the rocks speak

crashfrog i have a question ..
recently a creation scientist was saying that fossils are fantastically well preserved , in the rocks. also he was suggesting that these creatures hadn't been eaten away by worms bacteria e.t.c , like corpses are today . he was saying that this was one of darwin's problems .He was also talking about the complexity of orchids and how darwin said some orchids evolved to look like bees and had evolved with bees through natural selection as they depended on the bees to pollenate them.this creationist scientist then took some of his own orchids to australia and they survived without the bees , he said this blew darwin's theory away, i agree with him whats your view?

quote:

---

also he was suggesting that these creatures hadn't been eaten away by worms bacteria e.t.c , like corpses are today.

---

Most corpses are eaten away my bacteria, worms, whatever-- most, but not all. Under some conditions bodies get preserved relatively well. We can demonstrate this. For example, an animal kill by a mudslide and buried under ten feet of dirt won't decay like an animal on the surface. For one thing, scavengers won't be able to get to it, the oxygen content is different, the chemical composition is different. It isn't really a problem.Also remember that the vaste majorty of fossils aren't all that well preserved. We get tiny bits of bone, some teeth, a track mark here and there. We aren't getting Von Hagen's quality preservation.

quote:

---

this creationist scientist then took some of his own orchids to australia and they survived without the bees , he said this blew darwin's theory away, i agree with him whats your view?

---

I'm not sure about this particular case. Darwin may have simply been wrong about the orchids. It doesn't disprove the ToE. Another possibility is that other insects replaced the bees in the orchid's life cycle. This happens. Animals tend to be oppurtunistic. I am also interested in what is meant by survive? Did the orchids simply live under the creation scientist's care or did they survive and reproduce without assistance?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
{Fixed link UBB code - Adminnemooseus}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 05-11-2003]

Mike thwe wiz,

quote:

---

He was also talking about the complexity of orchids and how darwin said some orchids evolved to look like bees and had evolved with bees through natural selection as they depended on the bees to pollenate them.this creationist scientist then took some of his own orchids to australia and they survived without the bees , he said this blew darwin's theory away, i agree with him whats your view?

---

Well why wouldn't they survive without the bees? The question is, did they reproduce sexually? Some plants have an an asexual reproducing stage as well as sexual. There are still possibilities for fertilisation even if the bees aren't present, it only takes an insect to visit two flowers.Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

Did the orchids simply live under the creation scientist's care or did they survive and reproduce without assistance?i think he said they did reproduce without assistance , he was saying something about their incredible complexity, the six gun orchid , which is incredible , it shoots the bee and then it will go off to another plant and stick to it and pollenate it , anyway i've forgot this scientists name but i must say his arguements were very convincing

I too find the diversity of life on earth, with countless methods of survival, protection, and behavior, incredible in its ingenuity and variety.But I don't find complexity to be a compelling argument for design. Complexity has been proven to arise through purely mechanistic means. Furthermore, designers tend to design not towards variety and complexity but rather uniformity and simplicity. If life is designed then it is by a just-barely competent designer. That's my view, anyway.Darwin could be wrong about orchids and still have a valid theory. I'm not impressed by attempts to discredit a 19th-century scientist by pointing out things that he couldn't have known at the time.Science moves forward and sometimes leaves even great men behind. But some theories stand the test of time and the theory of evolution, so far, is one of them.

It is unfortunate that you've forgotten anything useful about your source. Anecdotal evidence isn't very useful at most times. It is completely useless without very good documentation.

Mike, what was supposed to be the point of your vague, unconfirmed orchid story?Is Australia supposed to be on another planet? Australia has a number of native bees. It also has a large population of imported honey bees. It also has a range of native orchids.

quote:

---

Science moves forward and sometimes leaves even great men behind.

---

...or women.

quote:

---

i think he said they did reproduce without assistance

---

Well, really, you should find out for sure. Otherwise, your story doesn't mean much. Even if it is the case that the orchids survive and reproduce, the story may not mean much, for reasons I and several others have pointed out already.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Can I claim I meant "men" in the neutral sense? Probably not...Sadly, great women being left behind in the sciences would seem to the the rule for most of science's history... Even to this day efforts to restore female luminaries to their proper place of respect occasionally meet opposition from those who fear that lifting up a woman means pushing down a man...

ok the evos have jumped on me , but to be honest i was only asking peoples view. the full story is at Sucuri WebSite Firewall - Access Denied i feel evolutionists have only been told one half of the story .( i am ending my replies here!)Adminnemooseus says "the above link won't work for me. Try Sucuri WebSite Firewall - Access Denied instead".[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 05-12-2003]

Well, I mucked around the creationresearch.net site a bit.Here's their site map page:
Sucuri WebSite Firewall - Access DeniedThey seem to primarily be a audio, book, and vidio sales outlet.You may wish to look at their web books. The index page is at Sucuri WebSite Firewall - Access DeniedMoose

And you have only been told the other half.

quote:

---

i feel evolutionists have only been told one half of the story .

---

I am willing to bet, at least on this board, that the evo side has read a helluva lot more creationist work than the other way around.I mean, My husband and I own at least a dozen Creationist books, have gone to Creationist talks, have read loads of Creationist literature.I have taken several college level biology and anatomy courses, and a philosophy of science course, and my husband is a brain scientist about to get his PhD.Mike, how many science courses have you taken?

'Mike, how many science courses have you taken? 'its amazing the huge reaction i get when people start to feel insecure .
my point was that most evos havent heard the creation evidence i have , because they ask me silly questions when they are losing arguements.
as for your question, i have not taken these courses because your so much more cleverer than me which means i have no right to have an opinion! lol