Author Topic: The Fossil record as demonstrative disproof of evolution: Living Fossils.  (Read 802 times)

Online Xavier

  • Glory to God in the Highest Heaven, and Peace to His people on Earth of good will.
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2734
  • Thanked: 2376 times
  • Blessed Be the Hour that the Son of God was born!
  • Religion: Catholic Christian
Great Video: Worth watching in full and only 16 minutes long. Let's test some of the predictions of evolutionary theory. Evolution predicts animals that lived tens or hundreds of millions of years ago should have either (1) gone extinct completely, or else at least, (2) turned into something else entirely. What, then, would falsify this empirical prediction of evolution? Obtaining living fossils, i.e. fossils from animal phyla that are still living today, and that look entirely the same as those "100 milllion" year specimens. What happened? A prediction of evolution failed. Dr. Werner set out to test the contrary predictions of Creation and evolution and found "living fossils".

Questions for our friends who support evolution:

(1) Why did not these species evolve into something else completely over millions of years? (2) How is it that their modern living descendants look just the same as these ancient specimens? Something about the evolutionary story is clearly out of place.

"Dr. Carl Werner: 2:02 onwards "We went to 60 museums and we took 60,000 photographs. At the dinosaur dig sites, we found samples from every major animal phyla living today buried with the dinosaurs, and those animals look the same.

Interviewer: Say that again ... it's incredible.

Dr. W: At the dinosaur sites, we found fossils and samples of modern animals from every major animal phyla buried with the dinosaurs and they look the same ... it's worse than that, not only did we find this for animals, then for the plants, we found samples from every major plant phyla - of plants living today, buried along the dinosaurs, fossilized, and it looked the same as as plants living today."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=162&v=e574WaJhW0o

So, why did not these animals and plants either go extinct, or be transformed by evolution over 70 million years into something different?

See also: "Dr Werner continued, “Living fossils provided me a simple way to test evolution. If evolution did not occur (animals did not change significantly over time) and if all of the animals and plants were created at one time and lived together (humans, dinosaurs, oak trees, roses, cats, wolves, etc), then one should be able to find fossils of at least some modern animals and modern plants alongside dinosaurs in the rock layers. I set out to test this idea without any foreknowledge of any modern organisms in the rock layers. My results (as laid out in the book & video Living Fossils) showed that many modern animals and plants are found with dinosaurs—far more than I ever expected to find. Dr Werner and his wife Debbie travelled over 100,000 miles (160,000 km) and took 60,000 photographs as they filmed the television series Evolution: The Grand Experiment. (Episode 2 of this series, Living Fossils, reveals exactly what they found.) They focused on fossils found in dinosaur rock layers, and compared these fossils to modern animals and plants.

“We looked only at fossils found in the dinosaur dig sites so that scientists who support evolution could not suggest that the fossils we looked at were not ‘old’. All of the fossils we used for comparisons were found in dinosaur rock layers (Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous).”

https://creation.com/werner-living-fossils

Continued below

Quote
Many modern animals in dinosaur rock!

I asked Carl just how many modern types of animals he had found in the dinosaur rock layers.

“We found fossilized examples from every major invertebrate animal phylum living today including: arthropods (insects, crustaceans etc.), shellfish, echinoderms (starfish, crinoids, brittle stars, etc.), corals, sponges, and segmented worms (earthworms, marine worms).

“The vertebrates—animals with backbones such as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals—show this same pattern.”

Modern fish, amphibians and reptiles

“Cartilaginous fish (sharks and rays), boney fish (such as sturgeon, paddlefish, salmon, herring, flounder and bowfin) and jawless fish (hagfish and lamprey) have been found in the dinosaur layers and they look the same as modern forms.

“Modern-looking frogs and salamanders have been found in dinosaur dig sites.

“All of today’s reptile groups have been found in the dinosaur layers and they look the same or similar to modern forms: Snakes (boa constrictor), lizards (ground lizards and gliding lizards), turtles (box turtles, soft-shelled turtles), and crocodilians (alligators, crocodiles and gavials).”

Modern birds

“Contrary to popular belief, modern types of birds have been found, including: parrots, owls, penguins, ducks, loons, albatross, cormorants, sandpipers, avocets, etc. When scientists who support evolution disclosed this information during our TV interviews it appears that they could hardly believe what they were saying on camera.”

Dr William Clemens, UC Berkeley, on modern birds being found in Cretaceous rock. (Clip from Living Fossils DVD)

Paleontologists have found 432 mammal species in the dinosaur layers; almost as many as the number of dinosaur species. … But where are these fossils? We visited 60 museums but did not see a single complete mammal skeleton from the dinosaur layers displayed at any of these museums. This is amazing.
Mammals
“At the dinosaur dig sites, scientists have found many unusual extinct mammal forms such as the multituberculates2 but they have also found fossilized mammals that look like squirrels, possums, Tasmanian devils, hedgehogs, shrews, beavers, primates, and duck-billed platypus. I don’t know how close these mammals are to the modern forms because I was not able to see most of these, even after going to so many museums.”

“Few are aware of the great number of mammal species found with dinosaurs. Paleontologists have found 432 mammal species in the dinosaur layers;3 almost as many as the number of dinosaur species. These include nearly 100 complete mammal skeletons. But where are these fossils? We visited 60 museums but did not see a single complete mammal skeleton from the dinosaur layers displayed at any of these museums. This is amazing. Also, we saw only a few dozen incomplete skeletons/single bones of the 432 mammal species found so far. Why don’t the museums display these mammal fossils and also the bird fossils?”

Many modern plants in dinosaur rock!
“In the dinosaur rock layers, we found fossils from every major plant division living today including: flowering plants, ginkgos, cone trees, moss, vascular mosses, cycads, and ferns. Again, if you look at these fossils and compare them to modern forms, you will quickly conclude that the plants have not changed. Fossil sequoias, magnolias, dogwoods, poplars and redwoods, lily pads, cycads, ferns, horsetails etc. have been found at the dinosaur digs.”
Mary, our Heavenly Mother, implores those who receive Holy Communion Daily, or at least Weekly, to Offer their Lives. TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: "My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with Your most Precious Blood and Your Sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby Offer my whole Life to the Intention of Your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Together with my life, I place at Your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all Rosaries, all acts of consecration, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the suffering of my entire life for the Adoration and Supplication of the Holy Trinity, for Unity in our Holy Mother Church, for the Holy Father and Priests, for good Priestly vocations, and for all souls until the end of the world. O my Jesus, please accept my life Sacrifice and my offerings and give me Your grace that I may persevere obediently until my death." Amen. https://www.avemariamaternostra.com/life-offering-promises.html It is recommended that you make this Life Offering as soon as you feel ready, and to renew it from time to time.

Please read the Blessed Mother's promises in the link: those who make it seriously will face no Purgatory (promise 5) since they would have completed it here, will have all their loved ones released from Purgatory the day they offer their life with intent to persevere (promise 4), and can save the souls of all their family members in due time by their life offering (promise 3). It will benefit all souls who have ever lived until time's end (promise 2) A simple effective way for thousands of us to save millions of souls. Inflamed in Large Letters of Love, you will have your name written in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary forever (promise 1).
 
The following users thanked this post: Habitual_Ritual, Maximilian, Michael Wilson

Online Xavier

  • Glory to God in the Highest Heaven, and Peace to His people on Earth of good will.
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2734
  • Thanked: 2376 times
  • Blessed Be the Hour that the Son of God was born!
  • Religion: Catholic Christian
See also, for further documentation of these well known scientific facts: https://creation.com/living-fossils-enigma

"A New Scientist article1 ponders a baffling enigma to evolutionists—‘living fossils’. These are creatures alive today which are identical to fossilised forms, believed to have lived ‘millions of years ago.’ Examples include the coelacanth fish (fossil coelacanths are believed by evolutionists to be 340 million years old2), Gingko trees (125 million years), crocodiles (140 million years), horseshoe crabs (200 million years), the Lingula lamp shell (450 million years), Neopilina molluscs (500 million years), and the tuatara lizard (200 million years).

This poses a conundrum for evolution: ‘Why have these life-forms stayed the same for all that time?’ New Scientist quotes several evolutionists who say ‘chance’ and ‘luck’ are the answer. Unsatisfied with this, other evolutionists look for alternative explanations. They believe the cockroach (reputed to have survived for 250 million years) demonstrates that the key to success is to ‘be abundant and live everywhere’,1 i.e. to be an opportunistic generalist, not fussy about food and habitat. However, many ‘living fossils’ are in fact highly specialised, such as the coelacanth, superbly suited to living in deep-sea caves. New Scientist suggests that the coelacanth remains unchanged because its habitat has not changed. But this applies also to many other species, living and extinct.

Some evolutionists think the ‘evolutionary straitjacket’ of long generation times (e.g. at least 15 years for the tuatara) ‘slows evolution’ of living fossils, but this cannot apply to the rapidly reproducing (but unchanging) cockroaches and archebacteria (the latter multiplying in minutes, yet believed by evolutionists to have been on Earth for 3.5 billion years) ...

Why, then, do evolutionists cling to their beloved old-age theories despite paradoxical inconsistencies and other glaring evidence to the contrary? As one leading evolutionist has said, they are committed to materialist explanations (i.e. excluding God) ‘… no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying … for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.’4"
Mary, our Heavenly Mother, implores those who receive Holy Communion Daily, or at least Weekly, to Offer their Lives. TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: "My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with Your most Precious Blood and Your Sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby Offer my whole Life to the Intention of Your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Together with my life, I place at Your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all Rosaries, all acts of consecration, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the suffering of my entire life for the Adoration and Supplication of the Holy Trinity, for Unity in our Holy Mother Church, for the Holy Father and Priests, for good Priestly vocations, and for all souls until the end of the world. O my Jesus, please accept my life Sacrifice and my offerings and give me Your grace that I may persevere obediently until my death." Amen. https://www.avemariamaternostra.com/life-offering-promises.html It is recommended that you make this Life Offering as soon as you feel ready, and to renew it from time to time.

Please read the Blessed Mother's promises in the link: those who make it seriously will face no Purgatory (promise 5) since they would have completed it here, will have all their loved ones released from Purgatory the day they offer their life with intent to persevere (promise 4), and can save the souls of all their family members in due time by their life offering (promise 3). It will benefit all souls who have ever lived until time's end (promise 2) A simple effective way for thousands of us to save millions of souls. Inflamed in Large Letters of Love, you will have your name written in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary forever (promise 1).
 

Offline Quaremerepulisti

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3817
  • Thanked: 1255 times
  • Religion: Catholic (Byzantine)
Great Video: Worth watching in full and only 16 minutes long. Let's test some of the predictions of evolutionary theory. Evolution predicts animals that lived tens or hundreds of millions of years ago should have either (1) gone extinct completely, or else at least, (2) turned into something else entirely.

No, it doesn't.  See, when you make claims like this you show that you don't really know what you are talking about, and you show that zeal for the cause makes you think that you don't need to do your homework.  You could open up any biology textbook (or go Googling or go on Wikipedia for that matter) and it would tell you that evolution predicts (1) or (2) only under the conditions of heavy selective pressure; otherwise, natural selection would not operate to severely reduce and then eventually eliminate the original population, which would continue in existence, perhaps indefinitely.

If you want to seriously argue against evolution, there is no excuse for not doing your homework, sorry.

Quote
Questions for our friends who support evolution:

Question for you: WHY DIDN'T YOU actually bother to learn the biology (population genetics to be specific) before making such a moronic argument? Do you actually care about the truth?  Or is anything OK as long as it seems to argue against evolution?

Because among the scientifically literate crowd you will get laughed out of the room, and it is not due to some giant evolutionist conspiracy as you would have it, but because your arguments are ridiculous.

Or did you just trust your creationist sources to be intellectually honest and scientifically rigorous? Well, I'm sorry to inform you, they are often anything but.  You will need to educate yourself a bit better to sort out the wheat from the chaff.

As I've told you, there are MUCH better arguments out there.  The problem with evolution does not lie in the CULLING of genetic diversity, but in the GENERATION of such diversity.

Quote
(1) Why did not these species evolve into something else completely over millions of years? (2) How is it that their modern living descendants look just the same as these ancient specimens? Something about the evolutionary story is clearly out of place.

Because the selective pressure that would have eliminated those species wasn't and isn't there.  That doesn't mean populations that existed millions of years ago (and continue to exist today as the same species) couldn't be ancestral populations of other species we see today.  But they're not going to go extinct in the absence of some severe selective pressure.

Quote
"Dr. Carl Werner: 2:02 onwards "We went to 60 museums and we took 60,000 photographs. At the dinosaur dig sites, we found samples from every major animal phyla living today buried with the dinosaurs, and those animals look the same.

Here's a list of animal phyla.  https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animal_phyla
Please explain which one of these with samples found at dinosaur digs poses any problem at all for evolution.
 

Offline mikemac

  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6454
  • Thanked: 2649 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Great Video: Worth watching in full and only 16 minutes long. ...

Yes it is a great video.


I remember having this conversation about evolution with two friends about fifteen years ago.  They were both a couple of years younger than me.  When I told them that I don't believe in evolution and that "I'm not a monkey's uncle" they both looked at me as if I had a third ear "evolving" out of the top of my head.  ;D

Seriously though, it is a real shame that our schools have been brainwashing young students into believing this ridiculous hypothesis of evolution for so long.  It's no wonder that more parents are home schooling their children these days.
Like John Vennari (RIP) said "Why not just do it?  What would it hurt?"
Consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary (PETITION)
https://lifepetitions.com/petition/consecrate-russia-to-the-immaculate-heart-of-mary-petition

"We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete." Benedict XVI May 13, 2010

"Tell people that God gives graces through the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Tell them also to pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for peace, since God has entrusted it to Her." Saint Jacinta Marto
 
The following users thanked this post: Xavier

Online Xavier

  • Glory to God in the Highest Heaven, and Peace to His people on Earth of good will.
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2734
  • Thanked: 2376 times
  • Blessed Be the Hour that the Son of God was born!
  • Religion: Catholic Christian
Yes, Mikemac. My friends who believe in evolution almost all are atheists/agnostics or became so. This absurd and laughable fancy of Darwin that apes share ancestors with us is an atheistic theory designed to make people materialists. The Church has confiscated documents proving evolution was perpetrated and propagandized as a deliberate hoax by Freemasons, Zionists and Bolsheviks. In the op, Dr. Werner's argument is absolutely rock-solid, and apart from the occasional New Scientist article that frets about the implications of the same for evolution, most evolutionists simply pound the table angrily and refuse to deal with the fact that this is simply not what their theory expects or predicts, and falsifies it.

Creation science textbooks written almost a century ago (that exposed the deliberate Piltdown hoax long before evolutionists caught up) correctly warned evolution would turn Christian society pagan again if not fought against. We see that to have happened before our eyes.

Quote from: Quare
only under the conditions of heavy selective pressure; otherwise, natural selection would not operate to severely reduce and then eventually eliminate the original population, which would continue in existence, perhaps indefinitely.

Oh please! That is the lamest evolutionist excuse I've ever heard. We know what evolution is and what it should predict if it were true. The fact is evolution refuses to admit any evidence that falsifies it.

Start with archaebacteria (which multiplies in minutes, yet is believed by evolutionists to have been on Earth for 3.5 billion years) - it is a perfect example of a living fossil. Either it proves (1) evolution will never happen even in 3.5 billion years, and therefore the absurd theory is moot anyway, or (2) archaebacteria are not in fact 3.5 billion years old, but much younger. Then you can work your way up to 350 million year old coelacanth fish. These species did not evolve, over the alleged millions of years they lived. This is totally contrary to what evolution expects.

Angry atheists and evolutionary sophists would have us believe molecules evolved to man in the same timeframe, yet we are to believe the story that these fossils did not evolve for millions, billions of years.

And I don't believe anyone who claims to be against materialism and molecules to man evolution but then attacks Dr. Werner's argument.

The refusal to even admit that living fossils may pose difficulties for evolution (the New Scientist article admits as much) is very telling.

And, if your retrofitted claim were correct, why were evolutionists harassing Dr. Mary Schweitzer for having discovered soft tissue, c14, collagen, protein etc in dinosaur bone? According to your fallacious claim above, it now would not matter at all to evolution if those bones were only thousands of years old, or, even if other species thought to have long ago evolved into something else, are now found living and unchanged! Evolutionists panicked because their theory was imperiled.

