Science\'s argument against evolution (Long but interesting read)

Save the bible from what? - Clowd

Pffftt... Bwahahahah.. that\'s some funneh shiznits. Thanks for the laugh... I needed it after watching this perfectly interesting and respectable scientific thread get washed down the tubes by your blathering which, in fact, adressess NONE of our above posts.

Swedish botanist Heribert Nilsson after 40 years of his own research: “It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of plaeonbiological facts. The fossil material is now so complete that…the lack of transitional series cannot be explained as due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, and will never be replaced.

Again, this sounds exactly like what the guy who closed the patent office in the 1920\'s said. An ameture inventor himself, he stated that mankind has reached the end of his inventfulness, and that there was nothing new to discover. So much for computers, jet engines, space travel, genetics, and oh so much more. New discoveries are made all the time, and if you\'d actually (once again) study the fossil record you\'d see these new entries with your own eyes. I would like to know exactly when Mr. Nilsson made this statement.. so that I can pull up a the fossilised remains of a recently discovered creature and prove to you what everyone else already knows... that it\'s nonsence.

Of course, you won\'t.

I believe as birds breed, some may change in color or small changes in physical charcastics, but remain to its kind. - Clowd

Minor changes compound over time. Differences in breeds are merely the most obvious and short term example of how evolution works. Compound these slight differences over many thousands of years, and you will have a new creature. This is HOW evolution works son.

You cant prove evolution,  and the fossil record is against it.  Whats left?

EDIT:  Incomplete skeletons have been found?  Please elaborate

You cant prove evolution, and the fossil record is against it. Whats left? - Clowd

Oh come on Clowd.. is that all? Really, I expected much more nonsence from you to rip apart. Pitty. While it\'s true that the mechanics of evolution are still a bit clouded in mystery, the evidence for it by far greatly outweighs evidence for creationism, as illustrated by the myrid of links and diagrams the members of this board have posted.

Creationism is the easy out.. an answer for lazy people.. It\'s "Oh, I don\'t know.. I don\'t wanna spend all that time figuring it out.. let\'s jus say God did it and walk away." Every single gap or hole in science has at one time been attributed to "God\'s" doing.. and one by one those gaps are being filled in. Not just with Evolution, but Biology, Physics, Astronomy, Psychiatry, even Socialology. I\'m not sure, but I don\'t think anyone has attributed God to unsolvable problems in mathematics yet. Religeon is constantly having to bend it\'s view of the bible to fit scientific discoveries. That\'s not a great track record. Remember, you do NOT have the upperhand here Clowd.

Also, just how is the fossil record against evolution? It clearly shows the progress of change in the skeletal structures many different creatures... including man. Not ALL of the creatures who ever lived on earth left fossils behind, and of those that did, not all of their fossils have been discovered. As a creationist, you (once again) take the easy way out and instead of look for answers just throw your hands in the air and "It\'s gods doing".

Hmm.. what\'s next.. will you be trying to explain how a computer works to a friend or colluigue and come upon a question you can\'t answer and just attribute it all to magic?

So what\'s left? Good question. What\'s left, is to study.. observe.. test.. and formulate new ideas from your results in which you further study.. obeserve.. test. Even if you could somehow "prove" Darwinism wrong, that does not validate Creationism. It simply proves Darwinism wrong.. nothing more.. nothing less.

Your a mad man,  the fossil record shows thousands of species of COMPLETE COMPLEX creatures appearing SUDDENLY.  NOTHING HAS SHOWN A GRADUAL TRANSITION.  THE FOSSIL RECORD DOES NOT SHOW GRADUAL TRANSITION.

I NEVER TOOK THE EASY WAY OUT,  I HAVE YET TO SAY:  GOD DID IT THAT WAY.  I HAVE USED THE FOSSIL RECORD AND THATS ALL.  YOU CANT DENY THAT.  

THE FOSSIL RECORD DOES NOT PROVE EVOLUTION

Only anti-God people believe in God not controlling the creation of the universe.  Your by yourself if you think there is a creator,  but he didnt create the universe,  the big bang did.... :rolleyes:

EDIT: Incomplete skeletons have been found? Please elaborate - Clowd

An Incomplete Skeleton is simply a skeleton with some bones missing. When Chanda Levy\'s remains were discovered, not all of her bones were recovered. What they found was an incomplete skeleton which (thankfully) included a skull they could run dental matches on.

Acheologists almost never find complete skeletons. Out of all the Stegosaurus bones collected over the years, there is only 1 complete skeleton that we know of in existance. (As stated by the link about how incomplete the fossil record really still is) Those complete skeletons you see at museums are mostly incomplete skeletons with some of their bones fabricated by men to give a more complete view of the creature to the casual observer.

If this wasn\'t the answer you wanted, perhaps you should learn to ask right questions.

....ok....incomplete skeletons mean you see fossils with half a leg,  and fossils that date later with a full leg.  that has never been found.

THE FOSSIL RECORD DOES NOT SHOW GRADUAL TRANSITION. - Clowd

There are links and diagrams in the "Thread III" thread which prove otherwise. Either combat this with a link or source which discounts this proof, or concede defeat.

I NEVER TOOK THE EASY WAY OUT, I HAVE YET TO SAY: GOD DID IT THAT WAY. - Clowd

Umm.. what exactly do you think creationism IS Clowd? You say the bible says that god created man. Either he jus poofed man into existance or man evolved. Since you don\'t believe in evolution, you certainly must be saying god poofed us into existance. Or do you believe that God didn\'t create man at all?

THE FOSSIL RECORD DOES NOT PROVE EVOLUTION - Clowd

For the sake of argument, lets say you\'re right. It dosen\'t prove creationism either. Gee, now what are you left with?

Your by yourself if you think there is a creator, but he didnt create the universe, the big bang did.... - Clowd

Until it\'s proven contrary, I prefer to believe that God created the laws of the universe. The laws of the universe, as things unfolded, eventually lead to our creation. Weither this was intentional or we are merely god\'s "illegitimate" children.. I don\'t know. However, that is simply my personal belief, and I have stuck to debating scientific facts and theories since they are MY beliefs and mine alone.

....ok....incomplete skeletons mean you see fossils with half a leg, and fossils that date later with a full leg. that has never been found. - Clowd

They have been, and in fact, there\'s a living example probably slithering through your back yard right now. Yes, Snakes. While not all snakes have exibited "proto" legs to my knowlage, many variety such as the reticulating python have small "nubs" along their sides which serve no observable purpose. They are remenants of legs, which have yet to dissapear completely.

Originally posted by SonyFan


They have been, and in fact, there\'s a living example probably slithering through your back yard right now. Yes, Snakes. While not all snakes have exibited "proto" legs to my knowlage, many variety such as the reticulating python have small "nubs" along their sides which serve no observable purpose. They are remenants of legs, which have yet to dissapear completely.

the fossil record doesnt prove creation?  what about fully developed complex creatures appearing suddenly?  its not SOLID UNDENIABLE proof that creation exists,  but it points to it.  

im sorry,  until an incomplete skeleton is found,  evolution of creatures is theory.  

you say God poofed us into existance.  If he can create a cell from materials on the earth,  why not a creature?  What does he use?  His energy.  Ive explained it several times on this baord how he made the universe.

btw,  evolution is a theory,  and it remains one because it cant be proven

the fossil record doesnt prove creation? what about fully developed complex creatures appearing suddenly? its not SOLID UNDENIABLE proof that creation exists, but it points to it. - Clowd

No, it doesn\'t. A gap is merely a lack of evidence, it\'s not evidence to the contrary. Speaking of gaps, what do you make of the one which has been filled in concerning man\'s own evolution from proto-human form to modern man?

im sorry, until an incomplete skeleton is found, evolution of creatures is theory. - Clowd

So go kill a python, boil it\'s flesh off, an look at it\'s skeleton. Those nubs ARE the remenants of legs which it\'s ancestors had. Right there is your "proto" leg, yet you refuse to belive it.

you say God poofed us into existance. If he can create a cell from materials on the earth, why not a creature? What does he use? His energy. Ive explained it several times on this baord how he made the universe. - Clowd

First off, I never said God poofed us into existance. That was an example, a base of reference to illistrate your flawed logic. As far as "If he can create a cell, why not a creatre", refer to my first and third posts in this thread. There is your answer to that question.

btw, evolution is a theory, and it remains one because it cant be proven

Unfortunately for your argument it has quite a gread deal more sustancial evidence supporting it than Creationism. Evolution makes corollations with existing evidence. Creationism corollates with nothing aside from a dusty old book and insufficent answers to certain questions. Evolution may or may not be proven though the accumulation of facts and studies. Creation has no evidence in it\'s favor, just scant evidence against evolution.

Originally posted by Clowd
btw,  evolution is a theory,  and it remains one because it cant be proven

Yeah, keep telling yourself that - the more you repeat it, the closer it gets to being true.

*Clowd is NOT a moron. Clowd it NOT a moron.*

No, didn\'t work. You\'re still a moron.

Inbetween the chantings you could read this quote taken from Scientific American:


Paleontologists know of many detailed examples of fossils intermediate in form between various taxonomic groups. One of the most famous fossils of all time is Archaeopteryx, which combines feathers and skeletal structures peculiar to birds with features of dinosaurs. A flock\'s worth of other feathered fossil species, some more avian and some less, has also been found. A sequence of fossils spans the evolution of modern horses from the tiny Eohippus. Whales had four-legged ancestors that walked on land, and creatures known as Ambulocetus and Rodhocetus helped to make that transition [see "The Mammals That Conquered the Seas," by Kate Wong; Scientific American, May]. Fossil seashells trace the evolution of various mollusks through millions of years. Perhaps 20 or more hominids (not all of them our ancestors) fill the gap between Lucy the australopithecine and modern humans.

Originally posted by Samwise
Yeah, keep telling yourself that - the more you repeat it, the closer it gets to being true.

*Clowd is NOT a moron. Clowd it NOT a moron.*

No, didn\'t work. You\'re still a moron.

Inbetween the chantings you could read this quote taken from Scientific American:


Paleontologists know of many detailed examples of fossils intermediate in form between various taxonomic groups. One of the most famous fossils of all time is Archaeopteryx, which combines feathers and skeletal structures peculiar to birds with features of dinosaurs. A flock\'s worth of other feathered fossil species, some more avian and some less, has also been found. A sequence of fossils spans the evolution of modern horses from the tiny Eohippus. Whales had four-legged ancestors that walked on land, and creatures known as Ambulocetus and Rodhocetus helped to make that transition [see "The Mammals That Conquered the Seas," by Kate Wong; Scientific American, May]. Fossil seashells trace the evolution of various mollusks through millions of years. Perhaps 20 or more hominids (not all of them our ancestors) fill the gap between Lucy the australopithecine and modern humans.

Cant we debate without flaming?

Where is bossieman?  Any scientist will tell you evolution is a theory.  Samwise the only thing you are proving by saying that is how blindly you follow evolution.  Who can blame you,  the way they talk about it seems like they are taking it for a fact.

The only thing that quotes says is "whales had this,  creatures like this made the transition" but it has no proof to back it up.  Evolution only can say "it looks like".  How do you prove Archaeopteryx changed into a bird?  Simple, you cant.  It just \'looks\' that way according to evolutionists.  Until  You get more proof other then \'it looks like\'  its a theory.  

To put it in another way,  evolution doesnt have a foundation.  The fossil record doesnt prove it,  in fact it dissaproves of it.

Its probably even safe to say that it is sheer imagination.

Clowd.  Find some damn info to back up your posts.  You have no idea how misinformed some of your posts are.

You aren\'t a moron for believing in creationism.  No one is saying that.  It\'s the crap you\'re posting, and the way no one can get even the simplest of things through to you (such as evolution has nothing to do with how life began), that makes you seem like a complete moron.

Originally posted by Clowd
Any scientist will tell you evolution is a theory.  

Yes, evolution IS a theory - a scientific theory. I\'ll explain later.

Samwise the only thing you are proving by saying that is how blindly you follow evolution.  [/B]

You mean the way you follow religion, except I have something to back it up with? If I\'m not completly mistaken you have yet to provide a single source (except some obscure Swedish scientist you claim said so and so). Other than that you have provided ZERO backup on your opinion.

Its probably even safe to say that it is sheer imagination. [/B]

Right. Another words comes to mind, what is it.... that\'s right: Creationism.

Originally posted by shockwaves
Clowd.  Find some damn info to back up your posts.  You have no idea how misinformed some of your posts are.

You aren\'t a moron for believing in creationism.  No one is saying that.  It\'s the crap you\'re posting, and the way no one can get even the simplest of things through to you (such as evolution has nothing to do with how life began), that makes you seem like a complete moron.

You can stop the childish name calling now.

Half the world doesnt believe in evolution.  They are morons?  The theory cant even be proved.  WHy believe in it?  In fact there is evidence pointing against it.

Why do you think half of the world doesn\'t believe in evolution?

And once again, I said you ARE NOT a moron for believing in creation.  You ARE a moron for the crap you post in here, and how you don\'t listen.  This is a perfect example.