The most popular source of evidence used by evolutionist stems from the fossil record. Evolutionist Jay Savage states, "We do not need a listing of evidences to demonstrate the fact of evolution..." (V). Encyclopaedia Britannica (14:376) under a section called "The speculative nature of phylogeny [via fossil record]" states, "...judgements of relationships among organisms are almost always based upon incomplete evidence..." This means assumptions are used to fill in the missing pieces of evidence. Britannica also states, "The overwhelming majority of species that have ever lived have long since been extinct and with them the connecting links necessary for the direct demonstration of the descent of modern organisms from common ancestors." This statement shows that the evidence does not exist for Savage to "demonstrate the fact of evolution." He sidesteps the scientific process and logic thereby showing his bias thereby discrediting himself, his profession and the theory.
2007-01-27 14:14:54 · 12 answers · asked by Search4truth 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The evolutionist will look at this and say it's another attempt by a creationist to say evolution is false. Well, if there's no evidence, maybe it is false. There have been found to date no missing links. That's zero, nada, none, missing links. But the evolutionists here will come up with some stupid statements denigrating us. Stupid statements, but no hard evidence.
2007-01-27 14:23:14 · answer #1 · answered by ted.nardo 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Evolution is a proven fact (details on request), and fossil evidence is not even involved in the proof. The primary use of fossil evidence is in outlining the evolutionary pathways that life has taken, and permitting the ascription of dates. Some uneducated people claim that "gaps" in the fossil record are somehow evidence of the failure of the theory, but that is not true, for two reasons. First, ancient living things were not in tha habit of choosing places to die such that their remains might be preserved so that paleontologists could easily find them. Much more importantly, it is necessary to recall that genetic information is stored in digital, not analog, form. This means that there is a minimum sized change that can take place due to a one-bit change in the genetic code, but there is NO MAXIMUM: a change of a single bit can enable expression of all or part of an intron, or suppress all or part of an exon, making a change that is arbitrarily large. And that does not even take into accound chromosomal organization abnormalities, such as the one that causes Down's syndrome.
2007-01-27 22:27:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Go watch the youtube movie posted by Asilos Magdalena.
He and Brendan D are absolutely right. The fossil evidence gave us lots of clues, but the DNA evidence is overwhelming, and the two different forms of evidence are completely consistent with each other.
2007-01-27 22:27:00 · answer #3 · answered by Jim L 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Actually you're about 20 years behind the times. The most popular evidence nowadays is DNA.
The fossils provided indirect evidence. DNA is the clincher.
2007-01-27 22:20:01 · answer #4 · answered by Brendan G 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Please! Will you creationists just shut up? I took a college course in biology that spent a great deal of time positing evidence for evolution. The most powerful evidence is in the chemistry of organisms. Ever hear of DNA or proteins? The similitude between such organic chemicals in organisms is strong evidence. Before arguing against evolution, please read a book about it to even begin to grasp it, if your brain is not too small for it. HEY! Did you know what the strongest support for creationism and intelligent design are? FAITH. What a bunch of BS....
2007-01-27 22:21:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
No, it is a snap shot of what life existed at that time!
But it does show reptiles growing feathers, and reptiles fully feathered, so evolution WAS observed in that case.
Or are you going to refute that by saying God stuck the feathers on.......lol
2007-01-27 22:24:09 · answer #6 · answered by tattie_herbert 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
My understanding is that Satan concocted fake fossils all over the place.
Remember the wager God had with Satan, in which he allowed Satan to ruin Job's life just to win a wager and make a point?
Well, God has invited Satan to distribute fossils, but all the church people wil not be fooled.
They will go the Heaven and sing praises forever.
Whereas all those people digging up fossils will surely go to Hell -- and as an added punishment they will have worms, horrid intestinal worms, they will itch and can't scratch, they will have hideous boils and they will suffer painful farts. They will burn and rot throughout eternity.
Stay away from the fossils everybody.
2007-01-27 22:19:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
The matter which forms Evolution itself is "fossilized"
2007-01-27 22:23:13 · answer #8 · answered by Carl j 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why is it so important to you? I will continue to trust in science...you keep believing you came from a pile of dirt
2007-01-27 22:18:45 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Can you explain this please?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs1zeWWIm5M
2007-01-27 22:18:10 · answer #10 · answered by Asilos Magdalena 1 · 5⤊ 2⤋