Darwin's theory

SaveOurLyric

GreeBo wrote: »

Ok I'll bite once more, why did God kill all the dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals that we have fossils for but no longer exist?
If he made them all, why did he kill them all off?

You need to be a believer in science to believe that there is any solid ground for making claims about animals living millions of years ago. That a long, looooong time ago. If that isn't blind faith, then I don't know what is.

J C

Gintonious wrote: »

Ok, lets get back to it then.

Shows us proof that Evolution is not true. You made the claim, now back it up.

There is no issue with the validity of Natural Selection of pre-existing genetic information ... just like Darwin postulated.
The big issue is where the genetic diversity came from.
... and destructive mutagenesis and 'circlular' recombination aren't plausible mechanisms for it's creation.

Frank Bullitt

catallus wrote: »

Will you please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, stop accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being a troll.

We are all "proponents of evolution on this thread" I'm sure you'll be sorry to hear.

What is strange is calling anyone who says that evolutionary science doesn't explain absolutely everything either a creationist or a troll. It is demeaning to any argument to resort to this name-calling.

Where was it claimed that it did?

J C

EoghanIRL wrote: »

Don't forget about the flood .

Good point.
... a good slogan for your next tee-shirt!!!:)

J C

Gintonious wrote: »

You mean the evidence that supports evolution on earth is all wrong? Because the bible says so? Oh my!

... no I mean that the idea that 'goo evolved into you via the zoo' sounds like a joke.:)

Frank Bullitt

J C wrote: »

... no I mean that the idea that 'goo evolved into you via the zoo' sounds like a joke.:)

So if that sounds like a joke, would you care to explain your hypothesis on how all life on earth came to be? I am very interested to hear.

GreeBo

J C wrote: »

There is no issue with the validity of Natural Selection of pre-existing genetic information ... just like Darwin postulated.
The big issue is where the genetic diversity came from.
... and destructive mutagenesis and 'circlular' recombination aren't plausible mechanisms for it's creation.

If there is no issue with natural selection then the logical extension is that God put all these creatures on the earth at the same time (must have been very tight fit) with the full and certain (omnicognisant dont forget) that due to natural selection the majority of them would die out.
For a deity he is either pretty damn stupid or likes tearing the wings off flies, on a global scale.

EoghanIRL wrote: »

"Gods plan " obviously .
Ten thousand years ago he made the earth to look old .

Michael Bay should get him for his next movie.

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

You need to be a believer in science to believe that there is any solid ground for making claims about animals living millions of years ago. That a long, looooong time ago. If that isn't blind faith, then I don't know what is.

so like the big feck off fossils we have...did god make them so that the paleontologists would have something to do once he invented them?

PopePalpatine

catallus wrote: »

Will you please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, stop accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being a troll.

If it quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, in all likelihood it's a duck. The only time you turn into a rabid fundamentalist on Boards is when either evolution, secularism or religion is mentioned. And you know what? If I decided to set up a troll account as a nutty fundamentalist, I'd probably post in the same way as you! I'd keep a tab on a thesaurus site open, looking for the most obscure and verbose synonyms for the words I'm looking for. "Ignorant" would become "benighted" or "nescient" (a word that my spellchecker is convinced is made-up!), for starters.

J C

GreeBo wrote: »

Ok I'll bite once more, why did God kill all the dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals that we have fossils for but no longer exist?
If he made them all, why did he kill them all off?

It is thought that representatives of the Dinosaur Kind survived the Flood on Noah's Ark ... they subsequently became extinct ... like many other animals unfortunately, today.

EoghanIRL

J C wrote: »

It is thought that representatives of the Dinosaur Kind survived the Flood on Noah's Ark ... they subsequently became extinct ... like many other animals unfortunately, today.

So that's why dinosaur fossils are less than ten thousands years old.

PopePalpatine

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

You need to be a believer in science to believe that there is any solid ground for making claims about animals living millions of years ago. That a long, looooong time ago. If that isn't blind faith, then I don't know what is.

You've never heard of radiometric dating?

