Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[__ Science __ ] Evolution’s Surprising New Critics

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
Prominent scientists are speaking out against Darwinian evolution, and they’re not even creationists.

Continue reading...
Evolution has so many holes. If it took millions of years for one species to become another, there should be billions of transitional fossils. When evolutionists couldn't adequately explain, they came up with sudden transition. Laughable.
 
Evolution has so many holes.
It's a directly observed process that we both fight against (e.g., antibiotic resistance) and exploit (e.g., domestication).

If it took millions of years for one species to become another
The evolution of new species has been observed and studied both in the lab and in the wild, many times. I suggest you take the time to get up to speed on the science before trying to argue against it.

there should be billions of transitional fossils. When evolutionists couldn't adequately explain, they came up with sudden transition. Laughable.
Transitional fossils are abundant. But I have to ask....exactly how do you know what fossils do or don't exist? Are you a paleontologist? Do you have a degree in paleontology? Have you worked in paleontology? Do you subscribe to any paleontology journals?
 
It's a directly observed process that we both fight against (e.g., antibiotic resistance) and exploit (e.g., domestication).


The evolution of new species has been observed and studied both in the lab and in the wild, many times. I suggest you take the time to get up to speed on the science before trying to argue against it.


Transitional fossils are abundant. But I have to ask....exactly how do you know what fossils do or don't exist? Are you a paleontologist? Do you have a degree in paleontology? Have you worked in paleontology? Do you subscribe to any paleontology journals?
Then YOU point me to this plethora of evidence you claim exists.
 
Then YOU point me to this plethora of evidence you claim exists.
That's not a problem, but it would be nice if you answered the questions I asked you first.

Exactly how do you know what fossils do or don't exist? Are you a paleontologist? Do you have a degree in paleontology? Have you worked in paleontology? Do you subscribe to any paleontology journals?
 
Do you want answers to satisfy your ego or to invalidate my position or both? I think you can point me to this evidence without either.......or can you?
 
Do you want answers to satisfy your ego or to invalidate my position or both? I think you can point me to this evidence without either.......or can you?
I'll take your dodge as a tacit admission that you have no education, experience, or qualifications in paleontology. Why you're so reluctant to admit such a basic thing is something only you know.

As for observed evolution, CLICK HERE to see over 90,000 published papers describing researchers' observations during lab experiments.

With the evolution of new species, it's been observed in lots of different taxa....

Finches


Fruit flies



Whiptail lizards (in the lab)


Cichlids


Cicadas



Yeast


Bacteria


Goatsbeard


Sparrows


Apple maggot fly (in the process)




For "transitional fossils", let's be specific in order to minimize misunderstandings. A transitional fossil is typically defined as a specimen that exhibits a mixture of traits from different taxa. Do you agree with that definition?
 
I'll take your dodge as a tacit admission that you have no education, experience, or qualifications in paleontology. Why you're so reluctant to admit such a basic thing is something only you know.

As for observed evolution, CLICK HERE to see over 90,000 published papers describing researchers' observations during lab experiments.

With the evolution of new species, it's been observed in lots of different taxa....

Finches


Fruit flies



Whiptail lizards (in the lab)


Cichlids


Cicadas



Yeast


Bacteria


Goatsbeard


Sparrows


Apple maggot fly (in the process)




For "transitional fossils", let's be specific in order to minimize misunderstandings. A transitional fossil is typically defined as a specimen that exhibits a mixture of traits from different taxa. Do you agree with that definition?
Thank you.
 
I'll take your dodge as a tacit admission that you have no education, experience, or qualifications in paleontology. Why you're so reluctant to admit such a basic thing is something only you know.

As for observed evolution, CLICK HERE to see over 90,000 published papers describing researchers' observations during lab experiments.

With the evolution of new species, it's been observed in lots of different taxa....

Finches


Fruit flies



Whiptail lizards (in the lab)


Cichlids


Cicadas



Yeast


Bacteria


Goatsbeard


Sparrows


Apple maggot fly (in the process)




For "transitional fossils", let's be specific in order to minimize misunderstandings. A transitional fossil is typically defined as a specimen that exhibits a mixture of traits from different taxa. Do you agree with that definition?
A transitional fossils should show the migration of traits/characteristics/DNA from one species as it becomes another gradually taken place over the eons of time evolutionists insist upon.
 
