Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Show me the intermediate fossils!
youtube ^ | July 14, 2009 | Richard Dawkins Foundation

Posted on 08/13/2009 2:53:46 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode

Video:

RDF TV - Show me the intermediate fossils!


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: darwin; dawkins; evolution
Hilarious fairytale for adults. Turn the natural selection handle on the evolution Random Meatgrinder, and poof! Hippos turn into whales by accident.

Click here to learn the truth about evolution scientists

1 posted on 08/13/2009 2:53:47 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: metmom; Fichori; tpanther; GodGunsGuts; count-your-change

Indisputable proof that evolooshin is true!! Dawkins reveals it right here in this video!!


2 posted on 08/13/2009 2:55:37 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
Heck with that. Where are the things undergoing fossilization today?

ML/NJ

3 posted on 08/13/2009 2:56:31 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
Where are the things undergoing fossilization today?

Richard Dawkins is undergoing fossilization. Check this out: Richard Dawkins goes insane.

4 posted on 08/13/2009 3:03:07 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

5 posted on 08/13/2009 3:06:13 AM PDT by BigCinBigD ('Evil white devil since 1960')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

Does he really belive this? It seems so.
40 million years ago the Sun was touching the earth, if its present rate of ‘downsizing’ (shrinking at 2 1/2 miles in radius a year) is figured back in time. Even if the rate is slowed - how long ago was it hot enough on earth to boil everything here?
There must be a limit for the sun and earth like the ‘Roche’ limit established for the moon and earth.


6 posted on 08/13/2009 3:14:42 AM PDT by PastorJimCM (truth matters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

7 posted on 08/13/2009 3:40:13 AM PDT by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

There’s one in no 10 Downing Street, London, UK.


8 posted on 08/13/2009 3:43:49 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
I think the dotted lines should be enough proof for anyone that a putative ancestor of whales and hippos had a common ancestor that crawled out the sea and then some of the descendants of that ancestor crawled back into the sea because everyone knows swimming is a lot more fun than walking, while other descendants like the hippo just really couldn't make up their minds and so walk around under water and even breed under water which I suppose happens a lot with in ground pools too since only low class people and hippos or people who look like hippos, would do such things in an above ground pool (please!, no personal experiences).
That's not to say I've been looking over the hedgerow or anything but the trailers here ARE real close together.
And speaking of nostrils (no, not him!) why would a whale only have one and the hippos two?

And Dawkin’s Dots are like a line drawn from a floating log to a Los Angeles class nuclear submarine showing how one evolved into the other with a Jon boat as an intermediate. As I tell the engineers, “You can build anything with a pencil.” including wall charts.

Maybe Dawkins should get a subscription to Ancestry.Com, to track down the family members of whales, they're pretty good, they even found several of me, one of which too old to be me and must've been a fake.

9 posted on 08/13/2009 4:06:32 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

You just can’t debate with irrational people.

Notice that this statement doesn’t actually take a side, but I’ll bet the reader knows which side they’re on.


10 posted on 08/13/2009 4:35:32 AM PDT by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Here's proof.

Rosie O'Donnell devolving.

prisoner6

11 posted on 08/13/2009 4:36:00 AM PDT by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts hold the country together as the loose screws of the Left fall out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

Watch the daily White House press briefing. You will see plenty of intermediate fossils in the press corps.


12 posted on 08/13/2009 5:07:58 AM PDT by MIchaelTArchangel (I AM JIM THOMPSON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

Show me Noah’s Ark!


13 posted on 08/13/2009 5:09:02 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Socialist Conservatives: "'Big government is free because tax cuts pay for it'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

I imagine all the eugenicists mentioned in your link also believe the earth is round & orbits the sun.

So, I guess you believe the earth is flat & is orbited by the sun, for surely if the evil Darwin & his fellow scientists are wrong about evolution, wrong about eugenics, then they must then be wrong about everything!

That is your premise, isn’t it?

You have something in common with Al Gore - willful ignorance!


14 posted on 08/13/2009 5:12:40 AM PDT by Mister Da (The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PastorJimCM
You wrote:

"40 million years ago the Sun was touching the earth, if its present rate of ‘downsizing’ (shrinking at 2 1/2 miles in radius a year) is figured back in time."

No, the Sun is not "shrinking 2.5 miles" a year. While the Sun is losing mass as it converts Hydrogen to Helium, that loss of mass is small when compared to the whole. The "shrinkage" that can be measured is a rhythmic "puffing" in and out that all stars undergo, as the big ball of plasma balances thermal outward expansion with gravitational contraction.

You see, gravity wants to collapse the ball of plasma, under its own "weight", as it were. As the plasma is squeezed under gravity, just like any other gas, it heats up, and the addtional pressure allows for MORE fusion to take place, HEATING the plasma even more. When the thermal expansive forces overtake gravity, the star "puffs" back out. The plasma cools some, the pressures are slightly less, and less fusion takes place. Once a tad cooler, the gravitational contraction resumes.

During a star's "main sequence" lifetime, this pulsing in and out is the balancing act it maintains between heat and gravity, until the star runs out of fuel.

