The Colin Patterson quote: No Intermediate Fossils

[bhsmte]

Since gungasnake considers Stephen Jay Gould to be an expert, surely he has never claimed that there are transitional fossils, right?

"The lower jaw of reptiles contains several bones, that of mammals only one. The non-mammalian jawbones are reduced, step by step, in mammalian ancestors until they become tiny nubbins located at the back of the jaw. The "hammer" and "anvil" bones of the mammalian ear are descendants of these nubbins. How could such a transition be accomplished? the creationists ask. Surely a bone is either entirely in the jaw or in the ear. Yet paleontologists have discovered two transitional lineages of therapsids (the so-called mammal-like reptiles) with a double jaw joint—one composed of the old quadrate and articular bones (soon to become the hammer and anvil), the other of the squamosal and dentary bones (as in modern mammals). For that matter, what better transitional form could we expect to find than the oldest human, Australopithecus afarensis, with its apelike palate, its human upright stance, and a cranial capacity larger than any ape’s of the same body size but a full 1,000 cubic centimeters below ours?"--Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"
Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory" 1994

Maybe he had his fingers crossed when he said that.

 

[Loudmouth]

More from the experts:

I n t h i s week’s i s s u e o f Nature, researchers unveiled 32 postcranial bones from three adults and a teenager who lived 1.77 million years ago at Dmanisi, Georgia. The hominids resembled the Nariokotome Boy but would have stood only as high as his shoulders. “All of the individuals are small—they are not NBA players,” says team leader David Lordkipanidze of the Georgian National Museum in Tbilisi. Although their feet and body proportions are modern, the Dmanisi skeletons had more primitive shoulders and
arms and are considered the most primitive members of H. erectus yet found. But not everyone agrees. The bones are so primitive that a few researchers aren’t even sure they are members of Homo. “They are truly transitional forms that are neither archaic hominins nor unambiguous members of our own genus,” says paleoanthropologist Bernard Wood of George Washington University in Washington, D.C.
http://www.ambtbilisi.esteri.it/NR/...EF487D75CB/25802/20130517_Gibbons_Science.pdf​

 

[Loudmouth]

Great secondary article on the transitional features found in Au. sediba, and yet another example of an expert saying that there are transitional fossils.

"These results add further support to the claim that Au. sediba is taxonomically distinct from the temporally – and geographically – close species Au. africanus. Where the Au. sediba mandibles differ from those of Au. africanus, they appear most similar to representatives of early Homo," says De Ruiter.

He adds that "everywhere we look in these skeletons, from the jaws on down to the feet, we see evidence of the transition from australopith to Homo; everywhere we see evidence of evolution."


Read more at: Australopithecus sediba hominin: New study reveals how human ancestor walked, chewed, and moved​

 

[Loudmouth]

Yet another expert saying that there really are transitional fossils:

"Here we report the discovery of a well-preserved species of fossil sarcopterygian fish from the Late Devonian of Arctic Canada that represents an intermediate between fish with fins and tetrapods with limbs, and provides unique insights into how and in what order important tetrapod characters arose."
Nature 440, 757-763 (6 April 2006), A Devonian tetrapod-like fish and the evolution of the tetrapod body plan; Edward B. Daeschler, Neil H. Shubin and Farish A. Jenkins, Jr


3 experts wrote that paper, and they say that they found a transitional fossil.

 

[Loudmouth]

Man, those experts keep finding these pesky transitional fossils:

Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Nov 13;281(1774):

Himalayan fossils of the oldest known pantherine establish ancient origin of big cats.

Tseng ZJ, Wang X, Slater GJ, Takeuchi GT, Li Q, Liu J, Xie G.

"Here, we report the discovery of a fossil pantherine from the Tibetan Himalaya, with an age of Late Miocene-Early Pliocene, replacing African records as the oldest pantherine. A 'total evidence' phylogenetic analysis of pantherines indicates that the new cat is closely related to the snow leopard and exhibits intermediate characteristics on the evolutionary line to the largest cats."

 

[Loudmouth]

2 more experts saying that they have found a transitional fossil that fills an evolutionary gap:


Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Jun 26;280(1765)

Cambrian spiral-plated echinoderms from Gondwana reveal the earliest pentaradial body plan.