A transitional fossils should show the migration of traits/characteristics/DNA from one species as it becomes another gradually taken place over the eons of time evolutionists insist upon.
Um, that's not any sort of definition of "transitional fossil" I've ever heard of.

Again, let's be specific. If say, reptiles and mammals shared a common ancestry, then we would expect to find fossil specimens that have a mixture of reptilian and mammalian characteristics, right?
 
Um, that's not any sort of definition of "transitional fossil" I've ever heard of.

Again, let's be specific. If say, reptiles and mammals shared a common ancestry, then we would expect to find fossil specimens that have a mixture of reptilian and mammalian characteristics, right?
But not just that only. If a reptile slowly became a mammal, then only one fossil or type of fossil only ponts to a "platypus"type of species. It does not confirm evolution unless there are fossils showing stages of this evolution. If it took millions of years there should be billions of fossils showing this beyond question. Why not?
 
But not just that only. If a reptile slowly became a mammal, then only one fossil or type of fossil only ponts to a "platypus"type of species. It does not confirm evolution unless there are fossils showing stages of this evolution. If it took millions of years there should be billions of fossils showing this beyond question. Why not?
Does this mean we agree that transitional fossils exist?

As far as "confirming evolution", I've already done that in my Post #7 (the multiple cases of evolution of new species). Therefore, that evolution occurs is simply reality. What transitional fossils can tell us is how it occurred in the past, e.g., by what specific pathways.
 
Does this mean we agree that transitional fossils exist?

As far as "confirming evolution", I've already done that in my Post #7 (the multiple cases of evolution of new species). Therefore, that evolution occurs is simply reality. What transitional fossils can tell us is how it occurred in the past, e.g., by what specific pathways.
Maybe, but I want more than that to make an accurate assessment.
 
More transitional fossils showing the gradual changes necessary for evolution to be a fact rather than a theory.
Again, evolution is a fact. We see it happening right before our eyes, all the time.

And again, transitional fossils can give us info on how evolution occurred in the past, but isn't needed to show that evolution occurs; observing it directly takes care of that.

Is there any specific group of organisms and their fossil record you're particularly interested in?
 
Evolution has so many holes. If it took millions of years for one species to become another,
Often, it happens much faster than that. Even many creationists such as Answers in Genesis, no longer deny the fact of speciation.

there should be billions of transitional fossils.
As YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise demonstrates, there are countless number of transitional fossils, which he admits are "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory."

When evolutionists couldn't adequately explain, they came up with sudden transition. Laughable.
As a wise man once said, people are usually down on things they aren't up on. Do some investigation and learn.
 
More transitional fossils showing the gradual changes necessary for evolution to be a fact rather than a theory.
Observed changes in population genomes does that. Evolution is an observed fact. But common descent is not evolution; it's a consequence of evolution. And YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise says...

Evidences for Darwin’s second expectation — of stratomorphic intermediate species —include such species as Baragwanathia27(between rhyniophytes and lycopods), Pikaia28 (between echinoderms and chordates), Purgatorius29 (between the tree shrews and the primates), and Proconsul30 (between the non-hominoid primates and the hominoids). Darwin’s third expectation —of higher-taxon stratomorphic intermediates — has been confirmed by such examples as the mammal-like reptile groups31 between the reptiles and the mammals,and the phenacodontids32 between the horses and their presumed ancestors. Darwin’s fourth expectation — of stratomorphic series— has been confirmed by such examples as the early bird series,33the tetrapod series,34,35 the whale series,36 the various mammal series of the Cenozoic37 (for example, the horse series, the camel series, the elephant series, the pig series, the titanothere series,etc.), the Cantius and Plesiadapus primate series,38 and the hominid series.39 Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact.
Kurt Wise Toward a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms
 
But not just that only. If a reptile slowly became a mammal, then only one fossil or type of fossil only ponts to a "platypus"type of species.
No, there are dozens of them. Would you like to learn about some of them?

It does not confirm evolution unless there are fossils showing stages of this evolution.
And there are. One of the more interesting series of transitionals involves the evolution of the mammalian lower jaw and ear from the reptilian form by gradual changes. Would you like to see that?
If it took millions of years there should be billions of fossils showing this beyond question.
And as Dr. Wise admits, there are. The Karoo formation, for example, has countless billions of such fossils. Which is pretty impressive, since fossilization is a rare event for vertebrates; most of them decay and are gone in a decade or so, even if buried.
 

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
Back
Top