Evolution. Pfffft

[WinterBorn]

I know plenty of people who are not interested in beauty or art. Your ideas of good & evil are not the same as other people's ideas of good and evil.

You are welcome to claim we are set aside. I simply see that we are more evolved. The fossil record shows many intermediate steps between us and our common ancestors.

We have three fossils in this thread. 6, 66 and 120 million years. All looking like their kin today.

And I know a thing or two about animals. Horses, dogs, sheep, chickens, all sitting around my property right now, so don't try to BS me about animals

You have 3 fossils that resemble each other on the surface and without examination of a living creature.

If you have animals, especially horses and dogs, then you should know they form emotional bonds to people and to other animals. I am not bullshitting you at all. Especially since there are plenty of documented examples of animals grieving themselves to death after losing a loved one.

I can pull out another hundred fossil photos that you can identify with creatures around today, so you are going nowhere fast. Your argument that they reached some pinnacle of evolution or they are different somehow are just pure desperation to make things conform to your programed world.

Chew on this for awhile, I took the pic a few months ago. It's dated to around 1,000AD by the "experts"
View attachment 118226

Yes, you can show that not all animals evolved, or evolved where their external features are concerned. That proves nothing, per se.

I have not said anything about a "pinnacle of evolution". But its nice to see you are consistent with your lies.

No idea what the pic is supposed to show.

And in all this I have yet to see 1 example for the case of evolution.
And it was another poster who claimed that, my apology.

There is enough evidence to satisfy the scientific community that the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation for the variety of species we have today, and for the extinction of those no longer here.

 

[Weatherman2020]

We have three fossils in this thread. 6, 66 and 120 million years. All looking like their kin today.

And I know a thing or two about animals. Horses, dogs, sheep, chickens, all sitting around my property right now, so don't try to BS me about animals

You have 3 fossils that resemble each other on the surface and without examination of a living creature.

If you have animals, especially horses and dogs, then you should know they form emotional bonds to people and to other animals. I am not bullshitting you at all. Especially since there are plenty of documented examples of animals grieving themselves to death after losing a loved one.

I can pull out another hundred fossil photos that you can identify with creatures around today, so you are going nowhere fast. Your argument that they reached some pinnacle of evolution or they are different somehow are just pure desperation to make things conform to your programed world.

Chew on this for awhile, I took the pic a few months ago. It's dated to around 1,000AD by the "experts"
View attachment 118226

Yes, you can show that not all animals evolved, or evolved where their external features are concerned. That proves nothing, per se.

I have not said anything about a "pinnacle of evolution". But its nice to see you are consistent with your lies.

No idea what the pic is supposed to show.

And in all this I have yet to see 1 example for the case of evolution.
And it was another poster who claimed that, my apology.

There is enough evidence to satisfy the scientific community that the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation for the variety of species we have today, and for the extinction of those no longer here.

Pffft. They all have a vested interest in promoting their charade. As I have shown, there is no evidence of species changing into other species.

 

[WinterBorn]

You have 3 fossils that resemble each other on the surface and without examination of a living creature.

If you have animals, especially horses and dogs, then you should know they form emotional bonds to people and to other animals. I am not bullshitting you at all. Especially since there are plenty of documented examples of animals grieving themselves to death after losing a loved one.

I can pull out another hundred fossil photos that you can identify with creatures around today, so you are going nowhere fast. Your argument that they reached some pinnacle of evolution or they are different somehow are just pure desperation to make things conform to your programed world.

Chew on this for awhile, I took the pic a few months ago. It's dated to around 1,000AD by the "experts"
View attachment 118226

Yes, you can show that not all animals evolved, or evolved where their external features are concerned. That proves nothing, per se.

I have not said anything about a "pinnacle of evolution". But its nice to see you are consistent with your lies.

No idea what the pic is supposed to show.

And in all this I have yet to see 1 example for the case of evolution.
And it was another poster who claimed that, my apology.

There is enough evidence to satisfy the scientific community that the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation for the variety of species we have today, and for the extinction of those no longer here.

Pffft. They all have a vested interest in promoting their charade. As I have shown, there is no evidence of species changing into other species.

You have shown nothing of the kind, and you know it.

