|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 2/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Great Creationist Fossil Failure | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
I don't proclaim to be an expert. I am not an expert. Therefore I am open to learning. At the same time I like a good point and a logical argument. As such evolution appears to be the weaker theory. Enlighten me if I am wrong. There are more missing fossils and weaker explanations for evolution and abiogenesis than creationism.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
Therefore I am open to learning.
No you are not. Don't lie to us. Don't insult us. You are attempting to proselytize, nothing more nothing less. All roads lead to the bible for you. That is not being open to learning.
At the same time I like a good point and a logical argument.
Another lie. You think only you make good points. You wouldn't know a logical argument if it bit you on the ass. Your claim of the legitimacy of OOPARTS shows clearly an inability to possess critical thinking skills. You accept these hook, line and sinker without actually examining and processing the data and evidence.Present them. Make a good point and logical argument for them. I am not an expert.
You should listen to the experts. They are the ones you are trying to shovel your bs to. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
I will consider all scientific evidence, and always try to adjust my view to fit the evidence. I do try and be open minded to the evidence. Yes I do take the bible as evidence as well, something that you may find strange, but using the bible I may just be able to interpret the science in some cases.
ie scientists debate about whether the PT boundary had a major transgression or a major regression. I am confident in the flood story and so I can tell you the transgression was first. Followed by the regression. Scientists may wonder at the rapid Cambrian Explosion and look for earlier fossil transitions. I say it points to creation, and so you are unlikely to find earlier fossil transitions. Scientists may wonder why a wide variety of the earliest mammals would congregate in Turkey and then spread. I have the advantage of the bible, it says the ark settled in Turkey, which explains the congregation of early mammals. Haplogroup studies point to a spread of humans from the Middle East. Some scientists still support the "out of Africa hypothesis". The bible supports the haplogroup studies rather than the "out of Africa" interpretation of them. The bible implies a spreading from the ark, and describes a spreading from the tower of Babel. Once again I am at an advantage through taking the bible literally.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Yes I believe that most dinosaurs did rapidly adapt from the archosaur. In a few thousand years? You really think that evolution is that powerful? And again I have to ask why no-one noticed. The Ancient Egyptians apparently didn't notice that they were sharing Egypt with Aegyptosaurus, Bahariasaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, Deltadromeus and Spinosaurus. You'd think they'd have noticed something like this, but no ...
The ancient cultures of Mesopotamia didn't notice all the ichthyosaurs that were swimming about, or indeed the fact that they were underwater. The ancient Chinese managed to overlook the fact that they were hanging out with (for example) Qianzhousaurus sinensis, a bipedal predator which was 29 feet long and weighed 1800 pounds. You'd think the way it kept eating them would be a clue, but no ...
I am not making piecemeal excuses. Yes you are: your excuse for the lobsters has nothing in common with your excuse for the humans which has nothing in common with your excuse for the dinosaurs.
There is actually evidence to support that trilobites and early bacteria thrived in warm anoxic sulfuric environments. This is not very conducive to other life. But remember, we also have (for example) Permian coral and Permian fish, neither of which thrive in anoxic sulfuric environments. So why don't we find lobsters alongside them?
To expect every modern environment to be prevalent enough in the Cambrian to show fossils is not logical. Well, according to you there must have been enough modern environments to sustain every modern group, and indeed all the Mesozoic groups too. And yet in hundreds of years of fossil hunting no-one's found one such environment? I agree it would be unreasonable to ask for every one of them, but you can't find any of them, not one Paleozoic place where mammals lived, or birds, or crocodiles, or flowering plants, or lobsters, or scleractinian coral, or teleost fish ... Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
The bible actually describes 14 of every kind. Most people miss that. There are only two of the unclean ones, the rest have 14.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Yet abiogenesis is a theoretical impossibility because of the need for multiple opposing environments in the same spot at the same time to create life. If you believe you can prove this, start another thread. The world's scientists will I am sure be awestruck by your profound insights into the science of biochemistry, which you have never studied, and the history of the early Earth, of which you know almost nothing.
