Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Great Creationist Fossil Failure
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1050 of 1163 (795616)
12-14-2016 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1048 by Dr Adequate
12-14-2016 4:24 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
So, just to be clear about this, in your world possums, kangaroos, koalas and wombats all diverged from a common ancestor within a few thousand years, but hominids with different-sized pelvises can't be related to each other?
Not at all. They can be related. But if you are relying on physiology as your evidence of evolution, and that physiology is inconsistent it ruins your evidence. They could be related or they could be unique species. There is in some cases a recently adapted clade which can be convincing, other than that most evolutionary sequences are unconvincing because of these sudden jumps in physiology in one feature which ruins the sequence and seems to indicate a unique species. I know under evolutionary assumption they remain related because of their close physiology, but as evidence against creationism the sequence is ruined if it is not completely convincing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1048 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-14-2016 4:24 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1052 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-14-2016 4:43 PM mindspawn has replied
 Message 1054 by Taq, posted 12-14-2016 4:46 PM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1053 of 1163 (795620)
12-14-2016 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1028 by Taq
12-14-2016 3:36 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
How do you determine that?
One determines similar physiology between two fossils by looking at the physiology of both fossils. If one cannot find any earlier fossil of similar physiology then that fossil can be regarded as "fully formed". Fully formed fossils are evidence that favors creationism. Unfortunately many many organisms just appear fully formed with no evidence of any predecessor.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1028 by Taq, posted 12-14-2016 3:36 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1055 by Taq, posted 12-14-2016 4:48 PM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1057 of 1163 (795628)
12-14-2016 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1051 by Taq
12-14-2016 4:42 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
What range of organisms does creationism predict, and why? Why shouldn't we find rabbits in terrestrial Cambrian deposits if creationism is true? Why shouldn't we find grasses in Devonian strata if evolution is true? Why shouldn't we find flowers in those same Devonian strata if creationism? Why shouldn't we find wooly mammoths in Jurassic sediments if creationism is true?
Where are these predictions that creationism supposedly makes?
Creationism predicts that all kinds were created at one moment in the past. Therefore all current organisms will be found through all layers in approximately the same form as modern organisms. After the flood , ark animals were too small in number to reflect significant fossilisation.
In the pre-Cambrian, alive organisms are less likely to be buried, it is the organisms of short life spans that would have been buried in precambrian strata. Much (not all) of the early landscape was marine anoxic and sulfuric with limited species therein.
The angiosperm non-aquatic low oxygen landscape of today was restricted to Siberian highlands in pre-flood times (before the transgression /regression of the PT boundary). This is the only early landscape that would explain the sudden later appearance of fully formed grasses and mammals (rabbits).
Late Permian to early Triassic layers are largely flood related. First marine reptiles then large flightless birds dominated the post-flood landscape (Triassic/Jurassic) until mammals spread out from the ark. There was an impact event that cause the eventual extinction of the dinosaurs and large flightless birds , and the subsequent dominance of ark mammals on most landscapes. Thus mammals were not numerous enough and were possibly confined to Turkey during the period that these previously marine reptiles dominated the continents during the Triassic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1051 by Taq, posted 12-14-2016 4:42 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1062 by edge, posted 12-14-2016 8:08 PM mindspawn has replied
 Message 1071 by Coyote, posted 12-14-2016 9:13 PM mindspawn has replied
 Message 1072 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-14-2016 10:44 PM mindspawn has replied
 Message 1106 by Taq, posted 12-15-2016 10:46 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1059 of 1163 (795630)
12-14-2016 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1056 by Dr Adequate
12-14-2016 5:03 PM


Re: TOPIC
quote:
We have enough threads where we can brag, and have bragged, about the triumphs of evolution. This thread is about the Great Creationist Fossil Failure. If you feel that you've run out of excuses, say so instead of trying to change the subject.
That is very unfair of you to say. I am replying to a lot of questions and if I do not get to all of them rapidly this is no excuse or subject change. In fact I do not find any question this thread challenging at all. Due to the evidence favoring creationism and a later flood as reflected in the geology of the PT boundary which shows this strong transgression and regression at the PT boundary.
And it is evolutionists who have the excuses, it is creationists that have the evidence of the sudden appearance of multiple organisms fully formed as expected.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1056 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-14-2016 5:03 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1060 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-14-2016 5:26 PM mindspawn has replied
 Message 1063 by edge, posted 12-14-2016 8:10 PM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1074 of 1163 (795666)
12-15-2016 5:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1070 by Coyote
12-14-2016 9:08 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
Evolution is largely a reaction to changing environmental conditions, with a lot of founders effect, accidents, and pure good or bad luck thrown into the mix.
Each species will react as circumstances apply, some will thrive for a while and others will go extinct. All of this is in keeping with the theory of evolution.
You simply can't expect to take some species that evolve away from a successful line (as judged millions of years later) as evidence that evolution didn't occur. It is rather the opposite.
All you say about evolution is nice in theory. My point is that an evolutionary sequence simply has to be convincing. And with zero convincing sequences what is evolution left with. An interesting concept. Interesting theory you guys have.
But if your evidence for this great theory of yours is faulty, do not expect it just to be accepted because you say so. If one species in your sequence does not fit, it should be disregarded as evidence. I state the obvious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1070 by Coyote, posted 12-14-2016 9:08 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1079 by Tangle, posted 12-15-2016 5:32 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1075 of 1163 (795667)
12-15-2016 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1062 by edge
12-14-2016 8:08 PM


Flood at the PT boundary
You seem to dispute a widespread transgression/regression event at the PT boundary. The following link references many studies about this matter as listed below. The evidence shows that both occurred. The bible indicates this widespread flood followed by a rapid regression, which explains the evidence. Often a regression will cause a hiatus, washing away the evidence of the transgression, but generally the signs of both occurring are widespread at the PT boundary:
http://www.geo.tu-freiberg.de/...eminar/os03_04/herrmann.pdf
""Sea level changes at Permian Triassic boundary are a widespread discussed subject in the last three
decades and there are still discussions about it. Every theory has facts that seem to be correct. In
comparison to palaeoclimatology a transgression is to be favoured, because of the decline of the ice
sheet in the Upper Permian in combination with a heating. On the other hand isotope studies from
HEYDARI et al. (2001) show another trend, which also seems to be true. In general, there is no trend
that sedimentological analysis gave other results as geochemical, in every scientific field of geology
there is confusion. What theory is the right, isn't presume to say""
[ Long cut-n-paste of the references from the above link deleted, please see link for the references. --Admin ]
Edited by Admin, : Remove long list of references.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1062 by edge, posted 12-14-2016 8:08 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1098 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 10:08 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1076 of 1163 (795668)
12-15-2016 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 1072 by Dr Adequate
12-14-2016 10:44 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
And this is not the case. Therefore (as surveyed in the OP) creationists have come up with some extremely bad excuses for why it is not the case. To this you have added your hiding-under-the-Siberian-traps nonsense, which also doesn't work. So Creationism stands refuted. Good.
That is a bit rich coming from evolutionists who are the masters of bad excuses for their lack of fossils. The Siberian highlands is the niche environment most obviously matching today's common environment. So of course that is the place to look for ancient representations of modern organisms.
Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1072 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-14-2016 10:44 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1096 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2016 9:55 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1077 of 1163 (795669)
12-15-2016 5:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1071 by Coyote
12-14-2016 9:13 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
The evidence does not support that view.
We have transitionals for a large number of species, including modern humans.
Yes yes, I have heard that before. Yet the only evidence presented for human transitions is a pic of some skulls, unlabelled may I add. Unless I have missed a post which actually tries to present some evidence. Maybe I missed a post? If so I would like to deal with it.
Label them with their species name, I will look up the transitionary sequence and see if it is logical. If your sequence is not logical your point is irrelevant. I dare you. show me your so-called evidence for evolution. A list of species, named, and dated , in a transitionary sequence from non-human apes and leading to modern humans.
Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1071 by Coyote, posted 12-14-2016 9:13 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1110 by Coyote, posted 12-15-2016 10:58 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1078 of 1163 (795670)
12-15-2016 5:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1069 by Coyote
12-14-2016 9:04 PM


Re: UNNECESSARY RELIGIOUS DISRESPECT
quote:
And refuted.
? Have they discovered a hidden cache of lovely PreCambrian intermediate fossils to explain the sudden appearance of most phyla in the Cambrian Explosion?? I think not. When things just appear, the better explanation is that they just appeared. That is what the evidence is showing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1069 by Coyote, posted 12-14-2016 9:04 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1111 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 10:58 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1080 of 1163 (795672)
12-15-2016 5:33 AM
Reply to: Message 1058 by PaulK
12-14-2016 5:16 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
Even there it would be false to say that there is NO evidence of intermediates. Such as the trace fossils of earlier Arthropoda alluded to previously in this thread
Please be more specific about the trace fossils. If arthropods existed earlier than expected this could merely be confirmation of earlier trilobites not necessarily confirmation of their PREDECESSOR. ie please post more detail about the physiology of the earlier arthropods to make your point relevant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1058 by PaulK, posted 12-14-2016 5:16 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1083 by PaulK, posted 12-15-2016 6:07 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1081 of 1163 (795673)
12-15-2016 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 1079 by Tangle
12-15-2016 5:32 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
Another fine point, well made.
The scientific world - and, as it happens, the majority of the religious world - is convinced. It underpins all of biological science. Virtually none of biology would make sense without it.
