Premier Pale Stale Ale
- Local time
- Today, 07:51
- Oct 17, 2012
Perhaps Noah provided them a eucalyptus-leaf canoe and taught them to row!
Galaxiom:This same quote is repeated across thousands of anti-Evolution posts online. Each time it is parroted by people who have not even bothered to read the passage in the original context.That was taken from post 8--after I quoted Ernst Mayr at post 3, where he stated the following:"[FONT="]What one actually found was nothing but discontinuities: All species are separated from each other by bridgeless gaps; intermediates between species are not observed . . . The problem was even more serious at the level of the higher categories." (Mayr, E., Animal Species and Evolution, 1982, p. 524.)[/FONT]"
In the subsequent paragraph Mayr goes on to explain that fossilisation itself is a very rare event, while the relatively few that formed must survive many millions of years of tectonic activity and be brought to a location where they can be found.
Galaxiom:However the fossil record does show a radiation of species over time from common ancestors. This record is also backed by genetic evidence.
Galaxiom:In other words, you are hardly in a position to point fingers at the Judeo-Christian Bible--for which there is evidence of divine inspiration--when you are stuck with science fiction aka evolution myth that the fossils record says never happened.
Even if the fossil record lacks enough examples to satisfy your scepticism that absence does not prove Evolution "never happened".
You are quite welcome to live in your fantasy. However you will find that expressing your delusions here will be met with intellect and you will invariably find yourself looking like a fool.
In the Punctuated Equilibrium scenario, according to Gould and Eldridge, species simply jumped from, for example, Creature A to Creature D, with no need for transitional fossils of Creature B and Creature C.
They presented not one shred of scientific evidence to support this, mind you.
It was just them telling the rest of us about their religious belief. Their position was: "Believe it, because we said that's how it happened."
The words "even if" are quite revealing. Those are the words people use when they are determined to not use reason. Those words speak for blind faith--belief in something for which there is no evidence. Yet, according to you, I am the one living in fantasy.
And when do you propose to explain where your Jehovah came from? Your god is, by the characterisation of your doctrine, the most complex thing in the Universe. Yet you expect us to believe it spontaneously generated without a maker.Exactly when do you intend to explain to the rest of us how evolution's common ancestor came to life without Jehovah?
Pasteur fond that, under the conditions he used, over the time scale he observed that life did not spontaneously occur. This does not mean that abiogenesis per se is disproven.Abiogenesis theory was debunked in 1859 by Louis Pasteur, as well as by other scientists since then.
Indeed. I could save myself and everyone else more often!WOW, If we all did that the Watercooler would be empty.
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]In the Punctuated Equilibrium scenario, according to Gould and Eldridge, species simply jumped from, for example, Creature A to Creature D, with no need for transitional fossils of Creature B and Creature C. [FONT="]Gould and Eldridge did not[/FONT] present one shred of scientific evidence to support this UPDATED macroevolution theory, mind you. It was just them telling the rest of us about their religious belief. Their position was: "Believe it, because we said that's how it happened; no scientific evidence required."
You really should make some effort to understand that which you attempt to criticise. Punctuated Equilibrium does not claim that species jumped directly from one to another.
It refers to the notion that speciation happens over a relatively short time between long periods with little change. The rapid changes happen when environmental conditions suddenly change.
The paucity of the fossil record compared with the population of organisms remains the main reason why we don't have fossils of closely related intermediate forms. Punctuated Equilibrium simply increases that difficulty because there are even fewer opportunities for fossilisation of the intermediate forms.
The fossil records does still show a progression of diversification between species due to relatively small changes, just not the finest level of differentiation.
Galaxiom:You should also make some effort to understand the scientific method.
Punctuated Equilibrium is a hypothesis presented to further explain the absence of fossils of all intermediate types. Anyone in science is welcome to present an alternative hypothesis. Competing hypotheses are judged on how well they fit the evidence and how well they predict any evidence that may be found in the future.
What exactly is your point here? I elucidated how Punctuated Equilibrium combined with the fact that a vanishingly small number of organisms are fossilised explains why we don't see a complete record continuous variation between species in the fossil record.You are confirming what I stated, that Punctuated Equilibrium aka science fiction removes the need for transitional fossils--while you are telling me that I need to "understand" what I am criticizing.
No it doesn't show that creatures "jump" from one form to another. It show that we have an incomplete fossil record. A "rapid" change would sill involve many thousands of generations even though this would be a blink of an eye in geological scales.By your own admission (at the portions of your post that I quoted in light blue), the creatures change rapidly and there are "fewer opportunities for fossilization." In other words, creatures jump from one creature to the next, without the need to show how it happened.
You definitely don't understand the scientific method.How in the world does anyone "predict evidence that may be found in the future" and refer to that as "the scientific method"?
The scientific method is based upon evidence that has already been discovered. It is not based on the prediction of evidence.
They prposed a hypothesis to explain what is observed. It is also incorrect to say that they found "nothing but gaps". There are many intermediate forms showing a series of changes between groups of organisms.So Galaxiom, exactly what point are you attempting to make? That I am right about the fact that Gould and Eldridge resorted to science fiction when they could not face the reality that the fossils record is filled with nothing but gaps, and so they decided to make things up as they went?
You would need to do more than simply repeat your assertions to get anywhere in this debate. You have added nothing to your argument in this session.If that was your aim, at that you have succeeded.
Galaxiom:What exactly is your point here? I elucidated how Punctuated Equilibrium combined with the fact that a vanishingly small number of organisms are fossilised explains why we don't see a complete record continuous variation between species in the fossil record.