TOE and the Reasons for Doubt

No, it is your assertions and prejudices talking. You've been shown that your understanding of current evolutionary theory is sorely lacking at best. What you propose as problems are not regarded as such by biologists because everything you've presented is already known and either incorporated into the theory, or was even predicted BY the theory, such as "living fossils" and stasis.What you need to do, rather than keep posting pretty pictures (and I admit, many of them are well taken with great colors) is explain, fully and with cites, WHY what you're showing us is bad for evolution. You need to honestly engage with people who disagree with you, rather than just dismissing their replies as "prejudice and assertion", and accept that you may not be omniscient: you may misinterpret things, you may be misinformed, you may not understand things. As I recall, one of your heroes was not a fan of pride and was a big proponent of humility.Judging by your name and your tactics here, it seems quite possible you're actually an "evolutionist" acting as a caricature of a fundamentalist creationist as a way to make the position seem laughable. If so, well done, but please come clean and stop clogging the site. If not, you may want to rethink your tactics under the realization that you're not doing your cause any favors and are, quite probably, doing it harm.

For one thing, evolutionists teach that humans did not live during the age that coal was formed, 250 million yrs ago. Quote: "Coal formation first began some 250 million years ago in an age called 'carboniferous period'." Page not found - Kids Portal For ParentsSo it is for you and your evolutionist comrades to figure out just how all those objects got encased so far below the surface of the earth when in fact it takes humans to produce human teeth, gold chains, hammers, etc.Evolution is a sorry joke. I laugh at it.

Have you considered the possibility that people placed them there? You know, modern people? The ones who are mining the coal, in fact? Does it not seem likely that some joker decides to stick something into the coal as a way to fool his friends? Maybe the coal miners are a little less than tidy and simply drop something, and a subsequent coal miner misinterprets it? Maybe it's not even the miners, maybe it's an overzealous creationist grasping at straws to try and prop up their flagging and crumbling "theory" either by seeding the site, or by intentionally misinterpreting the finding of said artifacts?

If so then my prejudices are well founded as an ex-evolutionist.Even the so-called 'experts' on this website have done a pitiful job defending their beliefs. I haven't seen anything that would be even close to convincing for someone who perhaps has not made up their minds in the matter.You and those like you are just pretending.

So you claim, but you have yet to show that to be the case. As an ex-Christian, it seems my prejudices are well founded, as mine are rational, logical and evidence based, rather than the opposite. They've done a great job, as evidenced by the fact that you're best reply to a refutation of your posts is to simply ignore it, assert that it's laughable, and to Gish gallop to another topic without actually allowing any sort of debate to take place. Your tactics are dishonest, and even if you could provide some evidence against evolution, it would get lost among all the chaff you're throwing in the air. Again, you're doing your cause harm and little good. I'm at a loss as to what you're hoping to do here. You're not convincing anyone, you're not learning anything.What's your goal?

THAT kind of 'reasoning' is exactly why I continue to reject evolutionary theory...among many other reasons.Do you think that people would go to the trouble of digging, in some cases, hundreds of feet below the surface of the earth just to place those objects there? Even so, what process would they use to encase the objects in coal? And what about the engineers that were merely doing their jobs and found the objects by accident? Are they all lying?You are wishful thinker. Such thinking is hard to respect.What are you going to do when geologists dig up a full grown T-Rex with the remains of a human in its belly? That day is coming.

You aren't telling the truth. The evidence speaks for itself and it is very strong.'ex-Christian'. Oh, now I get you. An apostate who turned your back on God's Son. That explains everything.Well, I'll put it to you this way; The Lord answers my prayers quite often, even when I tell no one else what it is I am praying for. He is very good to me and my Christian companions. But skeptics like you have done nothing but resentment and bitter feelings towards me. So who do you think I am more likely to trust?