Just so you actually read some of the page and not just skip the link because Ray Comfort is watching:

The uranium-lead radiometric dating scheme has been refined to the point that the error margin in dates of rocks can be as low as less than two million years in two-and-a-half billion years.[13][18] An error margin of 2–5% has been achieved on younger Mesozoic rocks.[19]

Uranium-lead dating is often performed on the mineral zircon (ZrSiO4), though it can be used on other materials, such as baddeleyite.[20] Zircon and baddeleyite incorporate uranium atoms into their crystalline structure as substitutes for zirconium, but strongly reject lead. Zircon has a very high closure temperature, is resistant to mechanical weathering and is very chemically inert. Zircon also forms multiple crystal layers during metamorphic events, which each may record an isotopic age of the event. In situ micro-beam analysis can be achieved via laser ICP-MS or SIMS techniques.[21]

One of its great advantages is that any sample provides two clocks, one based on uranium-235's decay to lead-207 with a half-life of about 700 million years, and one based on uranium-238's decay to lead-206 with a half-life of about 4.5 billion years, providing a built-in crosscheck that allows accurate determination of the age of the sample even if some of the lead has been lost. This can be seen in the concordia diagram, where the samples plot along an errorchron (straight line) which intersects the concordia curve at the age of the sample.

I'm certain that in the shithole where you studied creationism, they never shown you this equation:

D = D0 + N(t)*(e^(λt) − 1)
where

t is age of the sample,
D is number of atoms of the daughter isotope in the sample,
D0 is number of atoms of the daughter isotope in the original composition,
N is number of atoms of the parent isotope in the sample at time t (the present), given by N(t) = Noe^(-λt), and
λ is the decay constant of the parent isotope, equal to the inverse of the radioactive half-life of the parent isotope[15] times the natural logarithm of 2.
The equation is most conveniently expressed in terms of the measured quantity N(t) rather than the constant initial value No.

SaveOurLyric

EoghanIRL wrote: »

So that's why dinosaur fossils are less than ten thousands years old.

Yes.

Frank Bullitt

J C wrote: »

It is thought that representatives of the Dinosaur Kind survived the Flood on Noah's Ark ... they subsequently became extinct ... like many other animals unfortunately, today.

Now, can everybody see that part there?

PopePalpatine

I wonder, why did they become extinct in this creationist fantasy? :rolleyes:

El Guapo!

J C wrote: »

It is thought that representatives of the Dinosaur Kind survived the Flood on Noah's Ark ... they subsequently became extinct ... like many other animals unfortunately, today.

Thought?
As in...'don't know for sure'?
As in...'guesswork'?
As in....totally made up?

J C

GreeBo wrote: »

If there is no issue with natural selection then the logical extension is that God put all these creatures on the earth at the same time (must have been very tight fit) with the full and certain (omnicognisant dont forget) that due to natural selection the majority of them would die out.
For a deity he is either pretty damn stupid or likes tearing the wings off flies, on a global scale.

NS entered the world with death and disease after the Fall. It wasn't what God wanted ... but Adam and Eve had free will and had other ideas.

GreeBo wrote: »

so like the big feck off fossils we have...did god make them so that the paleontologists would have something to do once he invented them?

Products of the Flood ... billions of dead things in rock layers laid down under water all over the Earth.

GreeBo

J C wrote: »

It is thought that representatives of the Dinosaur Kind survived the Flood on Noah's Ark ... they subsequently became extinct ... like many other animals unfortunately, today.

Extinct how?
Why didnt Noah stick Mr & Mrs T-Rex on his Ark?
What about the mastodons and Sabre tooth tigers too?

J C

El Guapo! wrote: »

Thought?
As in...'don't know for sure'?
As in...'guesswork'?
As in....totally made up?

Considered opinion based on repeatably observable evidence.

Frank Bullitt

J C wrote: »

NS entered the world with death and disease after the Fall. It wasn't what God wanted ... but Adam and Eve had free will and had other ideas.


Products of the Flood ... billions of dead things in rock layers laid down under water all over the Earth.

The flood you speak of, there is no evidence for it my friend. None at all.

GreeBo

J C wrote: »

NS entered the world with death and disease after the Fall. It wasn't what God wanted ... but Adam and Eve had free will and had other ideas.


Products of the Flood ... billions of dead things in rock layers laid down under water all over the Earth.

Laid down in layers of sedimentary rock thats...oops older than 10,000 years.

Did God break out the shovels to get them in?

how does Natural Selection "enter" the world?
Are you now saying that its evil?

PopePalpatine

I'm still wondering how these hypothetical descendants of Noah forgot their god by the time they left the Middle East in their (mythical) journey to the rest of the world.

J C

GreeBo wrote: »

Extinct how?
Why didnt Noah stick Mr & Mrs T-Rex on his Ark?
What about the mastodons and Sabre tooth tigers too?

Juvenile representatives of all Kinds were present.
For example, there was probably only one pair of the Big Cat Kind ... and all big cat species are though to be descendants of these big cats.

Frank Bullitt

J C wrote: »

Juvenile representatives of all Kinds were present.
For example, there was probably only one pair of the Big Cat Kind ... and all big cat species are though to be descendants of these big cats.

You mean its not fact?????

J C

Gintonious wrote: »

The flood you speak of, there is no evidence for it my friend. None at all.

nothing except ... worldwide sedimentary rock layers laid down by it, geological features on a worldwide scale and enough water on Earth to drown the entire surface of the planet to an average depth of 2.6 Kilometres
http://books.google.ie/books?id=0cUKAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=if+the+earth+were+smooth+what+depth+of+water+would+cover+it&source=bl&ots=JzBhAmvwfU&sig=niv8xWH0zIreRMwc23Yq3c-0NXA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SVo4VOfoFqSV7AbtrIHoCw&ved=0CFcQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=if%20the%20earth%20were%20smooth%20what%20depth%20of%20water%20would%20cover%20it&f=false

J C

Gintonious wrote: »

You mean its not fact?????

As all big cats can still interbreed (with varying degrees of success) ... it's a very strong hypothesis.

Frank Bullitt

J C wrote: »

nothing except ... worldwide sedimentary rock layers laid down by it, geological features on a worldwide scale and enough water on Earth to drown the entire surface of the planet to an average depth of 2.6 Kilometres
http://books.google.ie/books?id=0cUKAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=if+the+earth+were+smooth+what+depth+of+water+would+cover+it&source=bl&ots=JzBhAmvwfU&sig=niv8xWH0zIreRMwc23Yq3c-0NXA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SVo4VOfoFqSV7AbtrIHoCw&ved=0CFcQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=if%20the%20earth%20were%20smooth%20what%20depth%20of%20water%20would%20cover%20it&f=false

So because there is water on the planet, that is proof of a fairy tale flood? Doesnt flood water drain in a straight line as well? No evidence YET AGAIN for that.

As all big cats can still interbreed (with varying degrees of success) ... it's a very strong hypothesis.

Nothing that you have said at all is a strong hypothesis, you sounds like you are making this stuff up with cards of humanity!

J C

EoghanIRL wrote: »

So that's why dinosaur fossils are less than ten thousands years old.

Yes

... here is one with soft tissue still fresh!!
http://thumbs.media.smithsonianmag.com//filer/05/8d/058dde79-05b8-4aa9-9a9c-f6d099e2cbdc/dinosaur-shocker-520-386.jpg__800x600_q85_crop.jpg

... and here the scientist who found the soft tissue in another fossil was fired

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/07/24/scientist-alleges-csun-fired-him-for-discovery-of-soft-tissue-on-dinosaur-fossil/

J C

Gintonious wrote: »

So because there is water on the planet, that is proof of a fairy tale flood? Doesnt flood water drain in a straight line as well? No evidence YET AGAIN for that.

No ... it provides the capacity for a worldwide flood ... the evidence is in the rocks.

Frank Bullitt

J C wrote: »

Yes

... here is one with soft tissue still fresh!!
http://thumbs.media.smithsonianmag.com//filer/05/8d/058dde79-05b8-4aa9-9a9c-f6d099e2cbdc/dinosaur-shocker-520-386.jpg__800x600_q85_crop.jpg

... and here the scientist who found the soft tissue in another fossil was fired

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/07/24/scientist-alleges-csun-fired-him-for-discovery-of-soft-tissue-on-dinosaur-fossil/

From another article about the soft tissue discovery.

Dinosaurs' iron-rich blood, combined with a good environment for fossilization, may explain the amazing existence of soft tissue from the Cretaceous (a period that lasted from about 65.5 million to 145.5 million years ago)

Frank Bullitt

J C wrote: »

No ... it provides the capacity for a worldwide flood ... the evidence is in the rocks.

The evidence in the rocks all point towards evolution, and nothing at all towards a flood, thats a blind-face lie I'm afraid.