Prove it or remove it challenge

[FutureAndAHope]

PROVE IT, OR REMOVE IT CHALLENGE

My son has just started his first year of primary school, which is a good thing and a bad thing. Good in that he will be learning how to read, count all those good things. Bad in the fact that for the next 13 years he will be indoctrinated into the theory of evolution. A choice over which I have no power. So I don't plan to remain silent, I plan to challenge the government to either "prove or remove" evolutionary teaching.

So here is my challenge to all my evolutionist friends, and other interested parties. Scientific jargon makes it impossible for the average man to understand if evolution is true or false. We don't understand RNA, DNA, etc, so we have to remain silent and trust others. But there is one way that the average man CAN fight back, and that is by using the fossil record. We can all understand and SEE fossils. We see fossils of dinosaurs, horses, birds, so from the very beginning of creation until now we have a record of animals that have lived. So really what should we expect to see in the fossil record, we should expect to see changes between species, wild and dramatic changes, partially developed wings on lizards, something turning into a monkey. But the real truth is we don’t see any of those things happening. We only see different sized monkeys being called our ancestors, or different sized horses being said to have evolved. But think of Dogs (alive today) there a big dogs called Great Danes, and small, dogs, even tiny ones. If all put in a row from small to big they would look like what we have been told is evolution.

So my challenge to you is this, before I contact our government, tell me can you PROVE evolution using the fossil record, the only thing we can all understand and see. The only thing a court of normal citizens could determine using reasoning of the average man, without being bamboozled by science talk. My challenge is don’t give me a list of text names of supposed fossils, I want to see pictures, for if evolution is true there must be millions of them out there, and surely scientists want us to see them; we have thousands of species, supposedly all evolved. Can you find them? If you can’t provide me with proof from the only historical record we have, then you have been taught a lie, evolution never occurred.

 

[eclipsenow]

I'm a theistic whateverist... meaning that I'm open to evolution, punctuated or Darwinian or whatever. It doesn't matter. God made the world through that 'whatever' and Genesis 1 is a thankful poetic theological narrative, not an engineering manual. I wish, I really wish, more Americans appreciated the importance of understanding it in the Hebrew, or at least being able to read someone who does. Then they might have a clue how to approach Genesis.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

PROVE IT, OR REMOVE IT CHALLENGE

I'm not sure if this is a serious post but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and respond as if it is a serious thread.

Bad in the fact that for the next 13 years he will be indoctrinated into the theory of evolution. A choice over which I have no power.

13 years of studying evolution? Hmmm...it might get touched on in beginner biology courses but advanced study of it would be at the university level. What are you so afraid of? It's one of the most established theories in all of science.

So I don't plan to remain silent, I plan to challenge the government to either "prove or remove" evolutionary teaching.

Good luck with that. Try to get it taken out of the classroom or try including creationism in the classroom and you'll be sued into oblivion. If you have the money for lawyers and don't mind losing, go for it. Kitzmiller vs Dover was an embarrassment for intelligent design advocates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

Scientific jargon makes it impossible for the average man to understand if evolution is true or false. We don't understand RNA, DNA, etc, so we have to remain silent and trust others.

The internet has unlimited resources for which you can use to learn. Even if you don't fully understand it, there are videos and books designed for the laymen. I could make suggestions if you'd like. "I don't understand it, therefore I think it's false" is a fallacious argument.

But there is one way that the average man CAN fight back, and that is by using the fossil record.

So, you don't fully understand DNA and molecular genetics but you are smarter than a paleontologist when it comes to drawing conclusions from the fossil record?

So really what should we expect to see in the fossil record, we should expect to see changes between species, wild and dramatic changes

You are correct. Evolution predicts we will see changes between species in the fossil record. We also expect to see more complex organisms as we move up the geologic column. This is exactly what we see.

partially developed wings on lizards, something turning into a monkey. But the real truth is we don’t see any of those things happening.

We've found dinosaur fossils with feathers. http://www.iflscience.com/plants-an...vered-fossils-hint-all-dinosaurs-had-feathers

"Something turning into a monkey"- This demonstrates that you don't understand how evolution works. It takes place in populations not in individuals. There are a ton of hominid fossils. The most famous one is "Lucy" or Australopithecus Afarensis. She had both human and ape like features: Smaller brain, flat nose, long arms and curved fingers. Her human features were bipedal hips (She could walk up right). http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/australopithecus-afarensis

This image needs to be updated with Homo Naledi. Scientific paper: http://elifesciences.org/content/4/e09560v1

But think of Dogs (alive today) there a big dogs called Great Danes, and small, dogs, even tiny ones. If all put in a row from small to big they would look like what we have been told is evolution.