And yet you attempt to discredit creationism for some missing fossils?? Well, given that we have lots and lots of intermediate forms, and you have no, zilch, zip, bupkis, zero of these Paleozoic mammals, or birds, or flowering plants, etc, that we ought to have if you were right, yeah, the advantage is with us. Y'see, lots is more than nothing at all.
Not only that..... at least creationism has a valid theory of origin. "A wizard did it" is not a theory and does not appear to be valid.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Scientists may wonder why a wide variety of the earliest mammals would congregate in Turkey and then spread. Scientists would say that you made that up. The mammals you refer to are Eocene, while the earliest mammals are late Jurassic; and the fact that the scientists say that "many of the fossil species are completely unlike any other fossil mammals we’ve ever seen" shows that they did not in fact spread, or at least that we have as yet no evidence whatsoever that they did, because otherwise these forms would have been seen elsewhere. 'Cos of what "spread" means.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Here is another map, this one mtDNA:
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
The overlap between humans and dinosaurs was just for a short early period of Middle Eastern history. Before that humans were in small numbers, not enough to reflect in archaeology or fossils. A litle later, when humans started cities and grew in numbes we signs of this overlap, other than the Sumerian seals, the Egyptian Narmer Tablets , we also have a Cynogathus represented in the temple of Gobleki Tepe.
Just as early Egypt reached its peak, it appears the Old Kingdom was wiped out. Weather patterns changed. Sumeria went through a disaster as did the Indus civilisation. When these civilisations recovered they were never as strong as the original ones. The overlap between humans and dinosaurs as reflected in artifacts was only during those early advanced civilisations, just for a short period.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Look I do understand why they assume they come from Africa because certain African groups are without certain ancient mutations that every other group has.
However this could also mean these groups migrated out the Middle East earlier than the rest. ie the assumption of location during earlier times could be the wrong assumption, especially when the rest of the groups expanded out from the Middle East.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Research into mammal evolution focuses on pivotal Eocene interval in Turkey | The University of Kansas
You are correct, the scientists are more concerned why these unique fossils gathered there , than reference to their spreading. My bad for emphasizing subsequent spreading , I'm interpreting the evidence through my own paradigm which isn't the logical thing to do. But even so, its easy to explain the mystery expressed in the link via the ark story. They gathered there through the ark, then later some surviving species subsequently spread out.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Look I do understand why they assume they come from Africa because certain African groups are without certain ancient mutations that every other group has. That's pretty definitive evidence for modern humans originating in Africa.
However this could also mean these groups migrated out the Middle East earlier than the rest. ie the assumption of location during earlier times could be the wrong assumption, especially when the rest of the groups expanded out from the Middle East. And they could have caught a local Metro bus for the journey. That's just about as likely as your scenario. You are ignoring a lot of evidence and making up increasingly unlikely "what ifs" to support your a priori religious beliefs. That's not doing science.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The overlap between humans and dinosaurs was just for a short early period of Middle Eastern history. So how much time are you allowing for the evolution of the dinosaurs from more basal archosaurs?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
You are correct, the scientists are more concerned why these unique fossils gathered there , than reference to their spreading. My bad for emphasizing subsequent spreading , I'm interpreting the evidence through my own paradigm which isn't the logical thing to do. But even so, its easy to explain the mystery expressed in the link via the ark story. They gathered there through the ark, then later some surviving species subsequently spread out. How does the Ark story explain all the other unique post-Paleozoic faunas? For example, the unique Triassic fauna of the Chinle Formation in New Mexico. The unique Cretaceous fauna at Wanderfeld IV in South Africa? The present unique fauna of Australia?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9516 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Mindspawn, you're all over the place with your 'evidence' and argument and you're on your own against a lot of people who have heard all this before - many, many times.
Why don't you pick your strongest single argument and present it fully, then we can pick it apart in detail?Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024