What proof would you need? (2)

[Astridhere]

That doesn't explain the Physicians views on miracles.

Indeed many well credentialed scientists also believe in creation.

Not only do well educated physicians believe in miracles, so do evolutionists and atheists.


RICHARD DAWKINS, Cambridge, "And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists....the only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation...", THE BLIND WATCHMAKER, 1986, p229-230

Dawkins, a creationist ridiculer, admits to the sudden appearance of kinds in the fossil record but denies this could possibly support creation but would rather believe in something that has not been observed but still miraculously 'evolved'.

Another example, evolutionists believe a placenta suddenly appeared in placental mammals without being able to describe how the selection of a new process of birthing and the demise of the former could possibly be an advantage to any intermediate.

I think the foundation of evolutionary science is based on "Let's not worry about the details".

 

[Keachian]

Indeed many well credentialed scientists also believe in creation.

Not only do well educated physicians believe in miracles, so do evolutionists and atheists.


RICHARD DAWKINS, Cambridge, "And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists....the only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation...", THE BLIND WATCHMAKER, 1986, p229-230

Dawkins, a creationist ridiculer, admits to the sudden appearance of kinds in the fossil record but denies this could possibly support creation but would rather believe in something that has not been observed but still miraculously 'evolved'.

Another example, evolutionists believe a placenta suddenly appeared in placental mammals without being able to describe how the selection of a new process of birthing and the demise of the former could possibly be an advantage to any intermediate.

I think the foundation of evolutionary science is based on "Let's not worry about the details".

Such an obvious quote mine, not to mention the fact that Dawkins like creationists seems to want to perpetuate the false dichotomy

 

[Astridhere]

progmonk..you are another one that will attempt to misrepresent your own researchers, just like USincognito. This extract is from his book, whether you like it or not. Of course he goes on the bag out creationists in his usual arrogant manner. However his acknowledgement of gaps in the fossil record is made.

Indeed this....

RICHARD DAWKINS, Cambridge, "And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists....the only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation...", THE BLIND WATCHMAKER, 1986, p229-230


......Is not a quote mine, as I suggest that Dawkins, like many other evo researchers prefer to believe in what they have not observed rather than let the obvious lead the way. Punctuated equilibrium is another attempt to excuse evolutionists finding stasis then heralding some totally different kind they dig up as an intermediate.

I note you staw grabbed at denial rather than speak to this imaginary sort of placental mammal, but not quite, that was just about to be...that of course never ever was.

Where is your evidence that such a non plausible transition could take place?

Further more to that, will you deny the former discussion that research into placebo affect demonstates the power of faith? How much more so will one heal whom has faith in HE who is more powerful than a pill?

 

[Huram Abi]

Contextomy is the cheapest and easiest way for a creationist to distort the facts.

Can't make your case? Post an incomplete quote.


Let's see how Dawkin's finishes his thought in the Blind Watchmaker:

"And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists.

Evolutionists of all stripes believe, however, that this really does represent a very large gap in the fossil record, a gap that is simply due to the fact that, for some reason, very few fossils have lasted from periods before about 600 million years ago.

One good reason might be that many of these animals had only soft parts to their bodies: no shells or bones to fossilize."

 

[Huram Abi]

What Astrid has done is even worse than just leaving off a thought. The quote she provides is actually 2 quotes, peicemailed together. The second portion is in regard to the interpretation of these major gaps in the fossil record.

"...there is no difference whatever in the interpretations of 'punctuationists' and 'gradualists'. Both schools of thought despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. Both schools of thought agree that the only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation, and both would reject this alternative."

Blind Watchmaker, p230

 

[Zaius137]

“Evolutionists of all stripes believe, however, that this really does represent a very large gap in the fossil record, a gap that is simply due to the fact that, for some reason, very few fossils have lasted from periods before about 600 million years ago.”

Given the missing genetic and molecular evidence of evolution, unreasonable claims of a common descent into the organism types (Bacteria, Archaea, Eukaryotes), variable isotope decay rates and rock dating assumptions and any evidence at all that one species changes into another.

I would also claim that the fossil evidence is not a major problem.

 

[Zaius137]

Such an obvious quote mine, not to mention the fact that Dawkins like creationists seems to want to perpetuate the false dichotomy

Why creationists have to mine so deep is because evolutionists are so good at burying the truth.
Evolution science is the soubriquet of a dichotomy.

 

[Huram Abi]

Given the ample supply of genetic and molecular evidence of evolution, very reasonable claims of a common descent into the organism types (Bacteria, Archaea, Eukaryotes), constant isotope decay rate and varying, verifiable rock dating methods among plenty of other evidence that one species changes into another, you are right.


The gap in the fossil record here is not necessary to be filled in order for us to understand evolution or to accept it.

 

[Astridhere]

Huram Abi ...Thanks for agreeing with me. Obviously I did not mine quote out of context. The paragraph you posted restates the obvious.."THE MAJOR GAPS ARE REAL".

...."and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record."

By any chance Huram Abi, did you notice my bold, or did you miss this bit that suggests indeed my point is made.

In case you are having difficulty in discerning what the point was, it was about the fossil record having gaps, as supported by Dawkins and other researchers. My interpretation of the fossils you present after a period of stasis are often different kinds eg Carnivora is a mess of dog, cat, bear kinds thrown together.