That "tooth" don't look much like a tooth to me; the roots are way to wide and long in relation to the "body". The first thing I'd ask is "What analysis has been done to prove it's a tooth?".

Hi, Calypsis4.Please read the following mock post by Bluejay:----------------------------------------------------------------[mock post]Here is evidence of evolution:

Cooksonia bridges the gap between non-vascular plants and vascular plants

Schinderhannes bartelsi bridges the gap between Dinocarida and Arthropoda

Ambulocetus natans bridges the gap between Artiodactyls and Cetaceans

These three fossils completely destroy all arguments against ToE. It is up to you to explain how these animals could have happened under your ID model.'Nuff said, right? [/mock post]----------------------------------------------------------------The above mock post is identical in quality to the arguments you have provided against ToE.It's nothing but: "Look! A picture of something that, according to me, destroys your argument! You have to be indoctrinated or heavily biased not to see it!"Seriously, would you like us to use the above tactics against you? Would that really make for a useful debate? If not, why the hell are you doing it?

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

No...but I think people would go through the trouble of digging, in cases, hundreds of feet below the surface of the earth just to get coal...you've heard of those things called coal mines, right? I don't know. I haven't heard any engineers say they found stuff encased in coal. I'm sure if they did, it would be headline news, considering the process that makes coal would have destroyed any artifact in the first place. The only way something would get into the coal is by having it put there at a later time. I don't want, nor need your respect. I assure you, you have none of mine. I prefer to be well regarded by people of conscience, thought, and integrity. Three properties you're sorely lacking. Yeah, logic would tend to hurt your idea, I can see why you would reject it. WHen it does, you can gloat all over this forum. I'm not going to hold my breath though. I would imagine any human eaten by a T. rex would be digested, and any placement of human bones inside T. rex bones would be less than conclusive evidence, no matter how much you would love to think so.

Again, shallow thinking. The tooth was not in question by the scientists who examined it. It was human.

No.

The thing's not a tooth. A cast of it was identified by a few dentists as a tooth, but none of the paleontologists he showed it to were convinced. It's a simulacrum, a natural object that looks like something we recognize. I wonder if there are any reliable studies of the thing published.There's a good blog post on it with a really bad picture and some excerpts from the 1926 Literary Digest describes it calling it a tooth.Somehow the tooth's enamel was replaced by carbonized and the roots by iron. The guy who found the thing was, of course, a creationist who instantly identified it as evidence of the flood.Just for grins let's say it is evidence for the flood...so now that means the creationists have one piece of evidence to set against something like the 400,000,000 plus fossils in museums and universities around the world.Oh, the "tooth" is about 1/3 of an inch long...at best a baby tooth. Way to go God. Bad Archeology: The ‘Beartooth Highway tooth’

Right back atcha. Isn't this form of debate fun and entertaining? We can throw insults and assertions left and right! I didn't turn my back on anything. My parents raised me to think logically and believe what I see. When doing so, it became obvious that believing in fairy tales was something for children and was a good thing to grow out of.You calim to be an "ex-evolutionist" and you seem to think that word means "scientist who isn't Christian." SO it appears you're the one who turned your back on something, namely logic and reason. I'd advise you to turn back around, your prejudices are showing. I don't resent you. I resent your dishonesty, your unfounded accusations, and your inability to debate in good faith on a debate forum. Until you show any incling toward reversing course on any of those, you're not going to get mcuh "good feelings." See, I tend to want people to show themselves worthy of my respect, and you have failed to do so on just about every post you make. There are many creationists I respect on here. They earn my respect by debating honestly and behaving in a respectful manner to those who disagree with them. If you do so, I will begin to change my opinion of you. I sincerely hope that you do.Now, I fear this is not quite the topic, so I'm going to stop, and I assume you'll throw in a "last word" and thst you in turn will assume by my lack of response that I'm letting you win. I assure you, I'm merely being honest...try it.

Once again: this is the Science section of EvC, leave the apologetics out of it.