Why do we only find fossils?

I don't see what you don't understand about this. Triceretops lived in the SAME AREA as ancient bison. In EQUAL NUMBERS. HUGE HERDS. Not only that, but they also shared it with MANY OTHER HERDING GRAZERS FROM THE DINOSAUR AND MAMMAL AGES. See what I'm saying? It's impossible. We are talking about MASSIVE ammounts of animals. No room to move kind of amounts.But again, we have already agreed, different groups of creatures were around at different periods of time. This means new groups of creatures are periodically "appearing" and/or disapering. So what is the mechanism behind this? No need really, just answer yes or no:Do new species/groups of animals "pop" into existance periodicaly without the aid of evolution? Sounds interesting, I would love to hear about it in another thread as you said. However I am more interested in hearing your view about how new creatures come to exist.For instance, when the mammoths appear on the earth, what put them there? They weren't there durring the dinos, evolution didn't happen, therefore something must have put them there after the dinos. So where did the mammoth come from?This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-11-2005 02:18 PM

What you are not getting Yaro is that different animals can occupy similar niches in different locales. So you cannot use one location to say that such and such creature did not exist anywhere else.It's a very simple concept.As far as mechanism for ID, I answered already. Maybe you don't realize that the term "mechanism for ID" refers to how new forms of creatures can come to being.I will only add that no one claims some speciation does not occur via micro-evolution, speciation defined under modern terms of "species." Take some time to learn about what others think, and I would be glad to talk with you about it, as much as the mods allow.This message has been edited by randman, 11-11-2005 02:23 PM

No, we agreed. Mamuths didn't exist at the time of the dino and dinos didn't exist at the time of the mammuths. So who put the mammuths here?ABE: The maxim: if we don't see it in the fossil record at a given time, it probably wasn't there.This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-11-2005 02:31 PM

You didn't see my references to an ID mechanism?What gives Yaro?Let me ask you this. Who put the rocks there?

Hi Belfry, Do you know if this kind of partial fossilization is common in other groups of animals? I guess if fossilization is a slow gradual process, then there has to be a point in every fossilization event where the object is a mixture of mineral and soft tissue. I wonder how long this stage would last.Thanks for the info.Mick

Personaly, I don't think anyone did. I think they just are.For the sake of this conversation where I have accepted the following premisses: I don't know, 'who' if there even was a 'who', put the rocks there.However, it seems to me, that your ID mechanism is proposing that mammuths, humans, and all other creaturs, spontaneusly appeard fully formed on earth due to the mechanations of an inteligent designer.Every few million years, after the old animals "run out", this designer creates a whole bunch of new and different animals and lets them loose on the planet.

It's a little more complicated than that. I think QM basically confirms ID because it shows consciousness is required for physical things to exist in any one state. THe QM interpretation I am following here is John Wheeler's and Anton Zellinger's as well as others'.To explain the mechanism would entail a physics thread, and of course, not all physicists agree, but when you realize everything essentially "Poofs" into existence every moment from it's probability state/energy information pattern, then it's easier to get past disbelief based on classical concepts of physical reality.Moreover, I also question the assumptions we use in interpretating data, specifically the assumption of a static past or static time-line. I think, more and more, we will see that the past is not unchanging and perhaps the present consists of several or many different "pasts" melded together, and so the evidence can be confusing without understanding better how reality is constructed.This message has been edited by randman, 11-11-2005 02:55 PM

So, are you saying that we could potentialy whitness a "poof"?So it's theoreticaly possible that suddenly a herd of Bantha will appear in central park?

Yaro, no I am saying we always only witness "poofs." Poofs are basic to what consitutes physical reality. Understanding that helps to understand how any of the following can be possible:1. Species could evolve via an intelligent force causing the changes to occur much faster than what is called "natural means" via random mutation and selection; super-evolution via ID.2. Species could appear from other multi-verses.3. Species could appear, poof, into the earth created by an Intelligent Designer.4. The universe itself, containing both subluminal and superluminal structures, could have built-in mechanisms for manifesting new species besides biological evolution.Any of all of the above.This message has been edited by randman, 11-11-2005 03:03 PM

That's way off topic for this thread. Please try to stay on topic.

---

OK.

To everyone,Just to clarify: There is no Creation/Evolution topic that is off-limits for EvC Forum.We do, of course, ask that topics be discussed in the proper forum.Randman's posting privileges were suspended for persistent unwillingness to follow the Forum Guidelines and moderator suggestions.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

I do agree that you have made a strong case for the absurdity of the YEC position.

---

said by a creationist: I am saying we always only witness "poofs." Poofs are basic to what consitutes physical reality.

I. Why are there so many different animals? II. Why do animals LOOK related? This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-13-2005 01:25 PM

yeah, look at me, sitting here eating crackers. laziness and a general lack of creativity. see above.

---

אָרַח