Evolution is Not Science

There is an excellant book called "Crucible of Creation" by Simon Conway. It has a number of very good examples concerning the Cambrian "Explosion" including some of the earlier forms of "animals" prior to this event including examples from Scandanavia, Australia and China. One of the reasons that the Cambrian fossils (whether you subscribe to S.J. Goulds view or S. Conways view) is that they fall quite well into the progression of differing forms in both time and geographical area expected of the descent with modification concept by Darwin. Almost all of the specific species and maybe some of speculative phyla are now extinct and there are no examples of the "higher" phyla present either in the Burgass shale or in the other contemporaneous geographical samples. This does not fit with a single creation model but does fit Darwins theory of Descent.

Yep, the biggest problem with the Noachian flood (other than the fact that it did not occur) is the sorting of the fossils. Actually that is in error, the biggest problem (again, ditto) is where did the water come from and go, but that is a different debate.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:

---

Well it could be evidence of a cosmic d'oh! on behalf of the creator?
[/B][/QUOTE]Actually the problem is more in the sorting of the fossils, ie reality of how they have been depostited which is in line with evolution and descent with modification vs how they would be sorted in a Noachian flood which is not observed.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TrueCreation:
--Oh G whiz, well your new here so I won't get skeptical about the skeptics. The water is in the oceans silly. And it came from polar glacier masses.
[/B][/QUOTE]Hi, yes I am new to this board but I am not new to the debate. I have been going at it to varying degrees for about 20 years now.As to the water, there is not enough in the polar ice caps to cover all of the land masses. I have this from a number of reputable sources, one was from a grad school friend who was in teh space physics department and was working on plate techtonics and models that could be applied to extrasolar bodies. Here is a different source that outlines the , prety much, most up to date data concerning the earths past,
http://www.ps.ucl.ac.uk/~awayne/polar/geology.html
so you see, even with plate movements and no caps there is still uncovered land mass, and a good deal of it as well .There was a model put out by a researcher at Los Alamos that has been used to demonstrate fast movement of the plates by creationsts, problem is that some model also demonstrates the slow movement postulated by geologists who are not young earth creationists. It also fails (the creationist model) to account for the massive offgassing which would accompany the fast movement model and pretty much give us a Venuvian atmosphere and the extinction of all non-bacterial life on this planet.Oh well, I have a great deal of work to do today so please consider this my answer to your reply on the other thread as well. Got to run.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz