Does this sound like something an evolutionist would hate?

Question

"FOSSIL TREES IN ANTARCTICA!"

Sounds like it ought to strike terror in the hearts of evolutionists everywhere, right? Apparently it should, according to this website:

http://www.modomedia.com/quantum/100things.html

I stumbled across it the other night, as a link from someone's answer. The above all-caps quote is #61, in a long line of mostly absurd, ignorant assertions. But this one struck me as positively ludicrus. The rest of the thing goes:

"This may not seem like a problem at first. Until of course, you learn that trees do not grow in Antarctica. Six months of the year there is no daylight in Antarctica..."

So I take it the average creationist does not know this?

"... How then, did these forests arise in the first place? Perhaps the climate was different at a previous stage in history? Evolution doesn't have an answer for this. The Bible does."

Evolutionisn't DON'T have an answer for this?! Excuse me?!

I don't have room to answer for evolution on this, in this forum, but do go and look it up for yourself. The person who made up this list of "1000 things evolutionists hate" obviously did not.

To arewethereyet: Yes, it is, in addition to the fact that Antarctica wasn't always sitting on top of the south pole getting 6 months of darkness a year. I don't get it either.

To cutebabe: Yes it was, and ME TOO!

To onanist13 and dukefenton: Ah, voices of reason...thank you...

To Vermin: Er, yes, that's sort of my point. I'm on your side, buddy!

To wrathpuppet (and all my other fellow blasphemers): thanks so much for your input! You reaffirm my faith in the ability of mankind to reason!

To Indigo: Er, I think wrathpuppet was being sarcastic...I think he knows that very well...

Answer 1

It's amazing how many of the people who read your question do not understand it in the least.

I like this list. I will happily add it to my list of ridiculous assertions made by people with little to no understanding of science.

Just glancing at the list I'm quite fond of #63. The "Coso Artifact" is a frequently discussed bit of Forteana. It's interesting how he changed the story to fit his argument. He claims that the sparkplug was "encrusted with fossils." Sadly for him this claim was never made and it is well accepted that it was merely a sparkplug encased in a dried ball of mud (dry mud is dirt.) So, nice try, but no cigar. Some fact-checking is in order, methinks.

As for forests in Antarctica. We obviously have no answer for this. This is as mysterious as finding fish fossils in the desert. Fish live in the ocean, not in the sand. Will we ever unravel this mind-boggling mystery?

Answer 2

Antarctica did have a very different climate as early as the Ice Age. It was rather mild and had perfect climate for trees. There is speculation of a pole shift, in which the land (or ice for North Pole) isn't the same as it was from that time beacause the entire crust shifted due to the weight of the ice. If that's not the answer, than maybe it was from Pangea? It didn't say the date but it could date back to that time.

Answer 3

Why are people such idiots? I mean, really that means NOTHING. So the climate clearly at one time was hospitable for trees to exist...so clearly it is part of the planetary evolution that occurred over the millennia. I mean, just the change of climates and landscapes is evolution of the planet itself, not something just limited to species.

Edit:
Wrathpuppet ~ "This is as mysterious as finding fish fossils in the desert. Fish live in the ocean, not in the sand. Will we ever unravel this mind-boggling mystery?"

Being that it is sand...just maybe it is possible that SAND was once ocean floor? I mean, given how most beaches are sandy and all...

Edit again: Ah ok ; ) But just in case some others come along and don't get that... lol

Answer 4

Have you never heard of continental drift.
When those fossil trees grew the Antarctica was not in the position it was now. They find fossils of crocodiles in England, yet crocodiles are tropical animals. When those animals were in alive England was in the tropics but has since drifted North. I live in Australia, a warm place, and the continent that has moved more then any other. IT HAS AT TIMES BEEN IN BOTH THE ANTARCTIC AND ARCTIC.

Answer 5

They are trying to stick religious dogma onto scientific theory. These people just love to shoot themselves in the foot. Any educated person is going to laugh at that list. Any educated person that believes in God and the Bible will be turned away not wanting to be associated with something so embarrasingly stupid. They think atheist worship evolution because they just can't get their brains wrapped around the simple fact that atheist don't worship anything. I don't worship evolution so I don't consider myself and evolutionist but I believe in science due to presented facts. I read that list and the only thing I hate on there is cockroaches but I must admit they evolved superbly.

Answer 6

at one time in the past the Continent of anartica was in a warmer climate. yes the continent it has land mass under the ice layer. some time in our past either through plate shifts or a meteor strike. its position was changed to where we find it now. in a climate that does not support a long enough warm season for plants to grow anymore. so what you have are fossils from when it could support living things.
do some digging in the library and you will find this and other theories about the past of this planet.

Answer 7

You're absolutely right! Every single one of these things could equally be labeled as "things creationists hate." There's far more scientific grounds for evolution with every single one of these points then there is for creationism. This guy apparently believes that the bible is a scientific document. Some people, eh?

Answer 8

It's an utterly asinine argument, but I'd expect nothing less from a creationist. I picked through the site a bit. What a hoot. Creationists try so hard to back up their drivel that in the end, they just talk themselves in circles.

It's alright though. They can believe whatever they want. It doesn't bother me until they try to push their snake oil mentality on our children. That's when the gloves come off.

Answer 9

We cannot comprehend the whole concept of Gods plans.according to science the earth is 13 billion years old.I seen on a site the other day a fossilized 17 year old male who walk uprite just like we do,that was 17 million years old!Who knows?Only God.

Answer 10

yes they do. sorry original asker... i'm gonna just post it. if you want me to take it down, just ask.

see how the part that is antarctica shows the fossils? the theory is that all of the continents once fit together, which means that antarctica used to be in an area where it did not receive so little sunlight.