Is fossil evidence that strong of a case for evolution?

[RickG]

You must have me mixed up with someone else.

You are the one with embedded age. You are the one who says God created everything 6,000 years ago but made the earth to physically much older. If God really did that, he is deliberately deceiving us.

 

[RickG]

Which is an absurd, if not blasphemous clutch phrase.

I am not the one saying God embedded age or anything. However, if that is true, then I have regrets say that that is a deliberately deceptive action.

Finally, an honest admission.

Yup! Which is something we rarely see from anyone citing the creationist literature.

So you don't believe God created life except by naturalistic means.

I didn't say anything about the creation of life. But since you give me the opportunity, YES. There is no reason it could not happen by natural means.

Classic Darwinian logic, there is nothing scientific or Biblical about it.

No, what I stated was up to date main stream science. It doesn't have anything to do with Darwin.

 

[Dizredux]

The funny thing is that many believe the fossil record is perhaps the weakest evidence for evolution. Remember that Darwin did not depend on or utilize the the fossil record very much in his Origin of Species book.

Here are some lines of evidence from Berkeley Lines of evidence: The science of evolution

Lines of evidence: The science of evolution

At the heart of evolutionary theory is the basic idea that life has existed for billions of years and has changed over time.

Overwhelming evidence supports this fact. Scientists continue to argue about details of evolution, but the question of whether life has a long history or not was answered in the affirmative at least two centuries ago.

The history of living things is documented through multiple lines of evidence that converge to tell the story of life through time. In this section, we will explore the lines of evidence that are used to reconstruct this story. These lines of evidence include:

Fossil evidence

Homologies

Distribution in time and space

Evidence by example

The fossil record is very important but there is more than enough evidence to establish evolution as the best theory to explain the diversity of life without even needing to look at fossils.

Dizredux

 

[AV1611VET]

So what's your reason for the thinly veiled dishonesty this time? Did you change your mind about embedded age or is there some kind of semantic error you're pretending to not notice?

Sometimes I wish, only for the sake of justice, that a God does exist so you can reap what you sow for all your lying and disrespect.

Perhaps instead, He will ask Rick what things I claim He embedded into His creation, other than age? or maybe He will ask DerelictJunction what my definition of embedded age is?

False accusations are a dime-a-dozen.

 

[Delphiki]

Perhaps instead, He will ask Rick what things I claim He embedded into His creation, other than age? or maybe He will ask DerelictJunction what my definition of embedded age is?

False accusations are a dime-a-dozen.

To clarify, your answer is that the semantic you're pretending to the oblivious to is that he said "things" in place of "age", yet you knew exactly what he meant anyway.

Perhaps one day you can learn how to be honest.

 

[Loudmouth]

Disclaimer: I could care less if we evolved or were created. The whole debate is non-sense, but some aspects of it are interesting, so no reason to go crazy over my question. I'm just curious, and looking for critiques.

I just wanted to get opinions on how this video is deceptive, and how creationist distort evidence to fit their pseudo-science.

I just got through the first few chapters of Jerry Coyne's book, "Why Evolution is True", and I didn't find the fossil evidence he gave that compelling. The whale evidence I thought was the worst (or maybe tiktaalik). Dinosaurs with feathers, eh, sort of convincing. The rest of the examples were just small variations within certain organisms, nothing impressive that I would throw all in and say evolution is true.

The one aspect that is often ignored is that every fossil found so far fits the predictions made by the theory of evolution. That is, the fossils fall into the nested hierarchy predicted by evolution. We find fossils with a mixture of mammalian and cetacean features. We find fossils with a mixture of dinosaur and bird features. We even find fossils with a mixture human and ape features.

More importantly, we DON'T see fossils with a mixture of mammalian and bird features, cetacean and fish features, or vertebrate and cephalopod derived features.

Ultimately, the fact that the fossil record falls into the predicted nested hierarchy is the biggest piece of evidence that the fossil record supplies.

 

[lasthero]

I could care less

You couldn't care less.

 

[Loudmouth]

Finally, an honest admission. So you don't believe God created life except by naturalistic means. Classic Darwinian logic, there is nothing scientific or Biblical about it.

Shouldn't you produce evidence that something other than naturalistic mechanisms are involved before expecting someone to believe in non-naturalistic mechanisms?

 

[AV1611VET]

To clarify, your answer is that the semantic you're pretending to the oblivious to is that he said "things" in place of "age", yet you knew exactly what he meant anyway.