Vested interest? Are you joking? Do you know what kind of fame and fortune a scientist would get if he disproved the Theory of Evolution? He would go down in history. It is not some private club. It is a group of educated professionals applying strict standards to research. That you think saying "It's too complicated" or making remarks like "Try random changes to your Windows 10 program" or "Molten lava did not become Beethoven" actually disproves anything shows more about your lack understanding of the theory, and of the science behind it, than it disproves anything.

 

[cwise76]

Talk about beating a dead horse.........

 

[ScienceRocks]

This is a really stupid thread.

Can you list anything science has done in the past 200 years that you agree with...jezz.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Wrong again. Every culture on earth appreciates music and a good sunset.
Next time you see a bunch of animals stop and stare at a sunset or gather around to play Mozart, you let us know.

I have seen animals respond emotionally or get excited at certain sights and sounds. Pavlov even proved that.

Animals will react emotionally to the sight of their owners or even other humans or animals that they love. Sounds can produce reactions in many animals.

That proves nothing.

Animals react to people or sounds because they are going to get fed or sense danger.

Like I said, you refuse to look at any evidence outside of the box they put you inside of. You are just a programmed robot.

People react to people or sounds when they are going to be fed or sense danger too. That is not the only time they react to sights or sounds.

And guess what? That is not the only time animals respond to sights and sounds. My dog responds with a great emotional display when he sees me. He does the same when our other dog comes home after being gone over the weekend. They see something that brings them joy and they respond.

I give your dog a steak and guess who he is seeing first next time.

Have you never seen Youtube videos of animals being freed or let outside after years of confinement?
Joy is obvious.

Now if we could see Muslim women attain the same freedom.

 

[Weatherman2020]

This is a really stupid thread.

Can you list anything science has done in the past 200 years that you agree with...jezz.

Dufus with the typical "if they question me I just attack them as being anti-science". I made my wealth on using science. How many US Patents on medical devices with your name on it, dufus?

 

[Weatherman2020]

I can pull out another hundred fossil photos that you can identify with creatures around today, so you are going nowhere fast. Your argument that they reached some pinnacle of evolution or they are different somehow are just pure desperation to make things conform to your programed world.

Chew on this for awhile, I took the pic a few months ago. It's dated to around 1,000AD by the "experts"
View attachment 118226

Yes, you can show that not all animals evolved, or evolved where their external features are concerned. That proves nothing, per se.

I have not said anything about a "pinnacle of evolution". But its nice to see you are consistent with your lies.

No idea what the pic is supposed to show.

And in all this I have yet to see 1 example for the case of evolution.
And it was another poster who claimed that, my apology.

There is enough evidence to satisfy the scientific community that the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation for the variety of species we have today, and for the extinction of those no longer here.

Pffft. They all have a vested interest in promoting their charade. As I have shown, there is no evidence of species changing into other species.

You have shown nothing of the kind, and you know it.

Vested interest? Are you joking? Do you know what kind of fame and fortune a scientist would get if he disproved the Theory of Evolution? He would go down in history. It is not some private club. It is a group of educated professionals applying strict standards to research. That you think saying "It's too complicated" or making remarks like "Try random changes to your Windows 10 program" or "Molten lava did not become Beethoven" actually disproves anything shows more about your lack understanding of the theory, and of the science behind it, than it disproves anything.

You know soooooooooooo little about what goes on in the scientific community. It is all built upon being PC with only studies being funded and supported that conform to current beliefs. Try to get some telescope time on Palomar for a theory that does not conform. It ain't happening. Your inability to grasp what they have programmed you to parrot is your issue. You have shown you have no real understanding of the BS you believe in because you simply do not choose to think on your own, you are just a mindless parrot. You are terrified of the alternative.
There are a lot of scientists who do show the theory of evolution is a hoax. They enlightened me. But because people like you have a vested interest in making sure it sticks, they remain on the outside simply because of politics.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Tilapia found in the Sea of Galilee. Which has been land locked for over 6 million years yet is still it's same old tasty self.
View attachment 115740

Coelacanth, thought to have been extinct 66 million years ago. Until science found out locals consider them tasty too and looking just like their 66 million year old ancestors.
View attachment 115741

/---- So much for settled science

 

[Weatherman2020]

Tilapia found in the Sea of Galilee. Which has been land locked for over 6 million years yet is still it's same old tasty self.
View attachment 115740

Coelacanth, thought to have been extinct 66 million years ago. Until science found out locals consider them tasty too and looking just like their 66 million year old ancestors.
View attachment 115741

/---- So much for settled science

Evolution is the same scenario as global warming with the left. Comply with what we feed you or we will destroy you.

 

[Old Rocks]

This is ignorance on a stunning level.

Ignorance is thinking chaos naturally becomes order

Spare me your definition of ignorance. You have demanded evidence of evolution, then tried to ridicule every bit. When, obviously, your knowledge of the Theory of Evolution is slim, at best.

And then you have the audacity to suggest intelligent design? ID has absolutely ZERO evidence to back it up. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

In fact, alien landings and UFOs have more evidence.

I just love it when ID is brought up to your ilk, and you can't even acknowledge the possibility of it, yet you stick to your theory of evolution that has more holes in it than an Iranian submarine.

Species have changed over time. That's a fact...there are many species that did not exist millions of years ago and there are species that did exist then that no longer exist, BUT there are clear similarities between some extinct and current species. Evolution explains how this happened. You obviously think there are too many holes. Ok. fine.

What do you think better explains these changes?

There is zero evidence of any species becoming another species. Zero.

You are so full of stupidity, WM. Synapsids;

Evolution: From Reptiles to Mammals

The most obvious distinctions between mammals and reptiles are the fact that mammals have hair or fur, and mammary glands which they use to nourish their young. These features do not fossilize, and no known mammals have left hair or fur impressions in the rock surrounding their fossils. Fortunately, however, there are also a number of skeletal differences between reptiles and mammals. For one, reptiles have a mouth filled with several teeth which are more or less uniform in size and shape; they vary slightly in size, but they all have the same basic cone-shaped form. By contrast, mammals tend to have teeth which vary greatly in size and shape; everything from flat, multi-cusped molar teeth to the sharp cone-shaped canines. In reptiles, the lower jaw is comprised of several different bones, which hinge on the quadrate bone of the skull and the angular bone of the jaw. In mammals, however, the lower jaw is comprised of only one bone - the dentary, which hinges at the quadrate of the skull. In mammals, there are three bones in the middle ear, the malleus, incus and stapes (also known as the hammer, anvil and stirrup). In reptiles, there is only one bone - the stapes. The reptilian skull is attached to the spine by a single point of contact, the occipital condyle. In mammals, the occipital condyle is "double-faced". The classic reptilian skull also has a small hole, or "third eye" through which the pineal body extends - a trait not found in any known mammal.

This brings us to the synapsid reptiles. Like mammals, they have a single, lower temporal fenestra. Already this makes them more akin to mammals than other reptiles, albeit with a very reptilian body; legs sprawled out, long whip-like tail, basically conical-uniformed teeth, etc.. One group of synapsid reptiles in particular, the therapsids, seem to break these rules and are adorned with very mammalian characteristics; in the more advanced forms, many of the bones absent in mammals were already being reduced to near extinction, and the "third eye" so small it might as well have been absent. [Romer, 1967, p. 226]

 

[Old Rocks]

Simply from physical evidence, fossils and DNA, evolution is the sturdiest of the scientific Theories. We see the evidence for evolution in the rocks worldwide. We see our relationship to all other life on earth in the DNA of all our cells.

So the first DNA had a meeting and drew lots into what they would evolve into?

This is ignorance on a stunning level.

Ignorance is thinking chaos naturally becomes order

Spare me your definition of ignorance. You have demanded evidence of evolution, then tried to ridicule every bit. When, obviously, your knowledge of the Theory of Evolution is slim, at best.

And then you have the audacity to suggest intelligent design? ID has absolutely ZERO evidence to back it up. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

In fact, alien landings and UFOs have more evidence.

I would be a coward to defend evolution taught in every public school too, it is such an absurdity with zero supporting evidence.

And that is why we prevent idiots like you from determining what is taught in public schools.

 

[Old Rocks]

Species have changed over time. That's a fact...there are many species that did not exist millions of years ago and there are species that did exist then that no longer exist, BUT there are clear similarities between some extinct and current species. Evolution explains how this happened. You obviously think there are too many holes. Ok. fine.