In fact, our Sun is a 5% variable star, and not as "constant" as one might think. This "puffing" can be detected in stars other than our own, with the proper equipment.

It is patently dishonest for some people to take JUST ONE PART of some observation, then run it off to some extreme, in an attempt to bolster their position. You could just as easily used the OTHER side of the observation, the "puffing out", and say that in just 40 million years, the Sun would be touching the Earth. It is this tendency of creationists to "cherry pick" the facts they want to present that irritates more scientifically grounded individuals.

I know, I know, you will say that scientists "cherry pick" data, and some certainly do. However, over the course of time, other, more honest researchers refute dishonest researchers in a process known over all as "peer review". "Peer review" is not instantaneous, and might take years, but it DOES happen. That is why we don't talk about "ether" as the medium for light, for example.

Hey, "TRUTH MATTERS".
15 posted on 08/13/2009 5:32:38 AM PDT by Rebel_Ace (Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rebel_Ace

Thank you for that explanation. There are many other questions that don’t seem to have answers: Roche limit, gravitational decelerization, salt in sea, population, age of Redwoods, documented human history, Guadaloupe woman, - these and many other point to a brief age for the earth.
If the moon spun off the earth - why are moon rocks so different from anything found here?
If the planets spun off of the sun - how fast was the sun spinning? Was the sun much smaller back then? Why are some of the moons spinning in a different direction then other moons around the same planet?


16 posted on 08/13/2009 6:35:30 AM PDT by PastorJimCM (truth matters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
Heck with that. Where are the things undergoing fossilization today?

Lots of places. But you knew that.

Shouldn't you be asking, "Why are there any fossils at all? Why are there all those fossils of extinct animals anyway? Why do those fossils all seem to be situated in the strata in accordance to the evil geologists/evolutionary biologists timelines? Why is God deceiving us with all these fossils? Is Loki the one true god?"

Right?
17 posted on 08/13/2009 6:40:20 AM PDT by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
But they have long planted their fairy tales into the minds of the public. And their wise men high atop the Supremes gave them standing to preach their methodology.

They are the 'gods' of education and now they intend to put their 'system' into action and call it health care. Just like Bama and company it is not 'wise' to question the gods about there being none not even one supposed intermediate fossil.

What has been formulated is the 'system' think model that gives them their stature to select their fittest and least fit. Taxpayers are the 'life' that keeps their model alive. Just like liberals are want to say our Constitution is a living breathing document..... Liberals are the hot air that are the most fit to evolve words over time to keep themselves fit and to destroy those they deem least fit.

They have a pretend beginning where they refused to even acknowledge they cannot recreate, that supposed ordinary hot steaming pond scum, and there are warehouses full of literal ancient fossils, and then a very long black hole in space and time. Followed by wallah out of nowhere, human bones that are not of the age of their ancient fossils and they created a fairy tale to claim a continuum from one age to the next age.

18 posted on 08/13/2009 6:59:49 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Bama and Company are reenacting the Pharaoh as told by Moses in Genesis!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Lots of places. But you knew that.

No. I don't know it. Where can I go to see things that are half organic, and half mineral? Tell me. BTW, Pompeii seems like an excellent place given the fairy tale about how fossils are formed but SFAIK no fossilization has taken place there.


Shouldn't you be asking, "Why are there any fossils at all?

I do wonder about this, yes. I don't believe the conventional wisdom, but it's obvious that they exist - sort of like life itself.


Why do those fossils all seem to be situated in the strata in accordance to the evil geologists/evolutionary biologists timelines?

You're kidding, right?

(Do you have any idea how those evil geologists date those strata?)

ML/NJ

19 posted on 08/13/2009 7:03:26 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9
Well, it is the Summer Holiday. Brown will be back providing comic relief in the fall.

ML/NJ

20 posted on 08/13/2009 7:05:01 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PastorJimCM
"Thank you for that explanation."

You are most welcome.

"There are many other questions...Roche limit... "

Most of the questions you refer to can be cleared up in the typical battery of Physics and Mathematics courses required for an engineering degree. Some of the questions you refer to actually posed incorrectly, using older, out of date information for their basis. For example:

"If the moon spun off the earth - why are moon rocks so different from anything found here?"

We spent a lot of money and went to the Moon to retreive samples. The moon rocks are basaltic, and VERY MUCH LIKE BASALT FROM THE EARTH, with two distinctions: They are VERY DRY, and rocks from the Moon seem to have less "heavy metals" in them. This supports a "collision theory" that a Mars sized planetoid slammed into a somewhat smaller than today Earth, resulting in a fairly large Moon made of mostly lighter, upper mantle material, and a larger Earth. Your question is based on a false premise, as the Moon rocks are more similar to Earth rocks than they are different.

"If the planets spun off of the sun - how fast was the sun spinning?"

