Does it make falsifiable predictions about what we should find in the fossil record? Congratulations. It's a theory, and it's workably applicable. Go out into the field and apply it, like these scientists have done.
One more step for evolution...
- Thread starter SnakeLord
- Start date
Does it make falsifiable predictions about what we should find in the fossil record? Congratulations. It's a theory, and it's workably applicable. Go out into the field and apply it, like these scientists have done.
If I say i have a theory about how I can make gold from lead you expect that I can make gold from lead - I mean workable in the sense that it actually works
Go test it. So far our observations have corroborated the theory. That means it works. Same reason why Newton's Law of Gravitation works despite a more accurate model being available. Capisce?
It works by the model of extrapolation - some changes are observed on the platform of micro evolution and it is supposed that such such changes also happen on a larger level - it presupposes that th egenus of the living entity is irreducable - there is also evidence that archeologists tend to shape their findings
“ Just offshore of Guadeloupe, in the West Indies, lies a kilometer-long formation of extremely hard limestone dated as Miocene, or about 25 million years old.
Nothing surprising so far! However, history records that in the late 1700's many human skeletons---all indistinguishable from modern humans---were excavated from this limestone. One of the quarried specimens, ensconced in a 2-ton slab, was shipped to the British Museum.
It arrived in 1812 and was placed on public display. With the ascendance of Darwinism, the fossil skeleton was quietly spirited away to the basement. The discovery of these human remains has been well-documented in the scientific literature.
Here is another pertinent geological fact: the limestone formation in question is situated 2-3 meters below a "1-million-year-old" coral reef. If the limestone is truly 25 million years old, the human evolutionary timetable is grossly in error.
Even if this is not the case, and the bones are merely 1 million years old or so, as required by the coral reef; then, fully modern humans lived in the New World long before the Bering Land Bridge went into service.
The only way a serious geological or archeological anomaly can be avoided is to predicate that the limestone formation was really laid down in the last 10,000-20,000 years (in geo-materalist years)---something like that doesn't seem too likely.
-Bill cooper ”
http://www.rense.com/general30/nasa.htm
http://www.mcremo.com/doors.htm
Where did I say there was? I offered you the chance to say that each variety of hominid and humans were created as individual species as though they were poofed into existence, or that humans evolved from hominids.
The way you are not even making comment on most of what I am saying is very telling indeed.
Guadeloupe Man: W. Cooper claimed in 1983 that a modern skeleton found on Guadeloupe in 1812 had been dated at 25 million years old, in the Miocene period. The excellent condition of the skeleton, and the fact that it had originally been found with other skeletons (all pointing in the same direction) along with a dog and some implements, indicate that it was a recent burial. In addition, it has never been claimed to be from Miocene deposits by anyone except Cooper. (Howgate and Lewis 1984)
From:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_anomaly.html#guadeloupe
As far as layers go, there is no rule that says layers will get deposited uniformly. The grand canyon has many anomolous layers, due to deposition, later erosion, and then more deposition. Sometimes geological processes mix layers up, so that younger is on top of older! An understanding of geology is important to scientists when dating layers. They take all this into account when dating fossils.
http://www.rense.com/general30/nasa.htm
They never say why they think this shoal is man-made.
http://www.mcremo.com/doors.htm
Both the video Mysterious Origins of Man and the book Forbidden Archaeology, claim that artifacts found in the gold-bearing gravels of California provide convincing evidence of the existence of modern man in California around 55 million years ago. In the 1880's, they claim that gold miners found pestles, mortars, ladles, and spear points within Tertiary gravel deposits underlying volcanic rocks that cap Table Mountain within Tuolumne County, California. These finds were reported by both D. J. Whitney (1880) and Becker (1891).
The findings of Dr. Whitney and Dr. Becker, including the artifacts found in the Montezuma Tunnels, were studied by Sinclair (1908) and found to lack any convincing evidence for being of Tertiary age. He found serious problems of provenance and other incongruities that argue against a Tertiary age for them as have other investigators, i.e. Holmes (1899). These finds were also widely discussed in other papers and in the popular press as indicated by the references at the end of this article.
From:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/mortar.html
------------
In general, I'm disappointed that you would mention all this pseudoscience. If you appreciate the scientific method, which these "discoveries" are supposedly based on, you would notice that evolution is well supported by evidence.
you said there were a million fossils that show how a hunch back developed a straight spine
To put it in clearer terms: If we have a million fossils charting the apparent evolution between hunched over hominid to upright human, then you are stating that all 1 million of those fossils are of unique species which were poofed into existence rather one genus simply evolving?
I was giving you a hypothetical case, hence the 'IF'. I don't know the details of the fossil record, but it is relevant to the way we understand the fossil record. So, if I was to lay out hominid fossils, a million of them in such a way that corresponded to the most hunched over monkey-like specimen, to the most upright human:
Would your conclusion be that each different fossil was a species which poofed into existence or that they simply evolved?
I put that last bit in bold in an attempt to get you to answer it for the 100th time of asking.
spidergoat said:
What he doesn't realize is that if they were supported by any weight of evidence they would either be incorporated into science or used in court at the Dover case by the intelligent design activists. The fact that creationists don't use these discredited cases when wanting to push forward their agenda means that the creationists themselves have discredited the pseudoscience as well as respected evolutionary scientists.
Lightgigantic:
www.rense.com is a pseudo-scientific, conspiracy-theory laden, website. It isn't a valid source.
It claims that George W. Bush is a shapeshifting alien reptile, for instance.
Please, don't quote it.
www.rense.com is a pseudo-scientific, conspiracy-theory laden, website. It isn't a valid source.
It claims that George W. Bush is a shapeshifting alien reptile, for instance.
Please, don't quote it.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Is this not generally known?
Each species is proofed
Even abiogenesis suffers from th same mystery .. same with the origins of the chemicals or physical matter before abiogenesis ... same for why inert matter could exhibit independence in the first place
Each significantly different humanoid fossil may indeed represent a separate species. Without DNA, it is difficult to determine the relationship between these species. For instance, they may have all evolved independently from a common ancestor. They may have evolved along a separate branch. They may have evolved to be separate, then again merged, and then separated again as a result of migration. It is a complex story.
This makes no attempt to answer my question. Don't be embarrassed to admit you are a creationist and that each species poofed into existence without the need to evolve from an ancestor.
So I would rather you answer this question (without deliberate typos this time) before I will then take you up on discussing the (god of the) gaps.
LG.
Why do human embryos go through stages that include a tail and gill slits?
Why do we even have a tailbone?
Why do our feet resemble hands?
Why, why, why...
Why do human embryos go through stages that include a tail and gill slits?
Why do we even have a tailbone?
Why do our feet resemble hands?
Why, why, why...
And since cris, in his infinite wisdom saw fit to close my thread on toes rather than move it, I'll bring it up here.
Why do humans involuntarily grasp with their feet during orgasm?
Why do humans involuntarily grasp with their feet during orgasm?
This one, illustrates a point I like to make regarding evidence for a world with some intelligent direction, and atheists refusal/inability to see the evidence.
Everybody's human after all.
I don't understand your point. The fact that the archaeoperyx had four wings instead of two is interesting, but irrelevent to the larger idea of refusal/inability to see evidence. Yes, there are sicentists who would have wished for it to be a perfect transition between dinosaurs and birds, but the very fact that they are willing to accept emerging facts is proof that their concern is for the truth, not for an ideology.
There are so many other fossils that show gradual evolution of features, evolutionary theory does not depend on just one.
There are so many other fossils that show gradual evolution of features, evolutionary theory does not depend on just one.