Argument #1: Transitional Fossils

[Simon Moon]

Then everyone should of evolved into the strongest, most rugged, smartest, creature imaginable. The rabbit must not of got the memo.

Sure they 'got the memo'.

They evolved the ability to breed constantly. They do not have wait to be in heat like most animals do. Larger populations guarantee population survival.

You do get the evolution effects populations and not individuals....right?

They also have quite good eyesight, see distances very well, and can detect fast changes in movement. Good for detecting predators.

They also evolved to blend into every environment they inhabit. White rabbits live in areas with snow. Tan colored rabbits live in tan colored deserts. Just a coincidence, I'm sure. Has nothing to do with survival and reproduction fitness or anything...

[Anomalocaris]

I thought the Miller-Urey experiment was evidence for abiogenesis.

Miller Urey experiment shows critical steps towards life can occur spontaneously in conditions simulated in the experiment. The conditions simulated in the experiment was thought at the time to be a reasonable approximation of the condition was likely prevalent on earth 4 billion years ago.

Unfortunately subsequent geological discoveries strongly indicates the conditions on earth 4 billion years ago was different in critical ways from the condition simulated in miller Urey experiment.

Also miller Urey experiment didn't show all critical steps would occur spontaneously.

So miller Urey experiment showed hurtles for abiogenesis is not as great as previously imagined under certain conditions. But it didn't add much to understanding of how abiogenesis might have actually happened on earth.

Modern research into abiogenesis on earth have concentrated on deep sea geothermal vents, where conditions are totally unlike what was simulated in miller Urey experiment.

The thinking about the site of Abiogenesis on earth have shifted from a warm sun lit pond on the surface of the earth to boiling hot water vent under great pressure in absolute darkness at the bottom of the sea, swirling in sulfur and other noxious chemicals.

So modern thinking is life was not born in something like Eden, but started in what is very much like hell. Not for nothing is the era when life began called hadean.

So tell Christians start of life had nothing to do with god.

[ManMachine]

If a kind or basic type of animal over a long period of time has evolved into a different kind of basic type of animal, then it is reasonable to expect a plethora of transitional forms in the fossil record. However, this is not the case, rather, the fossil record shows the original diversity of animal and plant forms.

Evolution models of the fossil record predict the following:
- wholesale transitions in organisms over time
- primitive forms evolving into complex forms
- gradual derivation of new organisms produced transitional forms

We do not find any of these to be true based on our fossil record.

Trilobites are an example of an organism appearing suddenly in the fossil record void of any evidence of transitions. Furthermore, trilobites have an organized complexity comparable to modern day invertebrates.

The facts remain, fossils have been discovered to suddenly appear in the record without transition. This is what would be expected from intelligent design not macroevolution.

You should not attempt to tackle a subject you clearly have absolutely no understanding of. I've read your Bible, at least show me the courtesy of reading a decent reference book on Evolution before attempting to comment. If you are not prepared to read one then just don't say anything, because your ignorance is making you look extremely foolish.

What kind of a god would want his followers to misrepresent knowledge on his/her/their behalf? That is what you have turned your god into.

MM

[Coffee Jesus]

Once again, if the theory of abiogenesis is false, it does not mean anything else in science is. It only means we don't yet understand how life arose.

This seems to be a common reply to those who reject God and don't have an answer to perplexing questions. "We don't yet but we are working on it." The problem is that the answer is, "God." Because some don't like that answer they keep searching in vain.

Really? God did it? ... How did he do that?

We don't know how it happened, therefore it's impossible, therefore there must be a being that can do the impossible.

[Cyberman]

Unfortunately subsequent geological discoveries strongly indicates the conditions on earth 4 billion years ago was different in critical ways from the condition simulated in miller Urey experiment.

Also miller Urey experiment didn't show all critical steps would occur spontaneously.

So miller Urey experiment showed hurtles for abiogenesis is not as great as previously imagined under certain conditions. But it didn't add much to understanding of how abiogenesis might have actually happened on earth.

The main point about the M/U experiment is that it didn't need to show how life arose under conditions on the primordial Earth (assumptions about which are now known to be wrong). The fact that amino acids were produced at all under any conditions is all that is required to burst the god bubble.

(I know that sentence is badly constructed but I can't for the life of me see where. That's what I get for posting with a half asleep brain.)

[The Valkyrie]

This seems to be a common reply to those who reject God and don't have an answer to perplexing questions. "We don't yet but we are working on it." The problem is that the answer is, "God." Because some don't like that answer they keep searching in vain.

Really? God did it? ... How did he do that?

We don't know how it happened, therefore it's impossible, therefore there must be a being that can do the impossible.

How did he do it?

Magic.

[Jackalope]

You should not attempt to tackle a subject you clearly have absolutely no understanding of. I've read your Bible, at least show me the courtesy of reading a decent reference book on Evolution before attempting to comment. If you are not prepared to read one then just don't say anything, because your ignorance is making you look extremely foolish.

I even tried warning him what was going to happen I'd he took this approach in one of his other threads when he announced his intent to post his 7 arguments.

Can't say I'm surprised.

[SteelCurtain]

You kidding me? He doesn't read anything that might challenge what he knows to be true. That little thing in the back of your mind that clues you in when something's not right? He has systematically destroyed that thing, and is proud of it. What it must be like to live in a world of constant cognitive dissonance. Leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

[Cinjin]

If a kind or basic type of animal over a long period of time has evolved into a different kind of basic type of animal, then it is reasonable to expect a plethora of transitional forms in the fossil record. However, this is not the case, rather, the fossil record shows the original diversity of animal and plant forms.

Evolution models of the fossil record predict the following:
- wholesale transitions in organisms over time
- primitive forms evolving into complex forms
- gradual derivation of new organisms produced transitional forms

We do not find any of these to be true based on our fossil record.

Trilobites are an example of an organism appearing suddenly in the fossil record void of any evidence of transitions. Furthermore, trilobites have an organized complexity comparable to modern day invertebrates.

The facts remain, fossils have been discovered to suddenly appear in the record without transition. This is what would be expected from intelligent design not macroevolution.

[Rampant.A.I.]