Fossil Record

[JohnR7]

Does the fossil record show that:

1) God created everything 6000 years ago, and then destroyed most of it in a flood about 4400 years ago? (Bishops Ussher & Lightfoot's theory)

2) Gap theory. That the days in Creation were literal, in that most everything was destroyed before the end of the last ice age, then God began all over again following the YEC model. But also that the OEC theory of creation is true, because the fossil record cleary shows an old earth that was created over millions if not billions of years of time.

3) Or do you believe that somehow, someway, due to creative writting and excessive use of the imagination, the fossil record proves YEC, OEC & the GAP theory to be wrong, with the only explaination left, that we have to work with is the theory of evolution?

4) Or you have a theory or explaination for the fossil record that I have not mentioned. For example, you believe in one of the OEC theorys.

 

[Justme]

Hi,

I just stay with the concept that 'evolution' was the tool of creation.
What is the 'ism' for that?

Justme

 

[lucaspa]

Does the fossil record show that:

1) God created everything 6000 years ago, and then destroyed most of it in a flood about 4400 years ago? (Bishops Ussher & Lightfoot's theory)

2) Gap theory. That the days in Creation were literal, in that most everything was destroyed before the end of the last ice age, then God began all over again following the YEC model. But also that the OEC theory of creation is true, because the fossil record cleary shows an old earth that was created over millions if not billions of years of time.

3) Or do you believe that somehow, someway, due to creative writting and excessive use of the imagination, the fossil record proves YEC, OEC & the GAP theory to be wrong, with the only explaination left, that we have to work with is the theory of evolution?

4) Or you have a theory or explaination for the fossil record that I have not mentioned. For example, you believe in one of the OEC theorys.

Wow, possibility #3 isn't biased or anything, is it? "due to creative writting [sic] and excessive use of the imagination". No bias there, right John?

The fossil record clearly falsifies YEC, OEC, and Gap theory. The mere existence of the fossil record falsifies YEC. If the earth were only 6,000 -20,000 years old there wouldn't be a fossil record with extinct species.

The fact that ONLY the larger mammals in the Northern Hemisphere went extinct at the end of the last Ice Age while all other life went on as normal falsifies the Gap Theory as stated here. And the transitional series of individual fossils linking one species to another and often across several species to new genera, families, orders, and even classes falsifies OEC.

OEC still requires special creation of "kinds" at least, species at best. And the transitional individuals linking taxonomic groups up to and including Class means that there is no possible definition of kind that could satisfy the statements of OEC.

Some transitional series of fossils that falsify all forms of creationism:

Transitional individuals from one class to another
1. Principles of Paleontology by DM Raup and SM Stanley, 1971, there are transitional series between classes. (mammals and reptiles are examples of a class)
2. HK Erben, Uber den Ursprung der Ammonoidea. Biol. Rev. 41: 641-658, 1966.

Transitional individuals from one order to another
1. C Teichert "Nautiloidea-Discorsorida" and "Actinoceratoidea" in Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology ed RC Moore, 1964
2. PR Sheldon, Parallel gradualistic evolution of Ordovician trilobites. Nature 330: 561-563, 1987. Rigourous biometric study of the pygidial ribs of 3458 specimens of 8 generic lineages in 7 stratgraphic layers covering about 3 million years. Gradual evolution where at any given time the population was intermediate between the samples before it and after it.

Transitionals across genera:
1. Williamson, PG, Paleontological documentation of speciation in cenozoic molluscs from Turkana basin. Nature 293:437-443, 1981. Excellent study of "gradual" evolution is an extremely fine fossil record.

Transitional individuals in hominid lineage
1. CS Coon, The Origin of Races, 1962.
2. Wolpoff, 1984, Paleobiol., 10: 389-406
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/11/science/12FOSSIL.html?tntemail1

Transitional series from one family to another in foraminerfera
1. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/foram/foramintro.html
2. http://cushforams.niu.edu/Forams.htm

Reptiles to mammals
1. http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_05.htm

Speciation in the fossil record
1. McNamara KJ, Heterochrony and the evolution of echinoids. In CRC Paul and AB Smith (eds) Echinoderm Phylogeny and Evolutionary Biology, pp149-163, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1988 pg 140 of Futuyma.
2. Kellogg DE and Hays JD Microevolutionary patterns in Late Cenozoic Radiolara. Paleobiology 1: 150-160, 1975.

Whale transition:
1. http://www.neoucom.edu/Depts/ANAT/whaleorigins.htm
2. http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v413/n6853/full/413277a0_fs.html
3. http://darla.neoucom.edu/DEPTS/ANAT/whaleorigins.htm

Transitional websites:
http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_04.htm
http://www.origins.tv/darwin/transitionals.htm
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Miller.html

 

[lucaspa]

Hi,

I just stay with the concept that 'evolution' was the tool of creation.
What is the 'ism' for that?

Justme

theistic evolution

 

[JohnR7]

Hi,

I just stay with the concept that 'evolution' was the tool of creation.
What is the 'ism' for that? Justme

Darwinism, or Neo Darwinism. Sense Darwin is credited with being the "father" of Evolution theory. Even though the theorys were around for a long time before Darwin came along.

 

[lucaspa]

Darwinism, or Neo Darwinism. Sense Darwin is credited with being the "father" of Evolution theory. Even though the theorys were around for a long time before Darwin came along.

Justme said "Hi,

I just stay with the concept that 'evolution' was the tool of creation.
What is the 'ism' for that? Justme"

Although this is how Darwin felt, the theory that you are calling Darwinism or neo-Darwinism says nothing about deity. When you introduce that concept then you are being a theistic evolutionist.

The idea that species were not fixed and new species were somehow derived from other species had been introduced in the late 1700s. However, the natural selection that is such an integral part of both Darwinism and neo-Darwinism was discovered by Darwin.

 

[Iosias]

Darwinism, or Neo Darwinism. Sense Darwin is credited with being the "father" of Evolution theory. Even though the theorys were around for a long time before Darwin came along.

And that most modern evolutionists disagree with Darwin on major issues. for the record I am YEC.

 

[Ave Maria]

I am a Young Earth Creationist and I probably always will be.

 

[Bushido216]

And that most modern evolutionists disagree with Darwin on major issues. for the record I am YEC.

Generally speaking the basic principles are left untouched. There were many things in Darwin's day that he simply couldn't explain, such as the mode of inheritance and the mode of variation. However, he knew that such things didn't need explainations, only observations of their results.

Very smart man, he.

BTW, nice way to dig up an ancient thread. This must be one of the first JohnR7/lucaspa grudge matches.

 

[L'Anatra]

And that most modern evolutionists disagree with Darwin on major issues. for the record I am YEC.

Which "major issues" are those, out of curiosity?

 

[Bushido216]

Phylogeny, for one. I think some of his ideas on modes of speciation and things like that.

 

[lucaspa]

And that most modern evolutionists disagree with Darwin on major issues. for the record I am YEC.

Please list the "major issues" that modern evolutionists disagree with Darwin about.

One of the most public debates where it was thought to disagree with Darwin was Punctuated Equilibria. But the ones saying it disagrees with Darwin never seem to have noticed this:

"Many species once formed never undergo any further change ... and the periods, during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured by years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form." Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, 4th and later editions, pg. 727

Finally, the originator of PE admitted:

"Punctuated equilibrium is neither a creationist idea nor even a non-Darwinian evolutionary theory about sudden change that produces a new species all at once in a single generation. Punctuated equilibrium accepts the conventional idea that new species form over hundreds or thousands of generations and through an extensive series of intermediate changes. But geological time is so long that even a few thousand years may appear as a mere "moment" relative to the several million years of existence for most species. Thus, rates of evolution vary enourmously and new species may appear to arise "suddenly" in geological time, even though the time involved woudl seem long, and the change very slow, when compared to a human lifetime." Stephen J. Gould, Science and Creationism, A view from the National Academy of Sciences, 2nd edition, pg 29, 1999. www.nap.edu

 

[Talmid HaYarok]

and this is the problem with many such Origins debates. You didn't even consider #5: None of the Above

Trying to force way too much into very limited accepted viewpoints. Remember, the scientific method can not be properly used unless you can seperate things into a logical null hypothesis.