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

Skip to comments.

Ancient fossil forest found by accident (potential major out of order problem for Darwinists)
news@nature.com (via BioEd online) ^ | April 23, 2007 | Katharine Sanderson

Posted on 07/30/2007 2:01:00 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-376 next last
To: Bruinator
There is no faith in evolution.

I would disagree. Evolution is as much faith-based as creationism. And the worshipers at the altar of evolution get quite bent out of shape when this is pointed out to them.

41 posted on 07/30/2007 2:38:46 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Bruinator

“Evolution has yet to be established. It is after all a theory.”

Evolution is basically genetic change within a population, sometimes resulting in speciation (where one species gives rise to another through genetic change).

Observed speciation: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

The only thing theoretical about evolution is the exact biomechanism by which it occurs. WHETHER it occurs isn’t really in dispute. The exact same thing can be said of star evolution, but creationists never question star evolution.


42 posted on 07/30/2007 2:38:46 PM PDT by navyguy (Some days you are the pidgeon, some days you are the statue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: brent1a

” I always thought diehard creationists would only admit that the Earth is 7,000 years old “

bingo!


43 posted on 07/30/2007 2:38:47 PM PDT by spanalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom
humans generally don’t live with lions (because they are dangerous) therefore we don’t expect them to be buried with each other.

penguins don’t live with mountain goats (completely different ecosystem, elevation) so we don’t expect them to be buried with each other.

Oh. Well, that explains it. Hominid fossils aren't found with dinosaur fossils because the dinosaurs ate the humans who weren't living with them.

44 posted on 07/30/2007 2:39:08 PM PDT by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

>> This story also illustrates, as seen so often before, that wherever evolutionists look, they find more complexity farther back in time than they expect. <<

This statement is absolutely true, but hardly surprising. Person A finds a first-ever fossilized widgetosaurus, about 100 million years ago, and proclaims that widgetosaurus appeared at least 100 million years ago. Now what are the odds that that widgetosaurus truly represents the oldest widgetosaurus? About zero. So when someone else finds another widgetosaurus 30 million years older, it’s stirring news, and slightly humbling but hardly shatters evolution.


45 posted on 07/30/2007 2:41:47 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

“humans generally don’t live with lions (because they are dangerous) therefore we don’t expect them to be buried with each other.”

Humans have been living on the African plains with lions for at least 100,000 years. They still are today. They sometimes eat each other.

Also, some animal fossils aren’t found in coal mines. Is that because they didn’t live with the ones who are found in coal mines? Or is there some other reason?


46 posted on 07/30/2007 2:43:12 PM PDT by navyguy (Some days you are the pidgeon, some days you are the statue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: navyguy; Bruinator
“...It is after all a theory.”

Just for the sake of my young Earth creationist friends, I need to stop you before you continue to lean on this fallacy in this particular argument-

the·o·ry [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Pronunciation Key –noun, plural -ries. 1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.

6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

The 'contemplation/speculation, guess/conjecture definitions are only two of the definitions for 'theory' and are not the context used when discussing scientific theorems.

47 posted on 07/30/2007 2:43:39 PM PDT by mnehring (Ron Paul is as much of a Constitutionalist as Fred Phelps is a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

>> for the same reason you won’t find humans with lions or penguins with mountain goats. <<

But you do find human remains near lion remains. And the reason you don’t find penguins with mountain goats is because they exist in different climates... but since when do humans not exist in swampy forests?


48 posted on 07/30/2007 2:44:54 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: navyguy

Because evolution was brought about as a means to dispel creationism, not as true means of science. Sure evolution happens, but the main idea that humans came from apes is just not true. There is no link or data to support it. If it were true, why are there still apes? The strict evolutionists you reference are athiests but just won’t admit it. The so called intellect is not just by chance or luck of the draw. All things given are God given.


49 posted on 07/30/2007 2:45:06 PM PDT by Bruinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: dontposttome
there are young earth creationists, and there are old earth creationists. An old earth is fine with the old earth creationists.

I am a bit confused!! By old-earth creationists do you mean those who are sometimes referred to as believers in 'intelligent design' or 'guided evolution' or something else entirely??

50 posted on 07/30/2007 2:46:27 PM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla (A person who does not want the best for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: navyguy
The only thing theoretical about evolution is the exact biomechanism by which it occurs.

This is actually falling into place.. The Genome Project has been working backwards in tracking 'errors' in DNA and how those have resulted in evolutionary changes, including the much disputed, intra-species evolution. In other words, we can actually map evolution now through genes. And just for the record, the head of the Human Genome Project is a Christian.

51 posted on 07/30/2007 2:46:52 PM PDT by mnehring (Ron Paul is as much of a Constitutionalist as Fred Phelps is a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

Really, thats not what science taught me in school. Hypothesis - theory - law.


52 posted on 07/30/2007 2:47:14 PM PDT by Bruinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

No problemo.

Just reclassify it as a living fossil and move on.


53 posted on 07/30/2007 2:49:35 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lucius Cornelius Sulla
By old-earth creationists do you mean those who are sometimes referred to as believers in 'intelligent design' or 'guided evolution' or something else entirely??

Actually, intelligent design and guided evolution are both 'God in the Gaps theories' that aren't very sound.

The scientintific community that falls into 'old Earth' creationists (for the record, this is my belief) are known as Theistic Evolutionists or Theo-Evolutionists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

54 posted on 07/30/2007 2:50:04 PM PDT by mnehring (Ron Paul is as much of a Constitutionalist as Fred Phelps is a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: jbwbubba

Didn’t you hear, Rove added time travel capability to the weather machine a few years back?


55 posted on 07/30/2007 2:50:29 PM PDT by Free Vulcan (Show them no mercy, for you shall receive none!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bruinator
Because evolution was brought about as a means to dispel creationism, not as true means of science.

False. Evolution is a science like many others.


Sure evolution happens, but the main idea that humans came from apes is just not true. There is no link or data to support it. If it were true, why are there still apes?

There is evidence for evolution from earlier primates. I studied it in grad school for six years. And the question, "Why are there still apes?" suggests to me you have not studied this issue at all. If most Americans are descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans?


The strict evolutionists you reference are athiests but just won’t admit it.

False.

56 posted on 07/30/2007 2:50:45 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Bruinator
Like the ‘theory of gravity’ or ‘mathematical number theory’?
This isn’t a problem with the word theory, it is a problem with education.
57 posted on 07/30/2007 2:51:53 PM PDT by mnehring (Ron Paul is as much of a Constitutionalist as Fred Phelps is a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Lucius Cornelius Sulla

I don’t mean anything in particular, since there are different varieties of old earth creationism. Just pointing out to another confused poster that there are young earth and old earth creationists.


58 posted on 07/30/2007 2:52:04 PM PDT by dontposttome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan

So its true, that was Rove on the Grassy Knoll.


59 posted on 07/30/2007 2:52:04 PM PDT by jbwbubba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

As a geology student and a creationsit I find this very interesting. I hold that the earth is indeed 4.5 billion years old, but we take great liberties in interpting data and make extrapolations based upon very little evidence.


60 posted on 07/30/2007 2:54:02 PM PDT by LukeL (Never let the enemy pick the battle site. (Gen. George S. Patton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-376 next last

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