Evidence for macroevolution

[Jerry Smith]

Fair enough

 

[RufusAtticus]

Post moved by me.

 

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by randman
We are talking about evolutionists. Talkorigins states there are thousands of transitional fossils.

Okay, I found the claim on Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution. That page gives the following in it bibliography: Colbert, Edwin H. 1991. Evolution of the Vertebrates, 4th ed. How about we both get a copy and discuss the fossil's presented?

Rufus, I really don't want to waste my time with you.

Awww, just when you started to spell my name right. Don't quit so soon, Randman. I'm sure that if you just keep repeating your same five arguments over and over again, I'll stop refuting you and just accept your version of things.

Obviously, from what I wrote, I doubt any science publications do state there are thousands of transitional fossils.

Your doubts are not evidence for anything outside yourself.

I've explained it ad nauseum. Hey, maybe I can check out carville. Same thing as talking to you.

What explaination? All you've done is stated that the fossil record doesn't support evoltion it supports creation. But when asked to defend creationism, you state that you are only interested in attacking evolution. That doesn't sound much like explaining things ad nauseum. It's more like repeating baseless assertions till the cows come home.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Jerry Smith

Can you prove there are not? I don't even know how many transitional fossils there are... How did you determine that there aren't thousands?

Why do you think there are? Because some guy said so?

Well, then, let's make a deal. I'll demonstrate the 16% figure when you demonstrate that there are thousands of transitional fossils. And no quotes from people on your side are allowed. You obviously refuse to cede credibility to quotes from the "other side" so in fairness, I shouldn't have to cede credibility to quotes from your side. And no links to talkorigins unless you will treat links to creationist sites with equal credibility. And no pointing to fossils that "look like they are transitionional" or "look related to this other species over here". Prove they're transitional or shut up.

 

[Jerry Smith]

Originally posted by npetreley


Why do you think there are? Because some guy said so?

Well, then, let's make a deal. I'll demonstrate the 16% figure when you demonstrate that there are thousands of transitional fossils.

I'll tell you what. When I claim there are thousands of transitional fossils, I will be sure to back up my claim.

You have claimed a 16% figure, which I suspect you already know is bogus (though you may not have when you posted it)..

Will you not admit that it was a load of bull? Short of that, will you not show your work, or at least show the work of the person who came up with that figure - including their assumptions?

And no quotes from people on your side are allowed. You obviously refuse to cede credibility to quotes from the "other side" so in fairness, I shouldn't have to cede credibility to quotes from your side. And no links to talkorigins unless you will treat links to creationist sites with equal credibility. And no pointing to fossils that "look like they are transitionional" or "look related to this other species over here". Prove they're transitional or shut up.

I agree with others that there is creationists books and web-sites suffer from a serious lack of credibility, but I am willing to follow a link and look at the contentions found there if that is what you are using to back up your claim. I may find the time to discuss the article you linked to in another thread about horses - the one that includes the false claim that Eohippus is a "Cony" - and backs it up with an out of context quote... then proceeds to make highly stupid remarks like:

Fossils of the three-toed and one-toed species are preserved in the same rock formation in Nebraska USA, proving that both lived at the same time, strongly suggesting that one did not evolve into the other.'

Then again, these threads are growing to fast for me, and I do need to return to real life before I end up an E/C debating junkie for life.. I have a brother-in-law who is an Evercrack junkie and has made a mess of my sister's family. I don't want to be like him...

Still, would you please just admit that you talking out your bottom when you claimed 16% of the "depth of the theorized column?" Or back up your claim.

Oh, and one other thing:

And no pointing to fossils that "look like they are transitionional" or "look related to this other species over here". Prove they're transitional or shut up.

Please, for Pete's sake - find out what transitional means -- or shut up.