What do you think better explains these changes?

There is zero evidence of any species becoming another species. Zero.

Since we cannot go back in time, there is nothing you would accept as evidence of a new species developing from a previously existing one.

However, having a species appear in the fossil record with very similar traits, except for some new trait, in the same area the other species existed, is evidence. Certainly more evidence than ID provides.

Your adamant insistence that there is "no evidence" is laughable, considering the Theory of Evolution provides far more evidence than does the Intelligent design ideas.

I am all about evidence. And fossils of species dated millions of years ago looking just like they do today is pretty damning evidence.
You haven't randomly changed some code in your Windows 10 software yet to see how it improves, why not? Because you know it does not work that way. Nature moves towards erosion, not towards order. There is nothing in any law or theory of physics that says an explosion will end up creating Mozart.

You are certainly not "all about evidence". You are all about demanding evidence for evolution. But when it comes to intelligent design, you are perfectly willing to accept things with zero evidence.

The number of species with fossil evidence from millions of years ago to the present, showing no changes at all is exceedingly rare.

Your insistence that evolution includes an explosion is just another example of your lack of knowledge about what is and isn't evolution. It is ridiculous to use it as a description, just like it was ridiculous to use the idea that evolution claimed molten lava became Beethoven.


But since evidence has been offered in support of evolution, please offer evidence supporting intelligent design.

How dare I ask for evidence to support a scientific theory.
Mathematical probabilities, biology, and physics all point to the only alternative to evolution of the species - intelligent design.

And I can't blame you for not wanting to side with what they teach kids in all the public schools about the creation of the universe and life, it is simply absurd.

Sheesh. Look, you Goddamned lying little cretin, we have the entire fossil record with more fossils being found daily. And we have the map of our DNA and that of other living creatures, which demonstrate our relationship to all life on earth. That is profound evidence. And your little mythology has no more evidence than does that of any primitive tribal mythology.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Ignorance is thinking chaos naturally becomes order

Spare me your definition of ignorance. You have demanded evidence of evolution, then tried to ridicule every bit. When, obviously, your knowledge of the Theory of Evolution is slim, at best.

And then you have the audacity to suggest intelligent design? ID has absolutely ZERO evidence to back it up. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

In fact, alien landings and UFOs have more evidence.

I just love it when ID is brought up to your ilk, and you can't even acknowledge the possibility of it, yet you stick to your theory of evolution that has more holes in it than an Iranian submarine.

Species have changed over time. That's a fact...there are many species that did not exist millions of years ago and there are species that did exist then that no longer exist, BUT there are clear similarities between some extinct and current species. Evolution explains how this happened. You obviously think there are too many holes. Ok. fine.

What do you think better explains these changes?

There is zero evidence of any species becoming another species. Zero.

You are so full of stupidity, WM. Synapsids;

Evolution: From Reptiles to Mammals

The most obvious distinctions between mammals and reptiles are the fact that mammals have hair or fur, and mammary glands which they use to nourish their young. These features do not fossilize, and no known mammals have left hair or fur impressions in the rock surrounding their fossils. Fortunately, however, there are also a number of skeletal differences between reptiles and mammals. For one, reptiles have a mouth filled with several teeth which are more or less uniform in size and shape; they vary slightly in size, but they all have the same basic cone-shaped form. By contrast, mammals tend to have teeth which vary greatly in size and shape; everything from flat, multi-cusped molar teeth to the sharp cone-shaped canines. In reptiles, the lower jaw is comprised of several different bones, which hinge on the quadrate bone of the skull and the angular bone of the jaw. In mammals, however, the lower jaw is comprised of only one bone - the dentary, which hinges at the quadrate of the skull. In mammals, there are three bones in the middle ear, the malleus, incus and stapes (also known as the hammer, anvil and stirrup). In reptiles, there is only one bone - the stapes. The reptilian skull is attached to the spine by a single point of contact, the occipital condyle. In mammals, the occipital condyle is "double-faced". The classic reptilian skull also has a small hole, or "third eye" through which the pineal body extends - a trait not found in any known mammal.