You don't understand the evolution of dogs and are using a strawman here. The common ancestors of dogs is the grey wolf. The evolution of the dog was done by humans called artificial selection. We domesticated them and bred the traits we found desirable. http://www.evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/lines/IVAartselection.shtml

So my challenge to you is this, before I contact our government, tell me can you PROVE evolution using the fossil record, the only thing we can all understand and see.

First, you need to understand science is not in the business of proving anything. That is what math does. Science follows the evidence to a logical conclusion. Second, even without the fossil record, evolution would still be an overwhelming fact. I explained some of it above. Molecular genetics and DNA was the slam dunk of evidence for evolution. Here's a short video of Kenneth Miller explaining a snippet of the human genome project. It's laid out in simple language. This is far more interesting than the fossil record.

My challenge is don’t give me a list of text names of supposed fossils, I want to see pictures

My favorite one is Tiktaalik Roseae. It is a transitional between fish and tetrapods. It has gills, a rib cage for lungs, eyes in the front of it's face and a neck. Coolest fact about this fossil. Neil Shubin and his team accurately predicted where they would find this and what it's features should be. Learn more here: http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/meetTik.html

Fossilization is actually very rare. We have tons of transitional fossils....in fact, every fossil we find is a transitional.
Here is a list with pictures included: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

If you can’t provide me with proof from the only historical record we have, then you have been taught a lie, evolution never occurred.

I think i've provided plenty of above. The fossil record isn't all that interesting to me. There are several other independent lines of evidence we could look at. Which would you like to move onto next? DNA and genetics? Embryology? Comparative anatomy? Nested hierarchy? Examples of evolution in the lab and in nature?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Hi I am on a mobile phone at the moment so I will not be able to write well. I looked up all of your links, I saw no evolution at all just a bunch of lizards. You go have a strong good look at those fossils and tell me where evolution is occurring. We have tens of thousands of animals alive, and the only fossils that can be shown are a hand full of lizards. I appeal to you to think harder. Where are my fossils, you have not answered my question. We have thousands of animals and no fossils showing them evolving. Like I said I have no interest in DNA creation scientist can give counter arguments to yours. I am interested in one area alone fossils. You must prove your belief. You can't run off to the DNA argument. One dinosaur with feathers hardly proves evolution. One, not even two, maybe I could believe if you had two.

 

[timewerx]

We see fossils of dinosaurs, horses, birds, so from the very beginning of creation until now we have a record of animals that have lived. So really what should we expect to see in the fossil record, we should expect to see changes between species, wild and dramatic changes, partially developed wings on lizards, something turning into a monkey. But the real truth is we don’t see any of those things happening. We only see different sized monkeys being called our ancestors, or different sized horses being said to have evolved. But think of Dogs (alive today) there a big dogs called Great Danes, and small, dogs, even tiny ones. If all put in a row from small to big they would look like what we have been told is evolution.

Latest theories about dinosaurs, particularly the theropods is that they are simply giant species of flightless birds.

There are growing evidences of them sporting feathers (which may include the T-rex) and soft tissues in bones that are only present in birds, including modern birds.

The sauropods on the other hand are simply giant lizards.

 

[SkyWriting]

You are correct. Evolution predicts we will see changes between species in the fossil record. We also expect to see more complex organisms as we move up the geologic column. This is exactly what we see.

There is no evidence of a rise in complexity. That's an urban myth.
Besides, why would you expect to see that?

 

[florida2]

I remember spending very little time in school actually looking at evolution biology lessons so he won't be studying it all the time as you seem to make out.

Genetics is essential to understanding evolution so you can't just hand wave it away just because you don't want to take the time to understand it. Science is hard but there are plenty of articles and videos to help you understand better if you're willing to take the time. If you're going to try and overturn a scientific theory it'll take more than asking people on one particular Internet forum to post some pictures.

You seem to want to actually learn, which is great, but you must be open to the different lines of evidence. There are posters on here who are very knowledgeable and will be able to help you. Fossils aren't even the best evidence for evolution, DNA is.

