Searching the records....

[Ioustinos]

Are there any fossil records that show proof for vertical transitional forms?

 

[seebs]

What exactly do you mean by "vertical"?

In general, yes, there are fossil records showing all sorts of transitions.

 

[Morat]

  Does he mean vertebrate? There's lots of those? Or is this another "ladder" thing?

 

[Iron Maiden]

But there are also missing transitional links, suggesting extinction and not necessarily evolution. IMO.

 

[Morat]

 *shrug*. Any transitional fossil will plug a gap, and create two more. "Missing links" are something of a red herring, especially in the days of protein comparson and DNA analysis.

   Having the wealth of hominid fossils we do is evidence for any but the most opposed, but chromosomal analysis is convincing for all but the terminally biased. And nothing short of God coming down with flowcharts and diagrams would convince them, anyways.l

 

 

[livingforJesus-Shaun]

what a joke their is no proof of evolution!!!! because it don't exist!!!

 

[Morat]

  I see. Well, that's nice to know. Perhaps you should be telling the biologists. They'd appreciate it. Since virtually every biologist who is not a fundamentalist Christian works with and uses evolution daily, they'd probably thank you for pointing out their error.

  I'd suggest you check out Talk.Origins first, because it details a small fraction of the data biologists take as evidence of evolution, and they'd need to know why it was wrong.

 

 

[OneLargeToe]

Is it just me, or does it seem that the majority of evolution deniers are either poorly educated individuals or are of sub-par intelligence?

I really don't mean to be hurling this out as an insult, but come on..there's some truth to this statement.

 

[Morat]

  Beats me. I'd imagine it's because they've been told evolution is a lie, and only atheists believe it.

  Why bother checking it out? I'm sure they trust the person who told them.

 

 

[blader]

Originally posted by OneLargeToe
Is it just me, or does it seem that the majority of evolution deniers are either poorly educated individuals or are of sub-par intelligence?

I really don't mean to be hurling this out as an insult, but come on..there's some truth to this statement.

For the sake of political correctness, let's keep sentiments like that to ourselves.

 

[LouisBooth]

*mod hat on*
onetoe, like blader said, watch it. Read the rules.

*mod hat off*

 

[seebs]

Originally posted by OneLargeToe
Is it just me, or does it seem that the majority of evolution deniers are either poorly educated individuals or are of sub-par intelligence?

It's just you. There are doubtless some poorly educated people on both sides. I would bet that each side has at least one genuinely dishonest con artist, at least one brilliant thinker who is well-educated and honestly convinced, and a fair number of regular Joes who haven't thought about it much.

 

[Lanakila]

Originally posted by seebs


It's just you. There are doubtless some poorly educated people on both sides. I would bet that each side has at least one genuinely dishonest con artist, at least one brilliant thinker who is well-educated and honestly convinced, and a fair number of regular Joes who haven't thought about it much.

 

I am wondering where I fit in your discription. I am not poorly educated, but not a science major either. I have studied this out and am still in the process of learning, about the facts of this debate. But, strongly believe the evolution on the molecules to man level is incorrectly interpreting the evidence that is out there.

 

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by Lanakila


 

I am wondering where I fit in your discription. I am not poorly educated, but not a science major either. I have studied this out and am still in the process of learning, about the facts of this debate. But, strongly believe the evolution on the molecules to man level is incorrectly interpreting the evidence that is out there.

Well you have a lot more to learn, since there is no "molecules to man level" in evolutionary biology.

 

[LouisBooth]

you sure about that??? pro to euk?

 

[Jerry Smith]

lb, you mean prokaryotic to eukaryotic? Prokaryotic cells are live organisms. They aren't non-living molecules. That's single-celled organisms without true neuclei or organelles-to-single-celled organisms with true nuclei and organelles evolution.... not molecules to man.

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by Lanakila
But, strongly believe the evolution on the molecules to man level is incorrectly interpreting the evidence that is out there.

Alternate interpretations that better explain the evidence are most welcome.

 

[Joe V.]

Alternate interpretations that better explain the evidence are most welcome.

I already know what her interpretation is: we can't figure out how it happened (yet), so God-Did-It.

- Joe

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by Joe V.

I already know what her interpretation is: we can't figure out how it happened (yet), so God-Did-It.

Yes, but "we can't figure out how it happened" hardly qualifies as a better explanation.

 

[LouisBooth]

"not molecules to man."

I'd say its the same thing..I think that is what they were implying..?