Science vs. Creationism

[VINYLONE]

There has been 27 discovered human ancestors species ranging from 6million years ago to 40,000 years ago!!

CJ scares the **** out of me. Completely and utterly.

 

[Zulu]

Here are some good peer reviewed journal articles that discuss the Dinosaur to bird evolution.

Paleontology. Tiny, feathered dino is most birdlike yet.

Authors
Stokstad E.
Journal
Science. 2000 Dec 8;290(5498):1871-2.
Affiliation

The evolution of dinosaurs.

Authors
Sereno PC.
Journal
Science. 1999 Jun 25;284(5423):2137-47.
Affiliation

Do feathered dinosaurs exist? Testing the hypothesis on neontological and paleontological evidence.

AuthorsFeduccia A, et al. Show all Journal
J Morphol. 2005 Nov;266(2):125-66.
Affiliation

A basal dromaeosaurid and size evolution preceding avian flight.

AuthorsTurner AH, et al. Show all Journal
Science. 2007 Sep 7;317(5843):1378-81.
Affiliation

Palaeontology: Dinosaurs take to the air.

Authors
Prum RO.
Journal
Nature. 2003 Jan 23;421(6921):323-4.
Affiliation
Erratum in
Nature. 2003 Feb 6;421(6923):595..

 

[Zulu]

Pearl....

These mainly are for you!!

You seem to not like the Dino's turn into birds gap, well these articles look at transition fossils that show some good evidence that supports this concept!!!

 

[♪alt13]

I know not all Americans are like CJ but I guess people like him result in images like that

dood you made America too small.

What is that brown thing in the middle?

#yousuck@maps

 

[One Brow]

“Strangely enough,” admits the above-quoted book, “although modern birds possess both scales (especially on their feet) and feathers, no intermediate stage between the two has been discovered on either fossil or living forms.”

https://ncsce.org/pdfs/feathers/evodevo.pdf

Back in 2000, we already had most of the pathway by which the descendants of those with scales grew feathers. It's not at all out of our reach to finish the job.

 

[One Brow]

Many researchers agree that this vast and detailed record shows that all the major groups of animals appeared suddenly and remained virtually unchanged, with many species disappearing as suddenly as they arrived.

"Many" as in more than 10? There is a pitifully small minority that agree with this.

 

[One Brow]

We're not buying that "hogwash" process that "given enough time" anything can happen!

The Bible places no limits on how much a kind can change. Why do you place such a limit?

That line of reasoning can probably be applied to every single creature that exists today. The odds are stacked against it. Yet, we are expected to believe that by chance evolution also produced a male and a female at the same time in order for the new species to be perpetuated.

That's a description of miraculous creation, not evolution. Evolutionary theory says that at all times, members of populations reproduced with other members of the population who were pretty much just like them, as chages accumulated gradually over generations.

Have you ever read Chaucer in the original Old English? Do you think there was a generation of kids who just suddenly started speaking Middle English, and couldn't talk with their parents? Yet, Middle English is very different from Old English, and Modern English is more different still. Changes in the language accumulated gradually over generations, just like changes in populations accumulate.

Certainly, it stretches credulity to the limit to believe that life exists in its millions of perfected forms as a result of millions of gambles that paid off.

Life exists in 0 perfected forms, and millions of non-perfected forms.

 

[One Brow]

"In fact, the direct ancestors of living crocodiles were long-legged running animals the size of chihuahuas that ate insects."

The Darwiniac story gets more and more ridiculous.

Why is that ridiculous?

 

[One Brow]

So quiet please, men are talking.

I understand the impulse, but that's just rude.

 

[MVP]

Why is that ridiculous?

We have probably the best evidence of any other species evolution when we look at modern horse. It has evolved from small dog size ancestor and those fossils are extremely well documented. I bet "creationists" think it is ridiculous and less believable than Eve being "created" from Adam's rib.

 

[PearlWatson]

Pearl....

These mainly are for you!!

You seem to not like the Dino's turn into birds gap, well these articles look at transition fossils that show some good evidence that supports this concept!!!

Thanks. You seem like a nice guy except the stork jab.

Yes I do have serious doubts about a lot of the speculations Darwinists come up with regards to fossils.

I tried accessing the "dinosaurs take to the air" one but I was only able to read the small blurb, without paid access. I assume you have read the articles you are suggesting.

I have a question regarding your meaning of "transitional species."

So you have fossilized "dinosaurs" without wings and "dinosaurs" with 2 wings, and some with 4 wings.

Is there only one mutation from "no wings" to "wings?"

Also do the "dinosaur" fossils with wings have beaks?

Is the mutation from snout to beak one mutation?

Is the mutation from snout to beak always paired with the mutation from "no wings" to "wings?"

Is there "dinosaur" fossils with wings but no beak?

Is there "dinosaur" fossils with beaks but no wings?

Can you know whether a "dinosaur" fossil had feathers or scales or is it just a speculation since you only have the bones?

 

[One Brow]

Is there only one mutation from "no wings" to "wings?"

Pat of this issue with all of your questions (not just this one) is that you seem to think their is some distinct form a limb can have call that is "not a wing" versus dome form form that is a "wing", similarly for "snout" and "beak". However, what we see are things that are 20% toward what you call a wing/beak, or 35%, or 67%. or 95%. So, the answer to your question could be yes or no.

Yes, more than one mutation from 100% not a wing to 100% winged. No, only one mutation is needed to cross the threshold from under 50% wing to over 50% wing (or where ever you draw the line).