Fossilisation happens very very rarely so the ones we have are likely not a full representation of all the different varieties that existed. There are likely to be many species for which there isn't a single fossil. There is also the fact that we have only looked in a tiny fraction of the world for fossils - you might have incredible fossils underneath your house and we'll never know.

You say that the company only fossils are a handful of lizards. I suggest you haven't looked very hard.

 

[SkyWriting]

Scientific jargon makes it impossible for the average man to understand if evolution is true or false. We don't understand RNA, DNA, etc, so we have to remain silent and trust others.

I have to disagree. Animal Husbandry has been in use by goat herders for quite a while.
One need not have any formal education to practice DNA experiments.
99% of Evolutionary theory can be tested experimentally.
1% (or less) deals with theories about the past.
Past events cannot be observed, cannot be predicted or
deduced from physical evidence, and cannot be tested experimentally.

 

[SkyWriting]

before I contact our government, tell me can you PROVE evolution using the fossil record, the only thing we can all understand and see.

I can't see the fossil record. But I can raise dogs and make changes to the breed.
Forget trying to read the fossil record as it has no value.

 

[DogmaHunter]

PROVE IT, OR REMOVE IT CHALLENGE

My son has just started his first year of primary school, which is a good thing and a bad thing. Good in that he will be learning how to read, count all those good things. Bad in the fact that for the next 13 years he will be indoctrinated into the theory of evolution. A choice over which I have no power. So I don't plan to remain silent, I plan to challenge the government to either "prove or remove" evolutionary teaching.

I feel bad for your son, that you are willing to mess with his mind and try to prevent him to be educated in matters of biology.

Scientific jargon makes it impossible for the average man to understand if evolution is true or false. We don't understand RNA, DNA, etc, so we have to remain silent and trust others.

There's an easy fix for that: educate yourself in these matters.

But there is one way that the average man CAN fight back, and that is by using the fossil record. We can all understand and SEE fossils.

What makes you think that you have the required knowledge and expertise to understand the fossils record?

There's quite a lot one needs to be educated in, in order to correctly interpret / identify a bone found in the ground:
- geology
- paleontology
- perhaps some zoology
- comparative anatomy

I'm willing to bet that you wouldn't know a fossilised lion from a tiger or a cheetah. So what makes you think you are qualified to analyse and correctly interpret bones found in the ground?

We see fossils of dinosaurs, horses, birds, so from the very beginning of creation until now we have a record of animals that have lived. So really what should we expect to see in the fossil record, we should expect to see changes between species,

And we do.

Here's a fun example:

You can literally line up fossils of dolphin ancestors chronologically and see the blowhole move from the front of the face, when it was still a land animal to the top of the skull through the ages.

wild and dramatic changes, partially developed wings on lizards, something turning into a monkey

Yep and we have very nice fossils that illustrate all of that clearly.

But the real truth is we don’t see any of those things happening.

Except that we do.

We only see different sized monkeys being called our ancestors, or different sized horses being said to have evolved.

Yep, that's how it goes with creationists who don't understand what intermediate fossils really are. They expect to find "crockoducks", but reality doesn't work that way.

This is why you should leave the teaching of biology to actual biologists (or get educated yourself in these matters).

But think of Dogs (alive today) there a big dogs called Great Danes, and small, dogs, even tiny ones. If all put in a row from small to big they would look like what we have been told is evolution.

And it IS evolution. They all come from a common ancestor with wolves.
A chiuwawa and a great dane are cousins that share an ancester, do they not?

So my challenge to you is this, before I contact our government, tell me can you PROVE evolution using the fossil record

No. The fossil record supports evolution.
If anything can be said to "prove" evolution, it would be genetics.
Eventhough the word "prove" raises somewhat of a red flag in science. But for the purpose of this topic, it's close enough.

The only thing a court of normal citizens could determine using reasoning of the average man, without being bamboozled by science talk.

Maybe the average man should instead educate himself on matters of biology, before he wishes to tell biologists how to do their job.

My challenge is don’t give me a list of text names of supposed fossils, I want to see pictures, for if evolution is true there must be millions of them out there, and surely scientists want us to see them;

 

[Nithavela]

You do realise that nothing can be proven as true? It can only be proven wrong or be supported by so much evidence that it is seen as true beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Hi I am on a mobile phone at the moment so I will not be able to write well. I looked up all of your links, I saw no evolution at all just a bunch of lizards. You go have a strong good look at those fossils and tell me where evolution is occurring. We have tens of thousands of animals alive, and the only fossils that can be shown are a hand full of lizards. I appeal to you to think harder. Where are my fossils, you have not answered my question. We have thousands of animals and no fossils showing them evolving.

