys don't just move the goalposts, you dematerialise them, convert them into anti-matter and reassemble them in a parallel universe.[/QUOTE][/b]He did exactly the same thing in another thread, "Piltdown Man, Java Man...." He started with thousands and stayed there until I mentioned BMNH's catalog and then he went to "hundreds of thousands". I was going to prod him by asking if he would jump to "millions" but didn't, now I regret it.Point: does he actually have a credible way to calculate how many fossils we "should" be finding or is he tossing out numbers that he hopes we can't match?

My opinions are based upon my life experiences, my personal educational studies, and my direct observations of other individuals with whom I have come into contact throughout my lifetime. Shalom Jet

I will need to see the osseous remains of all of the Biblical patriarchs, and, indeed, an unbroken chain of corpses from Adam to me in order for there to be any merit whatsoever to the bibilical creation myth.

"I will need to see the osseous remains of all of the Biblical patriarchs, and, indeed, an unbroken chain of corpses from Adam to me in order for there to be any merit whatsoever to the bibilical creation myth. "
--What? Ok, I know your just being sarcastic here, right?------------------

I was waiting in the doctors office one day in the exam room looking at cut away diagrams of the human body. Seeing how extreamly complex the design is and how well it works is what convinced me. I just cant possibly imagine that all of this has happened totally by chance. It just works to well to have hapened on its own with no outside help. A million engineers working a million years couldnt even come close to designing somthing as well designed as the human body. And evolutionists expect us to beleive that it created itself?It is harder to beleive that abiogenesis and evolution occured than it is to beleive that there is a god that has created us.Just my opinion.