Macro Evolution Debunked - No Transitional Fossils

[ProfWag]

[ProfWag]

[caniswalensis]

The Theory of Evolution does not violate the 2nd Law of thermodynamics.

Here is plenty of good reading on the subject: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/entropy.html

[Craig Browning]

I Didn't Know We Were in Church?!

By that statement I'm saying this, "Scepcop, why are you so hell-bent is pushing the (not so)Intelligent Design issue?" idea… what you’re arguing and defending, is one of their main points when it comes to creating doubt in the minds of the less-educated and biblically gullible…

… and no, I do not believe for a second that “all” Christians are ignorant. Yet, the vast majority of them (especially in the U.S.) are “stupid”! Ignorance can be changed via study & schooling; Stupidity on the other hand, is voluntarily created by those that are too damned lazy or arrogant to actually LEARN. But back to the topic…

The issues you are bringing up first get tabled in Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins () by Percival Davis and Dean H. Kenyon and have been challenged (and proven impotent) time and again, the most public side of which involved the famed Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District () and the related documentary Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial (see the documentary here ) So, given the amount of actual INTELLIGENT debate and the mountains of actual FACTS presented by the scientific community vs. faith-bases conjecture, why in the hell is this being made an issue?

Am I missing something?

Sorry, but I’m just seeing the same old rhetoric tied to this chestnut and for anyone that’s halfway studied, especially in the higher education arenas, to start playing pitchman for the religious right… let’s just say that it makes me real nervous. Hell, I believe that some kind of “Higher Consciousness” exists in the Universe, but I do not believe for one second that IT literally created “ALL” let alone the delusion that everything just sprang up from nowhere here or on any other life-bearing body (as we are seeing, some moons and potentially, asteroids have life-giving potential… including micro-fossils (collected by our landers on Mars and elsewhere I believe… can’t recall the details but do remember seeing something on Science Channel about it) denoting previous life-existence)

Yes, it is quite possible that, as Darwin has had the words spoken for him, “God merely used natural process” in order to populate the planet – POSSIBLE, but not likely… at least, not in the Genesis sense of things (which, by the way, isn’t where the original “Creation Tale” of the Hebrew came from (try the Indus Valley and accounts that pre-date the biblical tales by over 1,000 years) and too, Genesis has TWO different creation myths, not just one… something the bible-thumpers try to obfuscate or explain away, but…)

I’m not vested in all the analytical elements around this argument, I simply cannot and have never been able to digest and embrace the fantastic idea that everything “just happened”, even when I was a kid and being taught what I was “supposed” to believe… it was just one side of the bible game that wasn’t digestible…one of many. So I must ask again, why has this been brought up as an issue Scepcop? Unless you’re being sucked into some kind of religious nut club, why are you buying this? I simply can’t believe you are that gullible.

[ProfWag]

I have come to the conclusion that Scepcop wants to disagree with anything and everything that a skeptic or the majority believe. I really do think it's just become a conditioned response to disagree with the majority no matter what the topic.

[Arouet]

It's called Scepcop's Connundrum: The truth value of a proposition is inversely proportional to the number of people who believe it.

[Andy9000]

If I understand correctly, creationists believe all life was created at the same time (correct me if I'm wrong). Why then have we found fossils dating hundreds of millions of years old, but the oldest found fossils of modern humans have only been dated to be about 195,000 years old? If we were created all at the same time, then we should find human fossils dating hundreds of millions of years, and also dinosaur fossils dating only hundreds of thousands.

The funniest thing about creationism is that it never explains where the creator came from. Was the creator created too? Where did the creator who created the creator come from? At some point, life/intelligence MUST have popped into existence by natural means. Evolutionists believe a very simple life form suddenly popped into existence by some rare naturally occurring phenomenon, and creationists believe a complex all knowing creator suddenly popped into existence by some magic phenomenon. I say, there had to be nothing before something, and going from nothing to a simple life form is more likely than going from nothing to complex all knowing intelligence.

[Craig Browning]

Here's part of your answer. . . fundamentalist don't believe in radio-carbon dating unless it supports the details they want people to buy into and of course, the idea that the world is less than 10,000 years in age. For them "science" is only "good science" when it toes the churchianity extremes rather than challenging it. But here is where you can find them "shifting" their views. . .

There's a Nat Geo (I think it was) program about the Plagues of Egypt rendered by god via Moses, Aaron and the magic staff.

