Is Creationism a Fairy Tale?

[nuttypiglet]

OK, it seems a little overly simplistic, but I'll accept that statement. Birds that fly are currently the fittest creatures for most ecological niches that require large flyers.

But then I have to ask, what point that statement serves. It does exactly nothing to support Creationism, and is no better at supporting evolution. Neither does it weaken either argument. If that is the statement you wanted to arrive at when you issued me the challenge, then why bother issuing the challenge?

I simply said in a post that birds are best at the job of flying. I didn't make any challenge. That was done by another person who questioned 'BEST'. We've spent days over this ridiculous question lol. I think I need to start ignoring a certain person who asks too many irrelevant questions. What do you think 'lasthero'?

 

[OllieFranz]

I simply said in a post that birds are best at the job of flying. I didn't make any challenge.

You did issue me a challenge:

Another one steps in. Perhaps YOU can give an example then of a better aerodynamic life form, one better than birds which fly? Just one that is better than birds will do, which will make birds not the best. How about something better than an Eagle with its good vision, speed, agility and can soar on thermals to save energy.

This was at the point when I first entered the conversation. I'd not said a word about birds at this point.

 

[Split Rock]

That looks like a convincing start to the transition, but lots of changes to go yet. Is the next transition available for view?

Look at the second link

 

[EternalDragon]

So once deceived, in your opinion was Archaeopteryx a bird or not? And why or why not?

It definitely has both bird and dinosaur features. It seems to be a rather good example of a transitional species to me.

But you have no evidence that they did evolve. All you have is similarity. Similarity does not mean evolution from a dinosaur to a bird. It could mean that but is not enough to know for sure.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But you have no evidence that they did evolve. All you have is similarity. Similarity does not mean evolution from a dinosaur to a bird. It could mean that but is not enough to know for sure.

Actually we do. It is clear that you do not know what qualifies as evidence.

By the way, similarity is evidence, so you have just admitted that we have evidence.

Would you like to learn what evidence is so you will not continually make the same foolish mistakes?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Those more qualified to answer that are still trying to decide. It seems that it was in then out then in and now out or vice versa. The new findings I believe have it back in but deny that it was a precursor for birds. It seems to me that having some of the features of a bird appears to support that, however, if we look at other such cases we find many times it is independent evolution or horizontal transfer. Since the jury is still out, I think I will take a wait and see stance on it.

Many if not most fossils end in a an extinction of some sort. That does not mean that they are not transitional. I was asking you specifically what you believed about Archy and why and you punted.

 

[madaz]

For one thing, no one believes fairy tales are true.

Have you discussed this with AV?

 

[OllieFranz]

But you have no evidence that they did evolve. All you have is similarity. Similarity does not mean evolution from a dinosaur to a bird. It could mean that but is not enough to know for sure.

We have species that are in the midst of evolving. We can see what similarities are kept and what differences produce the species split. The "mere similarities" in the fossil record, and in the genomes, etc all agree with one another and with the explanation in cladistics and other branches of evolutionary science. It is more than a possibility as you suggest, but more like a 95% certainty.

 

[[serious]]

Um ... just as a reminder of my OP:

I somehow don't think Lynch v. Donnelly qualifies here.

You think a major supreme court case doesn't qualify as debate?

 

[lasthero]

I simply said in a post that birds are best at the job of flying. I didn't make any challenge. That was done by another person who questioned 'BEST'. We've spent days over this ridiculous question lol. I think I need to start ignoring a certain person who asks too many irrelevant questions. What do you think 'lasthero'?

It was barely even a day and a half. I asked you a simple question to start.

 

[lasthero]

Yes that is true, however, the new discoveries of two dino fossils challenge bird evolution from the Theropods since they pre-date those.

Source, please.

ght now, we have feathered dino's that pre-date the ones that were said to have been the ones that birds evolved from.

Source, please.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Source, please.


Source, please.

The fossils were discovered in China by Dr. Gareth Dyke, Senior Lecturer in Vertebrate Paleontology at the University of Southampton, and colleagues from five other international institutions. According to the researchers, who describe their findings in this week´s edition of the journal Nature Communications, this new species pre-dates the dinosaurs that were previously believed to have been the ancestors of modern flying chordates.
“Over many years, it has become accepted among paleontologists that birds evolved from a group of dinosaurs called theropods from the Early Cretaceous period of Earth´s history, around 120-130 million years ago,” officials from the university said in a statement Thursday. “Recent discoveries of feathered dinosaurs from the older Middle-Late Jurassic period have reinforced this theory,” and the newly discovered species “provides additional evidence to this effect,” they added.
“This discovery sheds further doubt on the theory that the famous fossil Archaeopteryx — or ℠first bird´ as it is sometimes referred to — was pivotal in the evolution of modern birds,” Dr. Dyke, who is affiliated with the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, explained. “Our findings suggest that the origin of flight was much more complex than previously thought.”
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112770632/bird-evolution-theory-challenged-by-new-discovery-012513/



A newly discovered bird-like dinosaur named Aurornis xui is about 10 million years older than Archaeopteryx, the feathered dinosaur previously considered the oldest bird known to paleontologists.


Aurornis xui - New Candidate for Oldest Bird | Paleontology | Sci-News.com

 

[Theodor1]

You think a major supreme court case doesn't qualify as debate?

I think it qualifies as toilet paper. There is a huge difference between man's law and God's law. The supreme court is an example of man's attempt at law and man's failure. This shows us the need for God and the need to live according to God's law.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I think it qualifies as toilet paper. There is a huge difference between man's law and God's law. The supreme court is an example of man's attempt at law and man's failure. This shows us the need for God and the need to live according to God's law.

And yet man, not God, dictates and attempts to enforce both.

 

[[serious]]

I think it qualifies as toilet paper. There is a huge difference between man's law and God's law. The supreme court is an example of man's attempt at law and man's failure. This shows us the need for God and the need to live according to God's law.

We are not gods, we are men.

 

[nuttypiglet]

Look at the second link

I did look at the second link but there are no transitional fossils there. It shows the lung of a dinosaur and bird, and the way the femur is used in birds to support the lung, not in dinosaurs. It also goes on about some soft tissue found in fossils, mainly a t-rex, but this is likely to be just slime.

 

[lasthero]

I did look at the second link but there are no transitional fossils there. It shows the lung of a dinosaur and bird, and the way the femur is used in birds to support the lung, not in dinosaurs. It also goes on about some soft tissue found in fossils, mainly a t-rex, but this is likely to be just slime.

What do you consider to be a transitional fossil?

 

[nuttypiglet]

What do you consider to be a transitional fossil?

The same as anyone else, so as I said before, no need to go there and waste time.

 

[lasthero]

The same as anyone else, so as I said before, no need to go there and waste time.

But everyone else considers archeaopteryx to be a transitional fossil, as well as these.

(A few) transitional fossils

So what's the problem?

 

[Split Rock]

I did look at the second link but there are no transitional fossils there. It shows the lung of a dinosaur and bird, and the way the femur is used in birds to support the lung, not in dinosaurs. It also goes on about some soft tissue found in fossils, mainly a t-rex, but this is likely to be just slime.

There are links to other transitionals in that entry.

Here:
Confuciusornis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Microraptor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia