Missing link found by Norwegian scientist

Hespera · May 19, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
Show me.

It is there for you. You have decided that no matter what, you wont believe it? If so what is the point in my making an effort on your behalf?

People who dont even know there is a christian cult that denies the reality of evolution seem to understand it fine. Nobody has ever found a piece of contrary evidence. That is why, for example. some say that god hid the evidence of the alleged flood. How else to explain the failure to find any evidence that it happened?

I doubt that you seriusly want to be shown. You'd have to show me you do before I'd make any more effort than i did already.

AV1611VET · May 19, 2009

Hespera said:
See you cant grasp that other people are not like you. You refuse to believe evidence no matter how much is piled in front of you.

Evidence of what, Hespera?

You throw us a bone every once in awhile and expect us to believe you've found some missing link of some kind?

Probably just someone with a bone disease, injury, or got too close to a pile of uranium or something.

Live I've said before --- what I think these guys are really doing is making these amazing "discoveries" so as to keep their support coming in.

You know --- keep the boss happy.

Honkytnkmn · May 19, 2009

faith guardian said:
University of Reading - Worms turn detective to help with contaminated land

Water Lily May Provide A "Missing Link" In The Evolution Of Flowering Plants

The first is a good example of how animals can adapt to their surroundings, but in the end a worm turning into a worm is hardly proof of evolution.

The second sounds like it was still mostly in the Hypothesis stages. I'd like to see a follow up on their findings.

Hespera said:
It is there for you. You have decided that no matter what, you wont believe it? If so what is the point in my making an effort on your behalf?

People who dont even know there is a christian cult that denies the reality of evolution seem to understand it fine. Nobody has ever found a piece of contrary evidence. That is why, for example. some say that god hid the evidence of the alleged flood. How else to explain the failure to find any evidence that it happened?

I doubt that you seriusly want to be shown. You'd have to show me you do before I'd make any more effort than i did already.

Funny you act like you know me from what 5 posts in 10 min. (I guess that would be par for the course. As I'm 39 years old and you are able to explain my entire being from 10 minutes on a forum, ignoring the last 20,774,946 minutes that you didn't spend getting to know me. but I digress)

I actually spend quite a lot of time scouring the internet for transitional fossils, I do searches about 4-6 times a year to see what new findings are out there. I'm sorry if a fossil here and an artist rendition there doesn't convince me.

TheReasoner · May 19, 2009

AV1611VET said:
My apologies --- I should not have assumed you didn't believe in angels.

Apology accepted
We all can make mistakes, and assumption is the mother of all... Mistakes.

Honkytnkmn · May 19, 2009

AV1611VET said:
Evidence of what, Hespera?

You throw us a bone every once in awhile

Now that there's funny! I Don't care what you evolved from!

TheReasoner · May 19, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
The first is a good example of how animals can adapt to their surroundings, but in the end a worm turning into a worm is hardly proof of evolution.

The second sounds like it was still mostly in the Hypothesis stages. I'd like to see a follow up on their findings.

Funny you act like you know me from what 5 posts in 10 min. (I guess that would be par for the course. As I'm 39 years old and you are able to explain my entire being from 10 minutes on a forum, ignoring the last 20,774,946 minutes that you didn't spend getting to know me. but I digress)

I actually spend quite a lot of time scouring the internet for transitional fossils, I do searches about 4-6 times a year to see what new findings are out there. I'm sorry if a fossil here and an artist rendition there doesn't convince me.

People spend a lot of time doing a lot of research and end up with the wrong conclusions all the time:
YouTube - Iraqi TV Debate: Is the Earth Flat?

That said, an adaptation such as this is a major one, and is a clear step in an evolutionary process. Just as my ability to digest cow's milk (most humans can't do that, actually) and Africans' ability to resist malaria more effectively is.
Sure, they may seem like small steps, but it all adds up. One drop may not seem like much. But add enough of them and you have an ocean.

Honkytnkmn · May 19, 2009

faith guardian said:
People spend a lot of time doing a lot of research and end up with the wrong conclusions all the time:

That's true. I'm guessing that this is the case with the water lily. But you were talking about me looking up information weren't you? Well I can't make you believe that I look at the information from a learning point of view, but I do.

When I see an article like this one we're discussing, I don't automatically dismiss it. I read the entire article and try to decipher if it actually holds up to the claims. It usually doesn't.

TheReasoner · May 19, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
That's true. I'm guessing that this is the case with the water lily. But you were talking about me looking up information weren't you? Well I can't make you believe that I look at the information from a learning point of view, but I do.

When I see an article like this one we're discussing, I don't automatically dismiss it. I read the entire article and try to decipher if it actually holds up to the claims. It usually doesn't.

Well, I was kind of talking about you. But not as a personal attack. I applaud critical thought and critical reading. Too few apply that. It just needs to be used correctly. As the video shows, some who think critically end up way off base. Personally I think you are a little of track when you don't believe in evolution. To me that's a little like not believing in Newton's laws. (which I know is a bad comparison given that they only work in certain special circumstances, but I digress)
I think the problem often may occur when people study alone without other people around them in the same study. Sometimes you can then fall into a rut so to speak and get stuck on a wrong track. This can also happen with groups of people, even whole societies. Look at the catholic church at Copernicus' time for an excellent example.

I also applaud it when a person has will, ability and guts to challenge a set idea or paradigm. Provided he or she does so with good, respectful and intelligent arguments. So far I have not seen you be neither disrespectful nor arrogant, so you definitely have my respect.

Honkytnkmn · May 19, 2009

faith guardian said:
Well, I was kind of talking about you. But not as a personal attack. I applaud critical thought and critical reading. Too few apply that. It just needs to be used correctly. As the video shows, some who think critically end up way off base. Not that I am saying you necessarily do.
I think the problem often may occur when people study alone without other people around them in the same study. Sometimes you can then fall into a rut so to speak and get stuck on a wrong track. This can also happen with groups of people, even whole societies. Look at the catholic church at Copernicus' time for an excellent example.

Well to be honest, I didn't watch the video as I'm at work and can't. But I know where you're coming from. It works on both sides too. Just because an idea is old doesn't mean its wrong.

I also applaud it when a person has will, ability and guts to challenge a set idea or paradigm. Provided he or she does so with good, respectful and intelligent arguments. So far I have not seen you be neither disrespectful nor arrogant, so you definitely have my respect.

I do tend to use a little sarcasm though! lol

Hespera · May 19, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
The first is a good example of how animals can adapt to their surroundings, but in the end a worm turning into a worm is hardly proof of evolution.

The second sounds like it was still mostly in the Hypothesis stages. I'd like to see a follow up on their findings.

Funny you act like you know me from what 5 posts in 10 min. (I guess that would be par for the course. As I'm 39 years old and you are able to explain my entire being from 10 minutes on a forum, ignoring the last 20,774,946 minutes that you didn't spend getting to know me. but I digress)

I actually spend quite a lot of time scouring the internet for transitional fossils, I do searches about 4-6 times a year to see what new findings are out there. I'm sorry if a fossil here and an artist rendition there doesn't convince me.

Well, fair enough about doing some guessing tho i intended to make it sound as if i were guessing rather than stating facts.

So am I right that you have now clarified it, that you really dont intend to look very hard?

The "worm turn into a worm" line is kind of typical creo site talk.

There is btw an awful lot of difference between one sort of worm and another. Far more than the difference between a dog and a bear or horse, say.

If you said "so a mammal just turned into a mammal, that doesn't prove anything about evolution" it would be more obvious than with worms, i guess that in fact, it may very well demonstrate something significant if one thing changes into something else.

Anyway...one way to look at it is that there are an awful lot of highly educated people around the world who in a wide variety of fields have contributed to the ToE, but none have ever stumbled upon a bit of data that would tend to argue against it, let alone falsify the ToE.

So if you dont understand it, arent convinced, that is more a case of how hard you looked than anything else.

TheReasoner · May 19, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
Well to be honest, I didn't watch the video as I'm at work and can't. But I know where you're coming from. It works on both sides too. Just because an idea is old doesn't mean its wrong.

Indeed it does! Everyone's human after all. It doesn't matter what you believe. We're all still quite capable of making mistakes. And sin. And eat. And sleep. And put our pants on one leg at a time and whatnot...

Honkytnkmn said:
I do tend to use a little sarcasm though! lol

Don't we all

lostaquarium · May 19, 2009

Is anyone else bothered about why they're publicising it without publishing it?

Hespera · May 19, 2009

lostaquarium said:
Is anyone else bothered about why they're publicising it without publishing it?

Oh, you know, that depends a lot on who is doing the publicizing.

As one of our Nobel Physicists put it, "publicity is a w...." (meaning lady of ill repute)

sbvera13 · May 19, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
I actually spend quite a lot of time scouring the internet for transitional fossils, I do searches about 4-6 times a year to see what new findings are out there. I'm sorry if a fossil here and an artist rendition there doesn't convince me.

Honkytnkmn said:
The first is a good example of how animals can adapt to their surroundings, but in the end a worm turning into a worm is hardly proof of evolution.

I'm assuming from this that you are looking for an example of one animal turning into another animal. If so, it's no wonder you havn't found any. It doesn't exist. Evolution says so. Evolution predicts slwo and gradual change. The worm example fits this prediction.

We have a name for a species spontaneously appearing. It's called creationism.

You have your viewpoints backwards. It's very ironic that in calling the sudden appearance of new animals ridiculous, and saying we've never found such a thing, is in fact disproving yourself.

USincognito · May 20, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
When I see an article like this one we're discussing, I don't automatically dismiss it. I read the entire article and try to decipher if it actually holds up to the claims. It usually doesn't.

Examples?

Baggins · May 20, 2009

Honkytnkmn said:
The first is a good example of how animals can adapt to their surroundings, but in the end a worm turning into a worm is hardly proof of evolution.

.

Ah! Conclusive proof that you don't have the first idea about what evolution is or how it works.

Only someone completely ignorant of the mechanisms of evolution would use the argument a worm turning into a worm isn't evolution.

Anyone who knew anything about evolution would know that a worm can only ever evolve into a modified worm.

Thanks for outing yourself Mr Creationist

Baggins · May 20, 2009

lostaquarium said:
Is anyone else bothered about why they're publicising it without publishing it?

I believe the description paper is in press - something called PLoS One? - but the purchase and work on this fossil was paid for by a disparate group who all wanted their day in the sun and got it today.

So in short - no.

Ectezus · May 20, 2009

Haha.

Google > creationists.

Gawron · May 20, 2009

Posted by Hespera:

"The "worm turn into a worm" line is kind of typical creo site talk."

But you know where all of this worm turning is leading, don't you?

AV1611VET · May 20, 2009

Gawron said:
But you know where all of this worm turning is leading, don't you?

--- Japan?

Missing link found by Norwegian scientist

Junior Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Newbie

Former christian, current teapot agnostic.

Newbie

Former christian, current teapot agnostic.

Newbie

Former christian, current teapot agnostic.

Newbie

Junior Member

Former christian, current teapot agnostic.

Quite flawed

Junior Member

Senior Member

a post by Alan Smithee

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Beholder

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency