Why is it ALL MOSTLY mammals above the dinosaurs?

Not if you've invented the concept of "complexity" it doesn't and that's mostly what I've pointed out in this thread so far. I suspect an honest assessment of that term would show there is no such pattern as increase in complexity. And that's because you are assessing the term purely subjectively rather than scientifically. I suspect you could turn the order upside down or rearrange it any way at all and you could find "novel plant traits" appearing above those below. Spores for instance would be novel if they appeared above the vascular type of plant. That's how subjective this is.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Exactly. Can't expect much of anything from defenders of the ToE.

Yes, Razzy, they gave up on progression to higher forms of life although isuch a progression is patently clear since that's the basis on which the taxonomic tree was also built. And for all its strong assertion that complexity has taken the place of that supposedly erroneous system absolutely not one word is said of evidence that complexity is involved at all. You are subjectively assessing superficial characteristics as more or less complex, but such subjectivity is not science.Are grasses more complex than angiosperms? I don't know about DNA in this case but subjectively speaking it wouldn't seem so since the latter may have flowers. So since your system is subjectively based I wonder how you rationalize this one.Isn't it true that there are some insects or worms that have more genes than human beings?Oh I've noticed how you and PK are asserting that just because something appears in a layer doesn't mean it doesn't also appear in the layer above and I've answered that it's not science to leave it out pf the discussion of what appears where, AND that it most likely appears in smaller numbers which would fit sorting by some mechanical process but makes no sense on the ToE/OE system. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

• First the absolute silliness of thinking sedimentary strata represent time periods.
• Second the absolute silliness of denying that sedimentary strata represent time periods
• Third the absolute silliness of thinking that dead things found within the sedimentary strata represent creatures that lived in the particular time period represented by the particular sedimentary layers.
• The subjectivity of the order of the fossil record and lack of objective tests, for "complexity" and so on.
• The fact that it's impossible for trial and error ever to produce a new species even in billions of years
• The fact that you only need a few hundred years at most to get new varieties of any species. Trilobites are a conspicuous example in the fossil record of varieties represented over hundreds of millions of years. Sheer silliness, and not a hint of evolution to another species either.
• The fact that evolution must ultimately lead to a point where further evolution is impossible, or even to extinction, by the inevitable depletion of genetic diversity.
• The habit of responding to critics of the ToE with ad hominems.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Assertion assertion assertion denial denial denial and you didn't even check to see what I was responding to.

This does not belong on this thread but I'll answer by saying that the number One reason Trump supporters support Trump is the absolute idiocy of the Democrats. His "lies" are just sloppy thinking and not about anything important so we don't care. He's flawed, so what, he's also done a LOT of good for the country and we know that's where his heart is. You guys have NO idea why Trump is popular -- and you aren't going to anticipate how wildly UNpopular any Dem candidate is going to be either.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.