No modern astrophysics theory postulates that the Sun "spun" out the planets. Current theory, supported by actual astronomical observations, suggest that planets individually coalesced from a proto planetary disk of material orbiting a new star. Such proto planetary disks have been imaged using Hubble and other high resolution telescopes, along with "cut trails" through them, suggesting that fairly large objects are "sweeping up" material as they orbit. An "accidental" experiment aboard the Space Shuttle with particles in a baggy showed that static electricity could easily "jump start" the process of accretion, when the electrostatic forces are more powerful in thin debris than gravity is. Again, modern theory and observations render the question you pose moot.

"Why are some of the moons spinning in a different direction then other moons around the same planet?"

Collisions, passing body gravitational capture easily account for such things. In fact, such observations point to a violent, disordered and dynamic condition for the early Solar System, much as would be expected if random density conditions of a proto-planetary disk determined planet formation and orbital trajectories.

"...documented human history..."

OK, let's say that I write down a story of an ALIEN ENCOUNTER with a UFO. Let's say I write it down with INCREDIBLE ATTENTION TO DETAIL. Let's say my story of the alien encounter takes place in the parking lot of a Wal-Mart. I describe the storefront in vivid detail. I describe the Outback Restaurant in the parking lot in vivid detail. I describe the UFO and the Aliens in vivid detail.

You read the story some years later, and say, "Phhhht! I don't believe it." So I take you to the place. There you see the remains of an Outback Restaurant (having closed years earlier to to Obama-nomics). You see the Wal-Mart with the original sign, but the outside is painted a different color. You can see evidence of the original color under the peeling paint. You can see the black top parking lot I described, and cars still use it. I say, "SEE! Here are the Buildings and Parking lot, JUST AS I DESCRIBED THEM! My alien story MUST be true."

You might intelligently ask me, "I see the evidence of the buildings, where is the evidence left by the UFO?"

This line of reasoning (which I bet under this scenario you agree with) is no different than looking at ancient texts of a religious nature. Sure, the buildings and people it descibes seem genuine, but fantastic claims are on much more shaky grounds. Just as it is smart to question the fantastic claim of a space ship in common surroundings, so it is smart to question the fantasic claims made in the story of Noah's Ark, for example.

"...age of Redwoods..."

I have no idea why the age of Redwoods, or tulips or beagle hounds pose any problem with the concept of an Earth that is billions of years old.


21 posted on 08/13/2009 8:31:20 AM PDT by Rebel_Ace (Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PastorJimCM

Wasn’t there a theory that the satellites going in the “wrong” direction were subsequently gravitationally captured by the planets in question?


22 posted on 08/13/2009 10:49:36 PM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
I think the dotted lines should be enough proof for anyone that a putative ancestor of whales and hippos had a common ancestor that crawled out the sea and then some of the descendants of that ancestor crawled back into the sea

Sure, that's proof enough. Actually, a little Mayr-esque narrative about whales is ironclad, like this old yarn from Darwin himself:

In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.
It doesn't matter if it's bears or hippos or camels. All you have to do is prefix "I can see no difficulty" or "I can readily imagine that", and presto, there's proof of evolution. A few years ago some evolutionists were saying that camels are the closest relatives of whales. I can see no difficulty in imagining camels as a dry sort of whale, and I can readily imagine whales to be camels who yearned to take to the waves, and so on.

There's a book that compiles Darwin's use of such convincing prefix phrases, among other things: Articles of the Darwin Faith

23 posted on 08/14/2009 2:58:45 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

Darwin must have been very sensitive to bad PR since most of the comment was struck from later editions though Darwin certainly hadn’t changed his mind.

Maybe someone asked just what kind of whale fed on airborne insects.

Thanks for the link!


24 posted on 08/14/2009 4:49:12 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Rebel_Ace

It is feasible that the differences in the moon rock come from a collision from a planetoid - but evidence of that planetoid should be throughout our earth, or at least in a vast area of the earth where rock should be just like the moon with the exception of the amount of water.
The rotation of Saturn’s moons (in different directions from each other) might have occurred as you have stated.

In that it seems the Redwoods do not die, unless they are cut down, something happened about 4,000 years ago. The Eqyptian and Sumerian histories date back about that time. (I would think that if human history went back much further there would be some record keeping that would have survived.) The rate of the erosion of Niagra Falls points to a similiar time frame. The build up of the Mississippi Delta also seems to confirm the same thing. Why a Cambrian Explosion? Could the effects of the flood at Noah’s time explain these things?
With the rate of increase with the world’s population - there were not many people on the earth a few thousand years ago. With the oceans getting saltier each year the world’s water was pure not that far into the past.
With sea shell fossils on Mount Everest, with poly-strata fossils (where trees remained standing [and dead] for millions of years while rock and soil finally covered it,) and cities under the ocean - in my opinion points to something cataclysmic in the past.
My physics and math in engineering was back in the early ‘70’s; I realize there have been many new discoveries and theories since that time.

Thank you for your time.


25 posted on 08/15/2009 4:03:10 AM PDT by PastorJimCM (truth matters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode

*See my Tagline

26 posted on 08/15/2009 4:25:39 AM PDT by DoctorMichael (Creationists on the internet: The Ignorant, amplifying the Stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson