Is evolution a fact or theory?

[Bible Research Tools]

And ill just add that, there are many of these sequences. Fish to amphibian, amphibian to reptiles, reptile to mammal is well known, reptile to bird is well known. There are sequences of modern animals, horses, whales, turtles, elephants, of course apes, birds, marsupials etc. Countless sequences, these are just some popular ones.

Please show the actual fossils, rather than artistic mock-ups.

Dan

 

[Bible Research Tools]

And all of evolution can easily be disproven, if an obstruction to the succession was found.

Show the actual fossils, and let us decide.

All anyone would have to do is find the...well known "cambrian bunny". Surely in a chaotic global flood, obstructions to the succession should exist.

Or, find a mammal in the ordovician or silurian. Find a bird in the carboniferous. Find a reptile in the cambrian. Anything like this.

How would it ever be known, with all the suppressive skulduggery that exists within the evolutionism orthodoxy?

Dan

 

[Job 33:6]

Are you planning to reply to my prior posts or no?

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Are you planning to reply to my prior posts or no?

Are you asking that question to anyone in particular?

Dan

 

[Job 33:6]

Dan, the message was for you.

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Dan, the message was for you.

Thanks for clearing that up. Which of your posts did I not respond to?

Dan

 

[Job 33:6]

Thanks for clearing that up. Which of your posts did I not respond to?

Dan

630 and 634

 

[Job 33:6]

Your response, I am looking at it now, appears to be that you just dont believe the fossils exist as they are described. As if pakicetus doesnt have a conical shaped whale like head, or as if its head isnt similar to rodhocetus or others.


Lets start with tiktaalik.
A Devonian tetrapod-like fish and the evolution of the tetrapod body plan
Pelvic girdle and fin of Tiktaalik roseae

The scales and fins are clearly visible in the above papers. As well the flat head that is unfused, along with its robust shoulders.

 

[Job 33:6]

Philip D. Gingerich

Composite of pakicetus fragments ^.

Molds are created with bilateral symmetry of the actual bones that are found.

Here is a pakicetus mold^. Notice the long conical skull, and the traingular whale like teeth. All of the fossils of the whale sequence share these features.

Rodhocetus^
http://www.faculty.virginia.edu/bio202/202-2002/Lectures 20202/thesissen et al 2001.pdf

View attachment 229147

ambulocetus

 

[Job 33:6]

Dorudon

 

[Job 33:6]

Ever seen a turtle with half a shell?

 

[Job 33:6]

 

[Bible Research Tools]

630 and 634

I responded to 630.

Let me check and see if I also responded to 634.

Yep. I also responded to 634.

By the way, when are you going to refrain from flooding this thread with blitzkrieg-style posts? The blitzkrieg method of posting -- a typical debater's trick used when the debater has no substantive defense -- is as easily recognizable as the tricks evolutionists use to fool the naive into believing Darwin was something more than an anti-Christian bigot.

Dan

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Your response, I am looking at it now, appears to be that you just dont believe the fossils exist as they are described. As if pakicetus doesnt have a conical shaped whale like head, or as if its head isnt similar to rodhocetus or others.

When are you going to refrain from pretending that morphological similarities prove evolutionism? I contend all similarities in morphology, DNA, and and every other similarity prove an intelligent designer -- the Holy God of the Bible -- and you cannot prove me wrong.

Dan

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Molds are created with bilateral symmetry of the actual bones that are found.
. . .
Here is a pakicetus mold. Notice the long conical skull, and the traingular whale like teeth. All of the fossils of the whale sequence share these features.

So? Prove it is a whale. Why do you demand that we prove a negative?

Dan

 

[Job 33:6]

Im giving you material to response do, and you appear to be ignoring it all.

Rather than actually addressing any of my words, you're just assuming that this is all sort of some giant conspiracy and that all of it is made up.

Well, i suppose ill leave you be then. When you are ready to address my posts, let me know.

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Dorudon

It has been written that the Dorudon and the Basilosaurus lack the melon organ found in modern whales. Does that mean anything to you?

Dan

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Ever seen a turtle with half a shell?

Is there a method to your madness?

Dan

 

[Job 33:6]

So? Prove it is a whale. Why do you demand that we prove a negative?

Dan

prove what is a whale? Pakicetus? Its not a whale, its a mammal with whale features. So is ambulocetus and rodhocetus. They arent whales like modern day species. They are transitionals that lead to the first whales ever observed.

For example, pakicetus looks like ambulocetus. ambulocetus looks like rodhocetus, rodhocetus looks like basilosaurus, and basilosaurus looks like...well, a whale. But even basilosaurus isnt exactly like a modern day whale. Its a transition.

Whale - Wikipedia

 

[Job 33:6]

It has been written that the Dorudon and the Basilosaurus lack the melon organ found in modern whales. Does that mean anything to you?

Dan

A basilosaurus isnt a modern day whale.

You keep saying things like this, like saying pakicetus doesnt have a blow hole. Well of course it doesnt, it isnt a modern day whale.