What is equally convincing is that only those with extreme religious beliefs remain unconvinced. This is not a coincidence. It is not possible to convince you with evidence, you are already convinced that no matter what evidence you see, that it is wrong. It MUST be wrong for you to hold the beliefs that you hold, so you create outragously rediculous scenarios such as fossils hiding in Siberia to explain to yourself, and only yourself, why the theory is wrong.
Creationists are the precedents for the current malaise of 'post truth'. Any old crap story can be invented to justify a ludicrous position. Like you, it's not necessary to hold any hard-earned qualifications and have real knowledge to form an opinion - you just create sciency sounding soundbites, pollute real science and distort and cherry pick real findings. It's a corrupt and corrupting practice, and should your imaginary god exist, he'll reserve a very special place for people like you that lie in his name.
Please post your proof of evolution. Instead of a pretty picture, a list of actual species over time that show changes beyond a clade.
What is outrageously ridiculous is your claim that evolution exists without any proof. The more you guys mock the obvious location of a biome similar to ours in Siberia, the more I mention .... ahem...... the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION.... hehe
Sure we are both missing fossils. You keep digging in the PreCambrian desperately hoping for some evidence that evolution exists, in the meantime I will watch the evidence to come out of the Siberian highlands. Deal?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1079 by Tangle, posted 12-15-2016 5:32 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1085 by Tangle, posted 12-15-2016 6:18 AM mindspawn has replied
 Message 1095 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2016 9:52 AM mindspawn has not replied
 Message 1102 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 10:24 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1082 of 1163 (795674)
12-15-2016 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1060 by Dr Adequate
12-14-2016 5:26 PM


Flood at the PT boundary
You seem to dispute flooding at the PT boundary. Kindly refer to my recent post showing evidence for a significant transgressive and regressive event at the PT boundary.
quote:
And what about the fossils? Your excuse was that all the fossils that you need to exist were hiding under the Siberian traps where no fossils can be found, and then it was pointed out that we're knee-deep in Paleozoic fossils from that exact area.
I seemed to miss your evidence of Paleozoic fossils from specifically the Siberian highland area of the Paleozoic. Kindly post a link. It is that precise area which would have the climatic/atmospheric conditions conducive to modern prevalent lifeforms (angiosperms/mammals/birds)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1060 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-14-2016 5:26 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1084 of 1163 (795676)
12-15-2016 6:15 AM
Reply to: Message 1083 by PaulK
12-15-2016 6:07 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
If the evidence is insufficient to come to a conclusion - even on a likelihood basis - then it can't be said to support one side or another. We cannot show that trilobites definitely had a predecessor but the evidence is certainly not good enough to say that there was none. In fact even the initial trilobite expansion from (probably) Siberia is not shown in the fossil record. Since we both agree that the trilobites expanded out from a single location we must also agree that the lack of fossils representing that expansion is a defect in the fossil record.
In contrast, I remind you that you have absolutely no evidence for Precambrian mammals - or, indeed, any tetrapods. Not even ambiguous evidence. Nor even a good reason to think it plausible that such a diverse range of creatures were all hanging out in a single location, all unnoticed until they happened to pop out.
So in fact you have no evidence for any predecessor to the trilobite. Nothing. Yes sure you can surmise they existed, but that is on the level of fantasy. Reality is they suddenly appeared fully formed as did MANY phyla at that time, the evidence favors creationism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1083 by PaulK, posted 12-15-2016 6:07 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1086 by PaulK, posted 12-15-2016 6:29 AM mindspawn has not replied
 Message 1105 by edge, posted 12-15-2016 10:41 AM mindspawn has not replied
 Message 1107 by Taq, posted 12-15-2016 10:49 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1087 of 1163 (795681)
12-15-2016 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 1085 by Tangle
12-15-2016 6:18 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
This is an evidence based website. I posted my evidence about an earlier "boreal cradle" of life showing traces of angiosperms, ie an environment like today in the Paleozoic. I admitted my lack of mammal/bird fossils but pointed to where they will be found, giving my reasons. I posted my evidence that most phyla appear fully formed in the Cambrian without any intermediates. I posted my evidence of flooding at the PT boundary.
I have done my research. I have even admitted where I lack. All you can do is appeal to the fact that evolution is widely accepted. Yet no-one has the guts to post anything to support it. If the evidence is so widespread, where is it? You guys are posting pictures of so-called transitionals without detailed explanations. Hmmm pretty damning to evolution if you guys represent the theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1085 by Tangle, posted 12-15-2016 6:18 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1089 by jar, posted 12-15-2016 8:51 AM mindspawn has replied
 Message 1092 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2016 9:25 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 1088 of 1163 (795682)
12-15-2016 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 1054 by Taq
12-14-2016 4:46 PM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
quote:
All of the evidence you asked for, and you still deny it.
Thank you for the graph in post 1054. Yes that is what I am looking for. I missed this post earlier. Give me a day or two to look into it. I appreciate the attempt to give evidence for your position.
Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1054 by Taq, posted 12-14-2016 4:46 PM Taq has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024