This brings us to the synapsid reptiles. Like mammals, they have a single, lower temporal fenestra. Already this makes them more akin to mammals than other reptiles, albeit with a very reptilian body; legs sprawled out, long whip-like tail, basically conical-uniformed teeth, etc.. One group of synapsid reptiles in particular, the therapsids, seem to break these rules and are adorned with very mammalian characteristics; in the more advanced forms, many of the bones absent in mammals were already being reduced to near extinction, and the "third eye" so small it might as well have been absent. [Romer, 1967, p. 226]

You don't even know what you are trying to parrot.
A. Your post has nothing to do with the lack of evidence that species become more complex species.
B. There are a number of fossils found that have hair or feathers.

Oldest Human Hairs Found in Hyena Dung Fossil

Rare Dinosaur Find: Fossil Covered in Feathers, Skin

125-million-year-old mammal fossil reveals the early evolution of hair and spines

Fossilized Mammal From Age Of Dinosaurs Had Spiky Hair

Identification of fossil hairs in Parahyaena brunnea coprolites from Middle Pleistocene deposits at Gladysvale cave, South Africa

 

[Old Rocks]

Really? So why don't you list them for us?

Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ

I wrote this FAQ as a reference for answering the "there aren't any transitional fossils" statement that pops up on talk.origins several times each year. I've tried to make it an accurate, though highly condensed, summary of known vertebrate fossil history in those lineages that led to familiar modern forms, with the known transitions and with the known major gaps both clearly mentioned. Version 6.0 of the FAQ has been almost entirely rewritten, with:

1. A completely rewritten introduction & conclusion, discussing what "transitional" means, why gaps occur, and what the fossil record shows.
2. A greatly expanded list of "chains of genera" for most groups, especially mammals.
3. References for documented species-to-species fossil transitions, mostly for mammals.
4. Explicit mention of the notable remaining gaps in the fossil record.

If you have questions about this FAQ or want to send email to the author, click here.

Contents
PART I has FISHES TO FIRST MAMMALS & BIRDS:

1. Introduction:
   1. Types of transitions
   2. Why are there gaps?
   3. Predictions of creationism & evolution
   4. What's in this FAQ
   5. Timescale
2. Transitions from primitive fish to sharks, skates, rays
3. Transitions from primitive fish to bony fish
4. Transition from fishes to first amphibians
5. Transitions among amphibians
6. Transition from amphibians to first reptiles
7. Transitions among reptiles
8. Transition from reptiles to first mammals (long)
9. Transition from reptiles to first birds

Reality.

There is zero evidence of any species transitioning into other species. A 66 million year old fossil of a fish looks just like a fish swimming around today, a 35 million year old fossil of a sea turtle looks just like a sea turtle swimming around today.

Superficially, perhaps...but they're not the same. The Coelacanth today is as related to the 66 million fossil as a poodle is to a sabre tooth tiger.

And your evidence of that is?
And even if true, means nothing because it is still a Coelacanth. Just as people are diverse, it does not mean we are different species going in different directions.

But the Coelacanths are NOT the same species.

Coelacanths are still Coelacanths.
Are these different species?

And how many different colors do cats appear in? Dogs? They can all interbreed, as we can, and thus are all the same species, or very closely related species, like we and Neanderthals. Give it up, WM, you are simply revealing your abysmal ignorance as to what evolution is and how it operates.

 

[Weatherman2020]

How about soft tissue being found in a "68 million year old" fossil?

The spin on how soft tissue could have survived 68 million years?

It had a lot of iron in it.

Soft tissue found on T. Rex explained

 

[Weatherman2020]

There is zero evidence of any species transitioning into other species. A 66 million year old fossil of a fish looks just like a fish swimming around today, a 35 million year old fossil of a sea turtle looks just like a sea turtle swimming around today.

Superficially, perhaps...but they're not the same. The Coelacanth today is as related to the 66 million fossil as a poodle is to a sabre tooth tiger.

And your evidence of that is?
And even if true, means nothing because it is still a Coelacanth. Just as people are diverse, it does not mean we are different species going in different directions.

But the Coelacanths are NOT the same species.

Coelacanths are still Coelacanths.
Are these different species?

And how many different colors do cats appear in? Dogs? They can all interbreed, as we can, and thus are all the same species, or very closely related species, like we and Neanderthals. Give it up, WM, you are simply revealing your abysmal ignorance as to what evolution is and how it operates.

