NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
1. Darwinian Evolutionary Theory is coin of the realm in academia today. Heaven help the academician/scientist who denies....even questions it!
When Chinese paleontologist Jun-Yuan Chen’s criticism of Darwinian predictions about the fossil record was met with dead silence from a group of scientists in the U.S., he quipped that, “In China we can criticize Darwin, but not the government;in America you can criticize the government, but not Darwin.”
Darwinocracy The evolution question in American politics Washington Times Communities
2. How to explain this anomaly of logic?
After all, if 'the debate is over,' why punish those whose outlier views orthodox science can most surely decimate???
Answer: the Darwinists can't decimate 'em.
Their response to doubters is
a. punish 'em, and/or
b.tell lies about the evidence.
And once you catch someone in one lie.....
"The 13th chime of a clock, not only does it make no sense, but it calls into question the validity of the 12 chimes that preceded it."
Today....an examination of one such lie, the Ediacaran Fauna.
3..For purposes of clarity,this is Darwin's perspective, the pillars on which his thesis rests:
The universal common ancestry of all living things: all had a single common ancestor way back in the distant past..."all the organic beings that have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one [ONE SINGLE] primordial form"
Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.484.
Then, via the accumulation of finite, beneficial changes....finally, the diversity of life present today.
If Darwin were correct, the geological stockpile should provide examples of organisms with a partial accumulation of said new traits and features, but not complete enough to have quite made it into the menagerie of life. Although they didn't produce new lines of living things, these 'attempts' would be, should be, preserved as fossils.
It is fossil evidence that is considered as prima facie proof.
4. Darwin posited evolution based on a gradual series of small changes, many of which would result in doom for the organism, but some which would make same better equipped to survive, and be passed on. But early on, contemporary paleontologists and geologists found contrary fossil evidence: the Cambrian explosion revealed "geologically abrupt appearance of a menagerie of animals as various as any found in the gaudiest science fiction.....During this explosion of fauna, representatives of about twenty of the roughly twenty-six total phyla present in the known fossil record made their first appearance on earth."
Meyers, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 31.
a. Here is the source of the problem:
'Before about 580 million years ago, most organisms were simple, composed of individual cells occasionally organized into colonies.... The Cambrian explosion, or Cambrian radiation, was the relatively rapid appearance, around 542 million years ago, of most major animal phyla, as demonstrated in the fossil record."
Cambrian explosion - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
And....even more difficulties for Darwinists:
b "The Chengjiang fauna makes the Cambrian explosion more difficult to reconcile with the Darwinian view for yet another reason. The Chengjiang discoveries intensify the top-down pattern of appearances in which individual representatives of the higher taxonomic categories (phyla, subphyla, and classes) appear and only later diversify into the lower taxonomic categories (families, genera, and species).
Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p.74
Now....what is the answer to this problem, as advanced by Darwin's supporters?
Well....some advance the idea that Ediacaran fossils obviate the appearance of inconsistency....
Coming right up.
1. Darwinian Evolutionary Theory is coin of the realm in academia today. Heaven help the academician/scientist who denies....even questions it!
When Chinese paleontologist Jun-Yuan Chen’s criticism of Darwinian predictions about the fossil record was met with dead silence from a group of scientists in the U.S., he quipped that, “In China we can criticize Darwin, but not the government;in America you can criticize the government, but not Darwin.”
Darwinocracy The evolution question in American politics Washington Times Communities
2. How to explain this anomaly of logic?
After all, if 'the debate is over,' why punish those whose outlier views orthodox science can most surely decimate???
Answer: the Darwinists can't decimate 'em.
Their response to doubters is
a. punish 'em, and/or
b.tell lies about the evidence.
And once you catch someone in one lie.....
"The 13th chime of a clock, not only does it make no sense, but it calls into question the validity of the 12 chimes that preceded it."
Today....an examination of one such lie, the Ediacaran Fauna.
3..For purposes of clarity,this is Darwin's perspective, the pillars on which his thesis rests:
The universal common ancestry of all living things: all had a single common ancestor way back in the distant past..."all the organic beings that have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one [ONE SINGLE] primordial form"
Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.484.
Then, via the accumulation of finite, beneficial changes....finally, the diversity of life present today.
If Darwin were correct, the geological stockpile should provide examples of organisms with a partial accumulation of said new traits and features, but not complete enough to have quite made it into the menagerie of life. Although they didn't produce new lines of living things, these 'attempts' would be, should be, preserved as fossils.
It is fossil evidence that is considered as prima facie proof.
4. Darwin posited evolution based on a gradual series of small changes, many of which would result in doom for the organism, but some which would make same better equipped to survive, and be passed on. But early on, contemporary paleontologists and geologists found contrary fossil evidence: the Cambrian explosion revealed "geologically abrupt appearance of a menagerie of animals as various as any found in the gaudiest science fiction.....During this explosion of fauna, representatives of about twenty of the roughly twenty-six total phyla present in the known fossil record made their first appearance on earth."
Meyers, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 31.
a. Here is the source of the problem:
'Before about 580 million years ago, most organisms were simple, composed of individual cells occasionally organized into colonies.... The Cambrian explosion, or Cambrian radiation, was the relatively rapid appearance, around 542 million years ago, of most major animal phyla, as demonstrated in the fossil record."
Cambrian explosion - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
And....even more difficulties for Darwinists:
b "The Chengjiang fauna makes the Cambrian explosion more difficult to reconcile with the Darwinian view for yet another reason. The Chengjiang discoveries intensify the top-down pattern of appearances in which individual representatives of the higher taxonomic categories (phyla, subphyla, and classes) appear and only later diversify into the lower taxonomic categories (families, genera, and species).
Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p.74
Now....what is the answer to this problem, as advanced by Darwin's supporters?
Well....some advance the idea that Ediacaran fossils obviate the appearance of inconsistency....
Coming right up.
The debate isnt over. Still open for discussion. What is your theory if you dont like evolution? How did we get here? God? FAIL! That's the only dead end. Stop it. We've already explained you dont have enough evidence for your hypothesis.
Try to focus like a laser.
The discussion is very specific: Darwin's theory.
3..For purposes of clarity,this is Darwin's perspective, the pillars on which his thesis rests:
The universal common ancestry of all living things: all had a single common ancestorway back in the distant past..."all the organic beings that have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one [ONE SINGLE] primordial form"
Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.484.
Then, via the accumulation of finite, beneficial changes....finally, the diversity of life present today.
And, once again, the admission of failure by dolts like you....bringing a straw man argument....as though my thesis had anything to do with religion.
"We've already explained you dont have enough evidence for your hypothesis."
Who's "we"?
You have a tapeworm?
And....what is my 'hypothesis'?
You seem not to know.
What's the better, scientifically supported, theory?
I guess we can take your grinchy faced silence to mean 'there is none'.
Case closed.
So you have no defense of Darwin?
My point exactly.
Case closed.
We're waiting to hear you state for the record what the better theory of evolution is. There is none.
Attacking Darwin's ideas doesn't change that.
