The theory of evolution claims to be based on scientific observation, but it's common knowledge that ?

Question

evolution makes numerous claims that cannot be supporeted by evidence. For ecample, evolutionists say that birds evolved wings. But, no one has ever observed the evolution of a wing in the fossil record. So, what gives evolutionists so much faith to believe in their theory?

Evolutionists insist that natural selection plus time developed the mechanics necassary for flight. But where is the evidence? Evolution theory proposed birds evolved from reptiles. So, if this is true as evolutionists believe, where is the record that this process happend? If evolution takes place gradually over millioins of years, shouldn't there be all kinds of intermediates in the fossil record showing the transisition of front legs into wings? Supporters of evolution have already determined that they will hang on their views despite the lack of evidence.

That's great, I don't get an answer, just a mispelling quote and accused of visiting a creationalist site. What the answer though?

That's what I thought!

Then show me the proof so I can observe it for myself. I can show you several SCIENTIST not creationalist that agree, there is no hard evidence or transistional fossils. You don't even agree with your fellow scientists. That's rich!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051010085411.htm
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/studies/report-50215.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/802009.stm

There are your scientists above who say it isn't true!

But not all scientists agree with the birds-from-dinosaurs link. Alan Feduccia, professor of biology at the University of North Carolina, is a noteable doubter.

He contends that Archaeopteryx wasn't the ancestor of all birds, but just another of nature's many experiments. He argues that a huge evolution of birds had been going on before[italics] Archaeopteryx, and that they evolved from four-legged forest reptiles.

In 1996 Feduccia investigated an intriguing bird that lived about 135 million years ago, just after Archaeopteryx. The bird, Liaoningornis, did not look like a dinosaur bird at all. It had a breastbone similar to modern birds, with massive flight muscles that enabled longer flights.

It was found alongside fossils of ancient birds not unlike Archaeopteryx. Feduccia believes that birds were very widespread by that date, occupying a variety of habitats. He believes most of them died out with the dinosaurs, about 65 million years ago.

The ancestors of all today's birds evolved later, he says, between 65 and 53 million years ago, independently of the dinosaurs. This is the "big bang theory" of birds. Feduccia and his fellow sceptics - it must be stressed they are in the minority - regard any similarity between birds and dinosaurs as an example of convergent evolution, by which two independent groups grow to look alike.

So, I am a liar huh??? More like you don't know your own fellow scientists disapproval of the theory. Don't call names to someone just because you ahve been found out to be a hoax.

Colin Patterson good enough for you?
http://www.afcinc.org/afcsite/english/literature/mc-lit/whatsay.htm

"Proof of evolutionary theory, in the rigorous sense of an experimental verification or demonstration is impossible for several reasons. The most Important reason is that evolution is a historical phenomenon." quoted from the above link!

Where are the comments about Colin Patterson?

Micropaleontology: Study of generally microscopic fossils, regardless of the group to which they belong.

Paleobotany: Study of fossil plants; traditionally includes the study of fossil algae and fungi in addition to land plants.

Palynology: Study of pollen and spores, both living and fossil, produced by land plants and protists.

Invertebrate Paleontology: Study of invertebrate animal fossils, such as mollusks, echinoderms, and others.

Vertebrate Paleontology: Study of vertebrate fossils, from primitive fishes to mammals.

Human Paleontology (Paleoanthropology): The study of prehistoric human and proto-human fossils.

Taphonomy: Study of the processes of decay, preservation, and the formation of fossils in general.

Ichnology: Study of fossil tracks, trails, and footprints.

Paleoecology: Study of the ecology and climate of the past, as revealed both by fossils and by other methods.

Um, why isn't his staement valued again? How is he not able to be in on this banter?

He studies fossils for petes sake. Isn't that part of your evolutionistic theory. That there are transistional FOSSILS? Now, you will decide what scientist qualifies? Give me a break. lol

Like I said earlier

Supporters of evolution have already determined that they will hang onto their views despite the lack of evidence.

I am not trying to prove God to you. I am showing you there are gaps in the fossil record.

Not once have I asked you to believe there is a God. If I were to mention Him and you were to choose not to believe than that's your choice. It's funny to me that you shoot straight to an approval from Colin Patterson that there is No God. But, you won't believe him that there are no transistional fossils that constitute believing in some theories of science. Truly ironic.

Answer 1

Evolution by Natural Selection does NOT depend on observing fossils of every organism which ever lived, any more than the scientific theory of Gravity depends on observing every single movement of mass in the history of the universe.

Yes, the evolution of birds is one of the least understood transitions in paleontology, as bird/small reptile fossils are so very rarely preserved (hence why creationists propagandists pick on this one branch and conveniently ignore most of the rest of the vast vast tree of life). However, 1) that is irrelevant to the big picture of evolution, for which the evidence is vast, and 2) the evidence for the reptile to bird transitions comes from all over science, in no way just paleontology. (Yet even sticking with weak paleontology, look up Sinosauropteryx, Caudipteryx, Beipiaosaurus, Archeopteryx, Sinornis, Shenzhouraptor, etc. They are all transitional between reptiles and birds).

And no, Colin Patterson was not saying that there are no transitional fossils. Such deceptive quote-mining (sadly a creationist specialty) is lying.

Answer 2

While archaeologists have not found fossil records that prove the theory of evolution every step of the way, they have amassed enough evidence to convince me.On the other hand, creationists claim God created the world on the basis of not one shed of evidence. How is stating that "God did it" a credible answer for anything? Is that how you answer any question that someone asks that you have no plausible answer for. Do me a favor do that today. Tell everybody that God did it. I promise I'll visit you at the funny farm this weekend. Have a good day!

Answer 3

Why do you lie-the fossil record has countless examples of transitional reptile to bird fossils. If you need to resort to blatant falsehoods to defend you beliefs is it not about time you were re-addressing them. The link below destroys your argument and just exposes you as either completely ignorant or completely bigotted.





EDIT-You've been shown the evidence. I say it destroys your argument and exposes you as a bare faced liar-do you have any comment on that? You've said there are no transitional fossils-I've shown you that there are-deal with the facts. Unless you can challenge the specific examples I've provided your links mean nothing.



Read the following about Mr. Fedducia.

"Alan Feduccia's research centers on the origin and early evolution of flight, feathers, and endothermy. He is also interested in the evolution of birds through the Tertiary, the origins of flightlessness and the evolution of other morphological specializations in the world avifauna, and avian systematics in general."


I'm quite happy for creationists to support the work of someone who clearly is such a strong supporter of evolution.

Patterson is a paleontologist-we're discussing evolutionary biology, something in which he has no qualifications. There's the comments-you've been shot down in flames I fear.

Answer 4

>So, what gives evolutionists so much faith to believe in their theory?

The evidence that you choose selectively to ignore.

>But where is the evidence?

In the fossil record

>So, if this is true as evolutionists believe, where is the record that this process happend?

In the fossil record

>If evolution takes place gradually over millioins of years, shouldn't there be all kinds of intermediates in the fossil record showing the transisition of front legs into wings?

No. That would be like saying there would need to be half-purple half-white peas in Mendel's pea experiment to make purple peas..

Answer 5

This bird's advice to you: Until you learn how to spell, you'd be better off cutting and pasting from those crazy creationist websites you're visiting.

Answer 6

Feathered reptiles with rudimentary wings and birds with reptilian teeth and tails aren't enough for you???

Answer 7

Do your research before saying something as stupid as this again.

Don't simply trust the creationist propaganda. Look it up!!!