Here's a question for you...

Describe the type of fossil that you would accept.
What kind of features would it need? Give a hypothetical example if that makes it easier.

Because it sounds like you would dissmiss literally anything because you seem to have seriously warped ideas about what a transitional fossil actually is.

Like I said I have no interest in DNA

Maybe you should.

creation scientist can give counter arguments to yours.

No, they cannot. They just like to pretend that they do.
And you are happy to believe them, because they say exactly what you wish to hear.

One dinosaur with feathers hardly proves evolution. One, not even two, maybe I could believe if you had two.

What type of fossils would "prove" evolution, in your opinion?
Describe it. What features would it need?

 

[eclipsenow]

There's an easy fix for that: educate yourself in these matters.

Hi DogmaHunter,
I enjoyed your post. Our metaphysics are different (I'm a theistic evolutionist) but I think our respect for science is on a par. (Your knowledge of it is probably far greater than mine). You're a software engineer. How do you know so much about evolution? Hobby?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Hi in regard to one of the earlier posts where Keith miller Supposedly proved evolution in the video new finds show he was incorrect http://www.icr.org/article/new-research-debunks-human-chromosome

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Ok I was asked what fossil type I am looking for ... I am not after a type ... I am after genuine evidence of the change ... There as I have stated are fossils of dinosaurs... And almost every currently living kind of animal ... WhT there is not is no strong evidence of change ... You supplied a handful of fossils ... That like I said look like a group of lizards and one dinosaur bird... That is all the evidence on the transitional fossil page ... The sum total of changes ... Yet it does not show transition to modern species ... Yet we have fossils of all modern species .. So why are there no intermediate fossils. They never existed.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Ok here is what I want you asked me what evidence would I like regarding fossils. Pick two modern animals and trace from the Big Bang to now their transition ... No lizards allowed as all your fossils look like modern day lizards.

 

[Nithavela]

Ok here is what I want you asked me what evidence would I like regarding fossils. Pick two modern animals and trace from the Big Bang to now their transition ... No lizards allowed as all your fossils look like modern day lizards.

From the big bang? Life didn't begin at the big bang.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I know life supposedly did not start at the Big Bang but you get what I mean .... Also as for the dolphin evolution provided in an earlier post ... Are they the only fossils? Sure the spout moves ... But the rest of the features are different ... Note the saw like spikes they appear ... Then vanish ... And the cavities around the eyes are different in each species. To me they look like three extinct kinds of dolphin, each one different from the other.

 

[TheQuietRiot]

Ok I was asked what fossil type I am looking for ... I am not after a type ... I am after genuine evidence of the change ... There as I have stated are fossils of dinosaurs... And almost every currently living kind of animal ... WhT there is not is no strong evidence of change ... You supplied a handful of fossils ... That like I said look like a group of lizards and one dinosaur bird... That is all the evidence on the transitional fossil page ... The sum total of changes ... Yet it does not show transition to modern species ... Yet we have fossils of all modern species .. So why are there no intermediate fossils. They never existed.

As posed by Dogma Hunter..

Describe the type of fossil that you would accept.
What kind of features would it need? Give a hypothetical example if that makes it easier.

Because it sounds like you would dismiss literally anything because you seem to have seriously warped ideas about what a transitional fossil actually is.

It does indeed sound like you are looking for a "crocoduck". The evolution of dinosaurs to birds would involve thousands of different species and specimens over a great period of time. You could imagine it as a roll of film reel, with every framea progressing chronologically representing a different animal a little further away from a dinosaur and a little closer to a bird. The fossils we are like picking up an individual frame, it doesn't give us the entire answer but we see that as we find frames (fossils) further along this progression they match the predictions set out by previous fossils of what we would expect from a animal further down the evolutionary line.

 

[TheQuietRiot]

To me they look like three extinct kinds of dolphin, each one different from the other.

That's because they are.

Humans have managed to force evolution from wolves into the many variations of dogs we see today over a few thousand years. Is it so hard to imagine that the environment and other species could do the same to each other over millions and millions of years?