Hopefully your are able to pick up that what you posted validated what I had to say in the first place. I also note that in two posts you had nothing to say to address anything I spoke to other than to strain an obvious point...GAPS and nothing to say about the power of faith!

You appear to only be able to make smart remarks, try to refute me by backing what I say, and absolutely nothing in the way of being able to defend your science eg Placental mammals and the power of faith. That my friend, says it all about you!

 

[Zaius137]

Given the ample supply of genetic and molecular evidence of evolution, very reasonable claims of a common descent into the organism types (Bacteria, Archaea, Eukaryotes), constant isotope decay rate and varying, verifiable rock dating methods among plenty of other evidence that one species changes into another, you are right.


The gap in the fossil record here is not necessary to be filled in order for us to understand evolution or to accept it.

Monkey see monkey do…Hey Huram… Those are my proofs which I can support any one of them.

 

[Zaius137]

You appear to only be able to make smart remarks, try to refute me by backing what I say, and absolutely nothing in the way of being able to defend your science eg Placental mammals and the power of faith. That my friend, says it all about you!

I agree 100% Astrid…

 

[Astridhere]

Why creationists have to mine so deep is because evolutionists are so good at burying the truth.
Evolution science is the soubriquet of a dichotomy.

Absolutely Zaius. Well said!

However, I did not quote mine out of context at all. These evos would argue with the earth being circular if a creationist based a post on it.

Indeed there are many gaps in the fossil record and evo researchers acknowledge it. It is a shame some of these evos have no idea about their own science but are prepared to put up a host of meaningless posts with no substance to them what so ever.

I have many CF trophies to be proud of eg a picture of USincognito messaging me and personalized hate mail in the thread tags.

Too bad these evos sprooke that evolutionary theory is so solid that none of them can ever defend it with more than smart remarks, ignorance of their own evo research and ridicule. While this is all they got, you and I are winners.

Creationist interpretations of the data could not possibly we worse than 150 years of evolutionary falsifications and instability.

Evolutionary researchers will never let real science and observation get in the way of a good story.

Evolutionists are very good at burying the truth eg, Chimp and human DNA is similar only if you bury the differences.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Further more to that, will you deny the former discussion that research into placebo affect demonstates the power of faith? How much more so will one heal whom has faith in HE who is more powerful than a pill?

The rather obvious point being made seems to have completely passed you by.

 

[Huram Abi]

Monkey see monkey do…Hey Huram… Those are my proofs which I can support any one of them.

By all means, then.... be my guest.

 

[Astridhere]

You appear to only be able to make smart remarks, try to refute me by backing what I say, and absolutely nothing in the way of being able to defend your science eg Placental mammals and the power of faith. That my friend, says it all about you!

I agree 100% Astrid…

Thanks.

Let's see if any bright ones can explain the 'evolving' of the placenta into being and why the selection of a new method of birthing babies that was transitional, was selected for....IOW Uselessness was selected.

Perhaps one would like to suggest all the research on placebo effects is idiocy and that faith does not support healing!

Let's see how many maybe's, perhapses and likely's these evos put up as evidence. Of course that's if any of them have anything to say at all about either topic. So far they are not doing very well.

 

[Astridhere]

By all means, then.... be my guest.

Your reply, yet again as always, demonstrates you have absolutely nothing of substance to say.

Keep up the smart remarks with no substantial explanation or refute to anything I say and you will further demonstrate you cannot refute me.

 

[Huram Abi]

I've refuted you a number of times, Astrid. You are just like Cupid Dave, in that you jump right over the refutation and keep on babbling.


Regarding what I said to Zaius, he said he could support his claims, yet hasn't. I'm giving him the opportunity to. So whatever "substance" you are looking for, needs to come from him, not me.

 

[Zaius137]

I've refuted you a number of times, Astrid. You are just like Cupid Dave, in that you jump right over the refutation and keep on babbling.


Regarding what I said to Zaius, he said he could support his claims, yet hasn't. I'm giving him the opportunity to. So whatever "substance" you are looking for, needs to come from him, not me.

I post here in the hope to sharpen my understanding of the arguments for the creation evolution debate. The most exciting debates for me are the ones I do not win. Usually when some one fails to provide a rational case and just wants an argument I lose interest. For some time now I have tried to really engage Huram and a few others in the deeper aspects of evolution dogma but have failed. I must say there are a couple of participants on the evo side that I have truly learned from and have a degree of respect for; my thanks go out to them.

Some participants only can speak bumper sticker. It is either they do not understand enough of there own dogma or they are not real science types.

I have a very serious question for Huram….

Can you ever talk anything but bumper sticker?

If so lets reason on a given subject.

 

[USincognito]

Monkey see monkey do…Hey Huram… Those are my proofs which I can support any one of them.

Don't be coy. Why not actually do it instead of just talking about it?

Creationists sure do love wasting time with empty promises instead of simply posting evidence and getting off the pot.

 

[Zaius137]

Don't be coy. Why not actually do it instead of just talking about it?

Creationists sure do love wasting time with empty promises instead of simply posting evidence and getting off the pot.

Is that a pure bred Cooncat?