Smith AB, Zamora S.

Abstract
Echinoderms are unique among animal phyla in having a pentaradial body plan, and their fossil record provides critical data on how this novel organization came about by revealing intermediate stages. Here, we report a spiral-plated animal from the early Cambrian of Morocco that is the most primitive pentaradial echinoderm yet discovered. It is intermediate between helicoplacoids (a bizarre group of spiral-bodied echinoderms) and crown-group pentaradiate echinoderms. By filling an important gap, this fossil reveals the common pattern that underpins the body plans of the two major echinoderm clades (pelmatozoans and eleutherozoans), showing that differential growth played an important role in their divergence. It also adds to the striking disparity of novel body plans appearing in the Cambrian explosion.

 

[Loudmouth]

Darn those transitional fossils, the experts keep finding them.

Proc Biol Sci. 2011 May 22;278(1711)

Australia's first fossil marsupial mole (Notoryctemorphia) resolves controversies about their evolution and palaeoenvironmental origins.

Archer M, Beck R, Gott M, Hand S, Godthelp H, Black K.

"Fossils of a marsupial mole (Marsupialia, Notoryctemorphia, Notoryctidae) are described from early Miocene deposits in the Riversleigh World Heritage Area, northwestern Queensland, Australia. These represent the first unequivocal fossil record of the order Notoryctemorphia, the two living species of which are among the world's most specialized and bizarre mammals, but which are also convergent on certain fossorial placental mammals (most notably chrysochlorid golden moles). The fossil remains are genuinely 'transitional', documenting an intermediate stage in the acquisition of a number of specializations and showing that one of these-the dental morphology known as zalambdodonty-was acquired via a different evolutionary pathway than in placentals. "

 

[46AND2]

The thing which drove ME away from evolution was evidence and logic. I was, after all, a math major, and if something can't survive a close inspection for logic, it doesn't really work.

And yet you follow a god who [is]:

1. both fully man and fully human
2. 3 entities, but still only one god
3. Omniscient, omnipotent creator of beings possessing free will
4. requires an arbitrary blood sacrifice to atone for something that doesn't please him, to prove to him our repentance, despite already knowing whether or not we are sorry, for something we couldn't help doing in the first place because he created Adam that way in order to punish all future generations to eternal hell for finite crimes if the arbitrary sacrifice isn't made (old testament version), then sends his son, (who is really him, also) to suffer a final sacrifice, despite the fact that he is an everlasting god who knows what heaven is like, knows he is going back there, and "suffers" a finite amount of his infinite existence and isn't really sacrificing anything anything at all.
5. supports slavery, despite creating all men equal
6. Never had/has a beginning or end
7. Is perfectly just, despite sentencing infinite punishment for finite crimes
8. Provides a Spirit guide (who is him, also) in order to guide humans to 30k+ different interpretations of his word (who is him, also, since Jesus is the word made flesh), most of which are claimed to be the unique correct interpretation

Logic does not appear to be as much of a factor for what you believe as you say...

No....it's the inability to ignore logic which drove me away from Christianity

 

[gungasnake]

In this case, and every case in which a creationist quotes a real scientist, I take it with a grain of salt, as creationists always quote mine. Always.

Like I say, I've posted a link to a thorough analysis of this one. You not wanting to read it does not affect the truth of the matter.

That quote!—about the missing transitional fossils

 

[gungasnake]

And yet you follow a god who [is]:
...
No....it's the inability to ignore logic which drove me away from Christianity

I believe in telling it like it is. That might be most of what you don't seem to like about Jesus, i.e. he also told it like it is, particularly wrt false prophets (Chuck Darwin, Muhammed et. al.)...

15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Fruits of evolutionism (viewing one's neighbor as a meat byproduct of random processes):

Fruits of islam:

False prophets:

 

[gungasnake]

The lettering in the Russian image says "Beslan, Sept 2004"
Beslan school hostage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[46AND2]

I believe in telling it like it is. That might be most of what you don't seem to like about Jesus, i.e. he also told it like it is, particularly wrt false prophets (Chuck Darwin, Muhammed et. al.)...



Fruits of evolutionism (viewing one's neighbor as a meat byproduct of random processes):

Fruits of islam:

False prophets:

Red herring. Yet another logical fallacy.

 

[46AND2]

But hey...if you're going to choose a religion based on a lack of atrocities perpetuated in it's name...why not Mormonism?

I'm no historian, but I don't recall hearing anything about them that's on par with...say...the Salem Witch Trials...

 

[HitchSlap]

But hey...if you're going to choose a religion based on a lack of atrocities perpetuated in it's name...why not Mormonism?

I'm no historian, but I don't recall hearing anything about them that's on par with...say...the Salem Witch Trials...

Ahem...

Mountain Meadows massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[46AND2]

Ahem...

Mountain Meadows massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well...there goes that idea.

Think I'll wait for a God who doesn't tell his people to murder innocents...

 

[Stethacanthus]

If you are saying that we have yet to find transitions between humans and our common ancestor with other apes, then you are wrong. There are tons of them. Go actually look before you make that claim.

If you are saying that we do not have half-snake-half-bird fossils, then you are absolutely right. They don't exist, and they shouldn't exist based on what we know of evolution.

Also whoever claimed that evolutionary theory led to the holocaust: read Mein Kampf and actually look at what he says. We understand that he was a Christian who described himself as doing "God's work". Sorry but he's your baggage. If you actually think that someone is just going to go to heaven for a new life after they die, that sort of undermines the value of human life in my book.

 

[gungasnake]

If you are saying that we have yet to find transitions between humans and our common ancestor with other apes, then you are wrong. There are tons of them. Go actually look before you make that claim.

If you are saying that we do not have half-snake-half-bird fossils, then you are absolutely right. They don't exist, and they shouldn't exist based on what we know of evolution.

Also whoever claimed that evolutionary theory led to the holocaust: read Mein Kampf and actually look at what he says. We understand that he was a Christian who described himself as doing "God's work". Sorry but he's your baggage. If you actually think that someone is just going to go to heaven for a new life after they die, that sort of undermines the value of human life in my book.

If there WERE any real intermediate fossils, Steve Gould, Niles Eldredge, and Ernst Myer would not have gone to the trouble to concoct an entire new variant of evolution(ism) (Punc-eek) in an attempt to EXPLAIN that total lack, would they?

As to Hitler and evolution, I posted a sort of a definitive article on that one a few days ago <edit>, but you might could turn the story up by doing a Google search on 'evolution and ethics sir arthur keith'. Keith did not share your notion of Hitler having been a Christian, to put it mildly.

 

[46AND2]

If there WERE any real intermediate fossils, Steve Gould, Niles Eldredge, and Ernst Myer would not have gone to the trouble to concoct an entire new variant of evolution(ism) (Punc-eek) in an attempt to EXPLAIN that total lack, would they?

As to Hitler and evolution, I posted a sort of a definitive article on that one a few days ago <edit> but you might could turn the story up by doing a Google search on 'evolution and ethics sir arthur keith'. Keith did not share your notion of Hitler having been a Christian, to put it mildly.

Oh, we know...it's the same old story...anybody who does something heinous in the name of Christ, is not a "real" Christian: KKK, Spanish Inquisition, Christian terrorist groups, Salem WT, etc, etc. All of them wolves in sheep's clothing, giving you the ability to claim that Christianity has never had a violent past. Convenient.

Never mind the fact that the Bible describes heinous acts commanded by God himself, but I digress...

 

[gungasnake]

As long as this thread has devolved into a sort of an anti-Christian thing, isn't somebody going to say something about Jesus being some sort of a villain for not denouncing slavery and putting all the low-achievers of Roman times out of work? I mean, given that slavery 2000 years ago was basically just what low-information voters did for a living....

 

[46AND2]

As long as this thread has devolved into a sort of an anti-Christian thing,

You're the one who brought up atrocities of other religions/beliefs. Why so mad when we point out Christianity's dark moments?

isn't somebody going to say something about Jesus being some sort of a villain for not denouncing slavery and putting all the low-achievers of Roman times out of work? I mean, given that slavery 2000 years ago was basically just what low-information voters did for a living....

'cept...you know...the owners could beat them, separate families, pass them down from generation to generation, force the females to marry, etc.