More Annoying Fossils to Upset Creationists!

Leona Conner · Post by **Leona Conner** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:16 pm

Arch, if memory serves me right the Cambrian Period lasted about 70 million years. That's a long, long, long time. Even fossils from this time period changed depending if they came from early Cambrian or late.

I think Precambrian years can be counted in the billions. Now that is a long time period and anything can happen.

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:05 pm

Especially when the world is only 6,000 years old!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 7:04 pm

The Cambrian Explosion
The fossil record of Proterozoic life is sparse because it was largely soft bodied or microbial. The advent of the Paleozoic Era brought an incredible diversification of multicellular animals having many different body plans, including most of the major groups alive today, such as mollusks, trilobites, other arthropods, brachiopods, echinoderms, corals, sponges, and chordates (our ancestors). Most significantly, the first animals having hard outer skeletons evolved; as a result, many of these shells became fossilized. Most of the Early Cambrian animals having exoskeletons were small, measuring one to five millimeters, and are often called the "Small Shelly Fauna". Another unique feature of the Cambrian fauna is the sponge-like archaeocyaths that formed reefs during Early Cambrian time. This sudden appearance of many different kinds of animals having skeletons (shells) in the fossil record is called the Cambrian Explosion. The Cambrian Fauna is as different from Vendian life as it is from the Paleozoic Fauna that occurs above Cambrian-age roc

http://www.nmnh.si.edu/paleo/geotime/main/index.html

besaides it doesn't matter wich epoch it happened in because it is wrong. thisis just the non-believer's explanation of the result of the flood.

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Jun 20, 2006 12:24 am

Told ya, Leona.

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:39 am

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Jun 20, 2006 12:53 pm

archaeologist wrote:
Sure, there is still alot of debate about how evolution works, but no one who doesnt have a turnip for a brain doubts the validity of evolution as a model for species development

may i remind you that those who believe in evolution are in a minority.

quote]

zagor · Post by **zagor** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 12:56 pm

“When you make a breakthrough it is a moment of scientific exhilaration because you have been on this search and seem to have found it,” he said. “But it is also a moment where I at least feel closeness to the creator in the sense of having now perceived something that no human knew before but God knew all along.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 84,00.html

Modern Darwinism is built on what I will be calling “The Primary Axiom”. The Primary Axiom is that man is merely the product of random mutations plus natural selection. Within our society’s academia, the Primary Axiom is universally taught, and almost universally accepted. It is the constantly mouthed mantra, repeated endlessly on every college campus. It is very difficult to find any professor on any college campus who would even consider (or should I say – dare) to question the Primary Axiom….

What should I do? It has become my conviction that the Primary Axiom is insidious on the highest level – having catastrophic impact on countless human lives. Furthermore, every form of objective analysis I have performed has convinced me that the Axiom is clearly false. So now, regardless of the consequences, I have to say it out loud: the Emperor has no clothes!
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1173

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Sic 'im, Bob!

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 1:29 pm

More creationist drivel.

Here's a solid rebuttal of such which is undoubtedly too long for the god tribe to wade through since they like short and simple answers to complex problems.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html

In any meaningful sense evolution is a fact, but there are various theories concerning the mechanism of evolution.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:33 pm

Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact.

of course they have to or they would be saying their life's work is meaningless.

It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming

this is funny as there is no historical evidence nor is it overwhelming and they have yet to demonstrate evolution today.

there is not one shred of evidence that can demonstrate transition in process, it is all conjecture. no one has the amount of time to verify the claims made by the scientists and if they could demonstrate it today then they are undermining their own timeline for change to take place.

evolution can never be proved nor is it possible.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:20 pm

of course they have to or they would be saying their life's work is meaningless.

Doubly true for bible-thumping con artists who need gullible fools to keep putting money in the collection plate, wouldn't you say?

Evolution at the microscopic level is observed constantly.

I agree with you that bible-thumpers have not evolved at all, though.

Anyway:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articl ... =2&catID=2

These days even most creationists acknowledge that microevolution has been upheld by tests in the laboratory (as in studies of cells, plants and fruit flies) and in the field (as in Grant's studies of evolving beak shapes among Galápagos finches). Natural selection and other mechanisms--such as chromosomal changes, symbiosis and hybridization--can drive profound changes in populations over time.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:24 pm

These days even most creationists acknowledge that microevolution has been upheld by tests in the laboratory (as in studies of cells, plants and fruit flies) and in the field (as in Grant's studies of evolving beak shapes among Galápagos finches).

i am well aware of the compromise some creationists make but i do not hold to micro evolution any more than macro. one cannot say that God created and that evolution is false, then turn around and say that evolution exists in a minor form.

that is just hypocritical.

Evolution at the microscopic level is observed constantly

could just be the way God made their life cycle. under such thinking one could say that child evolves into an adult thus proving evolution. that is just poor thinking

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 9:34 pm

one cannot say that God created and that evolution is false, then turn around and say that evolution exists in a minor form.

that is just hypocritical.

Or, some people are coming to their senses and realizing that they are way out on a scientific limb and have to accept the obvious. Then there are people like you who simply stick your head up your ass further and scream "god did it" even louder....as if that will matter.

Children do not evolve into adults.....most of them grow up. Not all....but most.

tj · Post by tj » Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:00 am

zagor wrote:It has become my conviction that the Primary Axiom is insidious on the highest level – having catastrophic impact on countless human lives.

Catastrophic impact eh?

Nothing puts a spring in my step like knowing that I'm fundamentally 'evil' and that my own path to 'good' (ie. not hell fire) is via the 'grace' of an obviously psychotic 'god' and the paltry 'sacrifice' of his bastard son.

Damn original sin makes me feel good! Thanks for reminding me zagor.

Post by **Minimalist** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:58 am

YOu might find this useful, tj.
A lot of history here, if not much archaeology.

http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/ ... ation.html