Rick said:

AV, you are the only one who claims God embedded things, which makes God a deceiver.

Prompting Mark's reply:

Which is an absurd, if not blasphemous clutch phrase.

Then DJ chimes in with:

AV is claims that God embedded 4.5 billion years of age and history in Earth's surface when He made it. Direct your accusation of blasphemy at him.

... when I've made it clear:

Embedded Age is defined as "maturity without history" (qv 1), whereas Omphalos is defined as "maturity with history". In other words, Omphalos is embedded history, not embedded age.

For the millionth time: embedded age is maturity without history.

Perhaps one day you can learn how to be honest.

Maybe you should learn to use a mirror before you use a microphone?

Or at least, know what you're talking about.

After all, wouldn't a real scientist investigate before he communicates?

 

[Loudmouth]

For the millionth time: embedded age is maturity without history.

Then why do you include rocks with millions of years of history in your list of things with embedded age?

 

[RickG]

Perhaps instead, He will ask Rick what things I claim He embedded into His creation, other than age? or maybe He will ask DerelictJunction what my definition of embedded age is?

It is quite simple AV. You have in the past claimed two specific things. (1) The earth was created 6,000 years ago, but God embedded age in it to make it appear to be 4.54 Ga (billion years old). (2) There were no fossils before the fall.

Then please explain how we have a 3.5 Ga fossil record thought out the geologic column if there were no fossils before the fall. How did they get there in a specific time and place without your embedded claim?

False accusations are a dime-a-dozen.

Yup, over 3 million so far and counting.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then why do you include rocks with millions of years of history in your list of things with embedded age?

That's it ... keep 'em confused, so they'll make these mistakes again.

 

[Loudmouth]

That's it ... keep 'em confused, so they'll make these mistakes again.

Can't answer my question? Here it is again.

Why do you include rocks that contain millions of years of history in your list of things that have embedded age?

 

[bhsmte]

Can't answer my question? Here it is again.

Why do you include rocks that contain millions of years of history in your list of things that have embedded age?

Rocks, can take a hike?

 

[AV1611VET]

Then please explain ...

No, Rick, I'm not going to "please explain."

Not when I'm being falsely accused of something.

You want to put words into my mouth; that's your prerogative, but don't expect me to take the witness stand and let you badger me about your own mistake.

 

[Naturalism]

No, Rick, I'm not going to "please explain."

Not when I'm being falsely accused of something.

You want to put words into my mouth; that's your prerogative, but don't expect me to take the witness stand and let you badger me about your own mistake.

Sure, I will play. AV, how old is the earth? Is this age the actual age or somehow an embedded age a god has induced into the creation?

 

[HitchSlap]

Disclaimer: I could care less if we evolved or were created. The whole debate is non-sense, but some aspects of it are interesting, so no reason to go crazy over my question. I'm just curious, and looking for critiques.

I just wanted to get opinions on how this video is deceptive, and how creationist distort evidence to fit their pseudo-science.

I just got through the first few chapters of Jerry Coyne's book, "Why Evolution is True", and I didn't find the fossil evidence he gave that compelling. The whale evidence I thought was the worst (or maybe tiktaalik). Dinosaurs with feathers, eh, sort of convincing. The rest of the examples were just small variations within certain organisms, nothing impressive that I would throw all in and say evolution is true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkwhd_gIR7c&feature=youtu.be

Yes, the fossil record supports ToE explicitly.

 

[Queller]

Link please?

Right here, for one

Oh, indeed we can:

1. The earth is 4.57 billion years old physically.
2. The earth is 6000 years old existentially.

The only way these two statements can both be true is if God created the earth 6,000 years ago with 4.57 billion years of age and history.

 

[DerelictJunction]

No, Rick, I'm not going to "please explain."

Not when I'm being falsely accused of something.

You want to put words into my mouth; that's your prerogative, but don't expect me to take the witness stand and let you badger me about your own mistake.

My apologies if I misrepresented you. However, your claim of embedded age without history then needs further explanation if I am to understand it.

You have stated that the embedded age of the Earth is 4.5 billion years (approx). How was this embedded age determined?

 

[HitchSlap]

Right here, for one

The only way these two statements can both be true is if God created the earth 6,000 years ago with 4.57 billion years of age and history.

Yes, this is his ad hoc explanation that assuages his cog dis so he can sleep at night. He has cutely named it "embedded age."