Study: Dinosaur demise didn't spur species

AP via Yahoo! ^ | 3-28-07 | MALCOLM RITTER

[SunkenCiv]

Catastrophism ping list

· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic ·

[SunkenCiv]

Just adding this to the GGG catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

[doc30]

No such falsifiability criteria exists for Evolution. Thus, Evolutionary Theory is unscientific. It can't be falsified, as the article for this thread makes clear.

Then you don't know much about evolution except what pablum genesis apologists feed you. There are lots of falsifieable tests of evolution. They've been posted by many people here but you chose to ignore them.

[MacDorcha]

University of Georgia Institute of Ecology

ah, good 'ol Georgia Ec...

[GourmetDan]

Out-of-sequence fossils are found all the time.

They call it 'fossil reworking'.

I'm serious. Google it.

[Southack]

"There are lots of falsifieable tests of evolution. They've been posted by many people here but you chose to ignore them." - doc30

Post a Link or else be thought a liar.

[49th]

Well let's see... if we could find species who were not genetically related to each other at all. If there were species who appeared in rock layers from before those creatures evolved. If we were frequently discovering fossil species without obvious predecessors. If we observed spontaneous speciation without the pressure of natural selection. If a method for the passing of hereditary information from one generation to the next hadn't been discovered...

Any one of these is enough to falsify the theory, none of them have been documented.

[doc30]

Species that are more closely related should share a greater portion of their DNA.:
http://www.txtwriter.com/Backgrounders/Evolution/EVpage13.html

All present and fossilized animals found should conform to the standard evolutionary tree.:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates

Fossilized intermediates should appear in the "correct" chronological order on the standard tree.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#chronology

Many organisms should retain vestigial structures as structural remnants of lost functions.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#morphological_vestiges

Thanks to the old list-o-links.

Try using your brain. God gave it to you for a purpose.

[Southack]

Neither of you have provided a link to a respected scientific society (or even to individual scientists) that states in black and white the "Accepted scientific falsification criteria" for Evolutionary Theory.

Both of you dance around that clear-cut point. Links to other topics (one was laughably to the very "standard" Evolutionary tree disproved in the article for this thread) do not count. Your personal guesses do not count.

Either the scientific community has a consensus or not for ToE's falsification criteria.

Well, link to it or admit that you are both busted, and busted hard.