Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 13, 2026, 12:11 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
(April 24, 2014 at 11:39 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: If I went to a local graveyard, dug up every ones bones, and lined the various bodies just so, I could create a convincing lineup showing evolution

Only convincing to the spectacularly easily convinced idiots like christains, Rev, not to the paleontologists.

A paleontologist might note that out of the whole jumbo of bones there are about 206 distinctly different varieties. They might date all of the bones of a similar variety and notice although no two bones are exactly alike, there is no clear trend in how they change over time.

They might compare the bones with bones of similar live animals like chimps and note certain bone features like the suture in skulls change in a predictable way as the animal age, and they might notice the same age related variation exist in bones produced but idiotic christain grave robbing hucksters. They might arrange those bones in sequence of age, and conclude some of the difference is age related, and not a progression of evolutionary change.

They might look at the same bone from different individuals, and observe the range of variation is no larger than what is observed in a living breeding population of another species, and conclud these bones all belong to one specie.

They might observe hip bones clearly show two different minimumally overalapping morphologies, and also observe these differences in morphologies are also seen between different sexes of similar living population, and conclude they represent not transitional forms, but different sexes.

Basically, when the likes of you second guess people with real PhDs from real university that teach real since, it would be like a cockroach challenging an elephant. The powers of scientists in truth finding are not superhuman. But they vastly surpass what the likes of you can imagine, nor indeed what your jesus could have imagined, because otherwise he might not have ran around full of himself and thinking his balony story of his own peternity could never be descisively penetrated.
Reply
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
(April 24, 2014 at 11:34 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Tonus,
You don't have to buy a ticket if you are not interested.

The Creation Museum is in my state. It exists because of my tax dollars. I don't have a choice but to pay for it.
Reply
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
(April 25, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote:
(April 24, 2014 at 11:34 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Tonus,
You don't have to buy a ticket if you are not interested.

The Creation Museum is in my state. It exists because of my tax dollars. I don't have a choice but to pay for it.

It's amazing the tax concessions that place has received, isn't it?

I wonder if a museum of natural history would get the same concessions?

I also wonder if, after 49 pages, we can rename this thread "Failed Argument #1"?

Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni:

"You did WHAT?  With WHO?  WHERE???"
Reply
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
(April 25, 2014 at 5:44 pm)Esquilax Wrote:
(April 25, 2014 at 2:19 pm)rasetsu Wrote: What characteristics must a fossil have in order for you to consider it a transitional fossil? You've implied you're looking for specific things. What are they?


He'll never say this, but secretly, the answer is "nothing that any fossil will ever have." Out loud he'll give us some nonsense remarkably similar to the crocoduck, if he answers at all. Mark my words.

The creationists' definition for a 'transitional fossil' is: "if it exists it's not one."
A mind is a terrible thing to waste -- don't pollute it with bullshit.
Reply
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
(April 25, 2014 at 8:25 pm)Godlesspanther Wrote:
(April 25, 2014 at 5:44 pm)Esquilax Wrote: He'll never say this, but secretly, the answer is "nothing that any fossil will ever have." Out loud he'll give us some nonsense remarkably similar to the crocoduck, if he answers at all. Mark my words.

The creationists' definition for a 'transitional fossil' is: "if it exists it's not one."

AIG said so in overarching term. No fact can be admitted to exist which shows "scripture" to be false.

It is ironic AIG thinks their proclamation about truth of genesis could even theoretically be of any value whatsoever when they out and out admitted their proclamation would be the same regardless of whether genesis is in reality true or not.

Total dissociation from truth is in the christian mind the only way to the truth.
Reply
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
Reply
Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
Reply
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
Reply
Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
The evidence has a clear evolutionist bias. Therefore, we must discard the evidence in favor of a creationist-biased worldview to restore impartiality.
Reply
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
(April 25, 2014 at 6:35 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:
(April 24, 2014 at 11:39 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: If I went to a local graveyard, dug up every ones bones, and lined the various bodies just so, I could create a convincing lineup showing evolution

It would be a great stunt to pull off, though wouldn't it? But someone would have to REALLY believe they could fool an expert with it, and no one REALLY thinks that, do they? No one believes it enough to try it with, say, an archaeological site, and send the photos of carefully arranged skeletons to a museum or university for an evaluation of the remarkable series of gradations in hominid evolution they've 'discovered'. You've never met anyone in your life with a skeleton that could be mistaken for one belonging to a Homo Erectus.

(April 25, 2014 at 5:47 am)Confused Ape Wrote: Evolution is no threat to anyone's faith in God and Jesus. This includes your own faith.

Maybe he perceives his own faith as so brittle that it can't take even one moment of seriously considering the science without crumbling like a cracker.

I've mentioned that I started off as a creationist. Finding out out how deliberately dishonest so-called 'men of God' were being was far worse than if I had found out they were honestly mistaken.

Lol unless he has met a Olympic runner with forward facing palms, no fore head and eye brows you break your fist on.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Kalam Cosmological argument. JJoseph 113 30458 January 10, 2024 at 12:38 am
Last Post: Astreja
  A 21st Century Ontological Argument: does it work. JJoseph 23 7790 January 9, 2024 at 8:10 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Conscience and the Moral Argument as Evidence for the Goodness of God. Nishant Xavier 162 43287 July 9, 2023 at 7:53 am
Last Post: Deesse23
  Is the Argument from Degrees contradictory to the 3rd Law of Thermodynamics? FlatAssembler 49 12870 June 26, 2023 at 6:59 pm
Last Post: Belacqua
  Is my argument against afterlife an equivocation fallacy? FlatAssembler 61 16321 June 20, 2023 at 5:59 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  A simple argument against God Disagreeable 149 44239 December 29, 2022 at 11:59 am
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  My Almighty VS your argument against it Won2blv 43 12483 May 5, 2022 at 9:13 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ? R00tKiT 225 67373 April 17, 2022 at 2:11 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  What is the best counter argument against "What do you lose by believing?" Macoleco 25 5861 May 1, 2021 at 8:05 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The Watchmaker: my fav argument zwanzig 672 204537 March 31, 2021 at 11:34 am
Last Post: John 6IX Breezy



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)