Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Great Creationist Fossil Failure
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 1103 of 1163 (795705)
12-15-2016 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 1101 by jar
12-15-2016 10:16 AM


Re: Flood at the PT boundary
Also, unlike the K/T boundary, the P/T boundary is not some line but rather a very long period of millions of years when conditions changed. The Siberian Traps (that mindspawn keeps using) actually developed over a period of a million years alone.
It is a fact, that many geological processes take a long time. Sure there are catastrophes, but there are thousands of them, local and otherwise. And YECs fail to account for the intervening time between events.
The 'Cambrian Explosion' is an excellent example. This has become almost scriptural to YECs and yet we know that it occurred over tens of millions of years.
The K/T event probably started a process that took hundreds of years to complete.
YECs have little understanding of time and process.
AbE:
Claiming the P/T boundary is the period of the Biblical flood myths is simply providing yet more evidence that the Bible is factually wrong since at the very most the Bible stories limit the flood to about one years duration, not millions of years.
The logical conclusion would be that the Bible speaks of something different from what YECs think.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1101 by jar, posted 12-15-2016 10:16 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 1105 of 1163 (795707)
12-15-2016 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1084 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 6:15 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
So in fact you have no evidence for any predecessor to the trilobite.
Incorrect.
We have predecessors much older than trilobites which already were showing a trend from stromatolites to the more complex Ediacaran life forms. The span of time involved makes evolution of trilobites a viable theory.
Nothing.
Denial is not a virtue.
Yes sure you can surmise they existed, but that is on the level of fantasy.
It is at the level of an explanation of the known data. Considering the more complete fossil record of more recent organisms, it is far from fantasy.
Reality is they suddenly appeared fully formed as did MANY phyla at that time,
Actually, that would be all phyla at all times.
... the evidence favors creationism.
Well, if you had a god continually creating new species based very closely on the preceding life forms over four and a half billion years and perhaps you had some kind of a prehistoric genetic laboratory artifact: well, you might have a point.
Let us know how your research goes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1084 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 6:15 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 1111 of 1163 (795714)
12-15-2016 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1078 by mindspawn
12-15-2016 5:25 AM


Re: UNNECESSARY RELIGIOUS DISRESPECT
? Have they discovered a hidden cache of lovely PreCambrian intermediate fossils to explain the sudden appearance of most phyla in the Cambrian Explosion??
This is kind of an irrelevant statement, dear to YECs, but still meaningless.
I think not. When things just appear, the better explanation is that they just appeared. That is what the evidence is showing.
No one says that the fossil record is complete or perfect. However, it is data that must be honored in any explanation of the history of life on earth. Consequently, all species appear 'suddenly', but definitely not at the same time. In the meantime we have a large number of transitionals for some lineages which also must be explained by any theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1078 by mindspawn, posted 12-15-2016 5:25 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 1112 of 1163 (795715)
12-15-2016 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1110 by Coyote
12-15-2016 10:58 AM


Re: the evidence supports evolution
You've missed a lot. But, here is a quick partial summary. Try the link for a lot more:
http://www.vce.bioninja.com.au/...lution/origins-of-man.html
...
Prepare for an avalanche of denial.
After all, none of this is evidence (according to YEC).
It's all just ... well, ... coincidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1110 by Coyote, posted 12-15-2016 10:58 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 1115 of 1163 (795763)
12-15-2016 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 1114 by RAZD
12-15-2016 3:22 PM


Re: Your straw man is not how evolution works
... My feeling is that you don't really have a concrete concept that you can articulate, and this hampers your arguments.
...
Unfortunately, my feeling is that mindspawn doesn't really care.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1114 by RAZD, posted 12-15-2016 3:22 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 1120 of 1163 (795796)
12-15-2016 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1118 by Granny Magda
12-15-2016 8:32 PM


Re: Phyla
Now I'm no palaeontologist, but I'm going to go ahead and say that it's not a dead ringer for a human being. Your mileage may vary.
Is mindspawn going to concede that this little critter shares a clade with humans? Or is he going to stop crowing about how all the phyla were present in the Cambrian?
Are you saying that my question about all orders and classes being represented in the Cambrian record has been a waste of time?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1118 by Granny Magda, posted 12-15-2016 8:32 PM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1122 by Granny Magda, posted 12-16-2016 5:12 PM edge has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 1151 of 1163 (796135)
12-23-2016 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 1149 by Taq
12-19-2016 10:40 AM


Re: clades vs kinds
The problem for creationism is that if there are no common ancestors then there is no reason we should see clades at all.
Interesting point.
If all creatures were created at the same time, why would there be clades? The very existence of clades by definition implies time and that time is manifested in the fossil record.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1149 by Taq, posted 12-19-2016 10:40 AM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1152 by jar, posted 12-23-2016 9:19 AM edge has not replied
 Message 1155 by creation, posted 01-23-2017 3:22 PM edge 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