Even when these calamities hit Egypt there were known reports of a massive volcanic eruption that caused the Nile to turn red, etc. It was likewise known that certain areas where the sea stood had sand-bars that became passable during key times of the year because of how the wind moved in that area. . . there are a few other things that were KNOWN in those days, especially to a Prince of Egypt who had access to the Temple and was taught by the Priests . . . one theory suggesting it would have been priests sympathetic to Aknauton, the king that first suggested that only one God existed.

Anywho. . . for most of the past 2,500+ years Jews & Christians have defended the miraculous and discounted these known factors. Today however, they are embracing the "scientific" perspectives as being proof to the Exodus tale even though certain elements tied to that tale do not host a chronology that fits; anything associated with a Hebrew revolution and departure that coincides with these NATURAL calamities.

The more fundamental side of religion embraces science when it benefits them and aids them in recruiting young people that have enough insight to question certain things such as the Exodus tale. As a rule however, the "church" has always loathed science, seen it as evil because it seemed to contradict the teachings. In truth, it only contradicts the dogma that man has attached to the idea -- the wisdom & philosophic concepts that promote humanitarianism, mutual respect, responsibility for one another and the planet, etc. etc. etc.

[Nostradamus]

Stephen Myer is a bible thumping ID advocate. He is a fraud in that he pretends not to be a creationist by saying ID. The same goes for the other fraud Jonathan Wells. Both of these frauds were implicated in the Dover decision in which these charlatans replaced creationism with ID and then pretended that they did not.

It is an outrageous lie to claim that either of these frauds are anything other than bible thumping creationists. If these posers were truthful they would not have altered their own literature in a fraudulent attempt to pretend that ID is not creationism.

[Nostradamus]

A big problem for creationists is the fact that genesis was 2 different creation myths. How do we know? The 2 tales have different sequences of creation. Neither of the sequences matches the fossil record. Two guesses and 2 wrong answers.

The first person to openly question fossils as being due to the biblical flood was DaVinci. He wrote an elegant analysis that shows that the fossils are from creatures that lived at the location of the fossil find and were not swept there by a flood. He also argued against the other hypothesis of his time that the fossils were tricks of the devil.

I have no idea why creationists argue as they do. They have bigger fish to fry. There is absolutely no evidence for exodus. There is no record or archaeological evidence for any of the events.

[Nostradamus]

There are lots of transitional fossils. One of the best sequences known is the transition from reptile to mammal. In fact, the problem is that it is hard to determine if some fossils are reptile or mammal since there is a such a well established transition from one to the other.

Where creationists often point is human evolution. Here is a set of species that were not numerous and yet quite a few specimens are found. More numerous fossils such as brachiopods and ammonites are known with great detail since they were common and many, many specimens have been found and their relationships mapped.

[Craig Browning]

You left out the other more anthropological reason why Genesis is wrong. . .

In a cave found in the Indus Valley the exact same creation tales can be seen illustrated but crediting Shiva (I believe it was) as the Hermaphroditic deity that brought about creation. According to biblical scholars this known and popular version of the creation tale was adopted by the Essene scribes that were commissioned by the Alexandrian government & library to write the Hebrew story as a contribution to the famed library. It is this version of the Talmud that we rely on today in that the original copies penned by Abraham, Moses, Joshua, etc. no longer existed and hadn't for hundreds of years due to Hebrew enslavement in Babylon and later groups.

As the more analytical perspective suggests, these scribes didn't want to reveal the more esoteric secrets of the Jewish people so they hid said information (supposedly the essence of the Kabalah & Sefer Yetzerah) within these common myths and the symbols set within them.

In other words, most of the Creation tale found in Genesis comes from a completely different time and place that predates the existence of the Hibru people by some 1,500 years. Similarly, the book is rife with tales from Babylon and other societies such as the great flood and ark which predates the Hibru by centuries as does much of Exodus and Leviticus which are a combination of Babylonian and Egyptian tradition. Psalms and Proverbs interestingly, mirror the accolades and pros credited the radical king Aknauton and his praise of the Aten (the ONE God).

There's so much historically, the contrasts grossly when it comes to the "truth" and chronology of the Old Testament.

[RichardT]

I found the "Debunking PseudoSkeptical Arguments of Paranormal Debunkers" book interesting, until I realized that there was a section on evolution and how "marco" evolution had been supposedly never observed. That section is complete garbage / bullshit and I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who has that view. When it is claimed that speciation has never been observed for example, that statement is wrong anyway you look at it.

[NinjaPuppy]

RichardT - Welcome!

[RichardT]