Says the dufus who parrots irrelevant nonsense.
Horse and a zebra can interbreed, yet ............

 

[Weatherman2020]

There is zero evidence of any species becoming another species. Zero.

Since we cannot go back in time, there is nothing you would accept as evidence of a new species developing from a previously existing one.

However, having a species appear in the fossil record with very similar traits, except for some new trait, in the same area the other species existed, is evidence. Certainly more evidence than ID provides.

Your adamant insistence that there is "no evidence" is laughable, considering the Theory of Evolution provides far more evidence than does the Intelligent design ideas.

I am all about evidence. And fossils of species dated millions of years ago looking just like they do today is pretty damning evidence.
You haven't randomly changed some code in your Windows 10 software yet to see how it improves, why not? Because you know it does not work that way. Nature moves towards erosion, not towards order. There is nothing in any law or theory of physics that says an explosion will end up creating Mozart.

You are certainly not "all about evidence". You are all about demanding evidence for evolution. But when it comes to intelligent design, you are perfectly willing to accept things with zero evidence.

The number of species with fossil evidence from millions of years ago to the present, showing no changes at all is exceedingly rare.

Your insistence that evolution includes an explosion is just another example of your lack of knowledge about what is and isn't evolution. It is ridiculous to use it as a description, just like it was ridiculous to use the idea that evolution claimed molten lava became Beethoven.


But since evidence has been offered in support of evolution, please offer evidence supporting intelligent design.

How dare I ask for evidence to support a scientific theory.
Mathematical probabilities, biology, and physics all point to the only alternative to evolution of the species - intelligent design.

And I can't blame you for not wanting to side with what they teach kids in all the public schools about the creation of the universe and life, it is simply absurd.

Sheesh. Look, you Goddamned lying little cretin, we have the entire fossil record with more fossils being found daily. And we have the map of our DNA and that of other living creatures, which demonstrate our relationship to all life on earth. That is profound evidence. And your little mythology has no more evidence than does that of any primitive tribal mythology.

We all have DNA so it is true!
You sound just like the idiot moonbat jurors in the OJ case.

 

[Old Rocks]

No. The differences are a lot greater, and at a genetic level as well.

But you're still tap-dancing.
How do you explain the thousands of extinct species of plants and animals and the thousands of current species not found millions of years ago?

So now you claim to have the genetic material from a 66 million year old fossil? And you say I am tap dancing?

You still have not answered my very simple question.

Can you provide any evidence supporting the ID theory?

Have you answered my question on yet on what are the possibilities for life existing yet? Did I miss your answer?

No, you have not missed my answer. It is irrelevant to the question I asked you. I have answered numerous questions, and you have yet to answer this one. I asked it when you first brought up ID, and you have steadfastly refused to answer.

Why is that?


Can you provide any evidence supporting the ID theory?

I have answered you already. You can't see the trees through the forest.

Is there any evidence that would make you think ID is the answer?

You have answered nothing. All you have done is flapped yap, and never addressed how come ID would bother with creating all these different species over time, rather than just creating what we see today. Is your Deity so new at creating things that it needed practice? And why the progress from single celled life to multi-celled? Why did not your Deity just create life as we know it, and be done with it?

 

[Weatherman2020]

So now you claim to have the genetic material from a 66 million year old fossil? And you say I am tap dancing?

You still have not answered my very simple question.

Can you provide any evidence supporting the ID theory?

Have you answered my question on yet on what are the possibilities for life existing yet? Did I miss your answer?

No, you have not missed my answer. It is irrelevant to the question I asked you. I have answered numerous questions, and you have yet to answer this one. I asked it when you first brought up ID, and you have steadfastly refused to answer.

Why is that?


Can you provide any evidence supporting the ID theory?

I have answered you already. You can't see the trees through the forest.

Is there any evidence that would make you think ID is the answer?

You have answered nothing. All you have done is flapped yap, and never addressed how come ID would bother with creating all these different species over time, rather than just creating what we see today. Is your Deity so new at creating things that it needed practice? And why the progress from single celled life to multi-celled? Why did not your Deity just create life as we know it, and be done with it?

There you go again, parrot, parrot, parrot.

I have shown a number of fossils of creatures that after "millions of years" are identical to what we have around today. Creatures that were all created at once.