Former agnostic, now Christian

[frankiej]

Anyone else feel like pointy-sticking this guy for a while?

I feel like pointy-long swording him.

[Epimethean]

You can't beat the stupid out of an xtian.

[KichigaiNeko]

But you can beat stupid INTO one... apparently

[frankiej]

But you can cut them up real bad.

[KichigaiNeko]

Oooooo I likes a nice bit'o Rump! frankiej you know dis!!

[Epimethean]

But you can beat stupid INTO one... apparently

True, though they tend to just intubate the poor things early in life, force-feeding the bullshit when their resistance is low.

[Cyberman]

Hmm....

---

I notice that this quote by Dr Albert Fleismann
""I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete, because the knowledge, hard won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long deserved fate were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of man."

Dr Albert Fleischmann. Recorded in Scott M. Huse, "The Collapse of Evolution", Baker Book House: Grand Rapids (USA), 1983 p:120

Was originally made in 1911. Science has moved on a bit since then lad.

As to not a shred of evidence?

What about molecular genetics which pretty much makes the fossil record unnecessary?

---

Nice smackdown. Some very good points there; wish I'd thought of them!

And what do you define as a "transitional fossil"
Since technically ALL fossils are transitional forms.

I actually did think of this one, but only after I'd shut everything down and gone home (I don't have a PC at home, so I need to visit my parents to go online).

And all of the supporting sciences such as geology, astronomy etc which show the Earth to be of an age required for Evolution to take place.

A hit... a palpable hit!

Another question, where did you do your "research" it appears to me to consist entirely of material from AIG and the like.

An excellent point and one which cries out for an answer. Rather famously, AiG has a page given over to "Arguments Creationists Should Avoid". It's still woefully misguided in its approach, and their reasoning is definitely dodgy, but at least they made a token effort to put their own house in some sort of order. And guess what they recommend as one of the "Arguments that should be avoided (because further research is still needed, new research has invalidated aspects of it, or biblical implications may discount it)"?

12. There are no transitional forms. (It would be better to say there are no intermediates between two different kinds. We find variant transitional fossils for animals within the same kind—horse to a horse for example but that is expected in a biblical worldview.)

When even the repulsive Ken Ham thinks you're spouting shit, you're spouting some real grade-A shit.