The reality is evolution is totally and completely disproven and falsified by the unexpected empirical fact of living fossils like archaebacteria.

Edit: Similarly, lack of transitional fossils conclusively disprove evolution, even apes-to-men evolution; soft tissue in dinosaurs and "500 million year old" fossils disprove molecules to man evolution, for which there wasn't enough time. And so on. And Archaebacteria, and Coelacanth fish now prove conclusively that even 3.5+ billion years is not enough for evolution to be true.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 08:49:10 AM by Xavier »
Mary, our Heavenly Mother, implores those who receive Holy Communion Daily, or at least Weekly, to Offer their Lives. TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: "My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with Your most Precious Blood and Your Sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby Offer my whole Life to the Intention of Your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Together with my life, I place at Your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all Rosaries, all acts of consecration, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the suffering of my entire life for the Adoration and Supplication of the Holy Trinity, for Unity in our Holy Mother Church, for the Holy Father and Priests, for good Priestly vocations, and for all souls until the end of the world. O my Jesus, please accept my life Sacrifice and my offerings and give me Your grace that I may persevere obediently until my death." Amen. https://www.avemariamaternostra.com/life-offering-promises.html It is recommended that you make this Life Offering as soon as you feel ready, and to renew it from time to time.

Please read the Blessed Mother's promises in the link: those who make it seriously will face no Purgatory (promise 5) since they would have completed it here, will have all their loved ones released from Purgatory the day they offer their life with intent to persevere (promise 4), and can save the souls of all their family members in due time by their life offering (promise 3). It will benefit all souls who have ever lived until time's end (promise 2) A simple effective way for thousands of us to save millions of souls. Inflamed in Large Letters of Love, you will have your name written in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary forever (promise 1).
 
The following users thanked this post: mikemac

Offline Quaremerepulisti

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3817
  • Thanked: 1255 times
  • Religion: Catholic (Byzantine)
It's just frustrating.  Why are devout, religiously-minded people often box-of-rocks stupid, and pathological liars to boot?

Yes, Mikemac. My friends who believe in evolution almost all are atheists/agnostics or became so. This absurd and laughable fancy of Darwin that apes share ancestors with us is an atheistic theory designed to make people materialists.

Well, you have nothing but absurd handwaving to explain things like endogenous retroviruses and pseudogenes like the GULO.  If you were knowledgeable and intellectually honest, you would admit that common descent explains these things far better, and that the best explanation consistent with Christianity is special creation of Adam and Eve, but later inbreeding with non-human hominids, which would in fact mean that apes share ancestors with us.  But you are not.

Quote
Quote from: Quare
only under the conditions of heavy selective pressure; otherwise, natural selection would not operate to severely reduce and then eventually eliminate the original population, which would continue in existence, perhaps indefinitely.

Oh please! That is the lamest evolutionist excuse I've ever heard. We know what evolution is and what it should predict if it were true. The fact is evolution refuses to admit any evidence that falsifies it.

Excuse me, but you are intellectually dishonest. That is to say, you are a liar, and you imagine that your lies can be used to defend the truth.  What I said IS what evolution predicts.  You don't ACTUALLY show that this is not the case but you just dismiss it as a "lame excuse".
 Changes in allele frequencies over time are the result of natural selection according to evolutionary theory and population genetics.

(The other fact is that YEC refuses to admit any evidence that falsifies it, of which there is plenty.)

Quote
Start with archaebacteria (which multiplies in minutes, yet is believed by evolutionists to have been on Earth for 3.5 billion years) - it is a perfect example of a living fossil. Either it proves (1) evolution will never happen even in 3.5 billion years, and therefore the absurd theory is moot anyway, or (2) archaebacteria are not in fact 3.5 billion years old, but much younger. Then you can work your way up to 350 million year old coelacanth fish. These species did not evolve, over the alleged millions of years they lived. This is totally contrary to what evolution expects.

Angry atheists and evolutionary sophists would have us believe molecules evolved to man in the same timeframe, yet we are to believe the story that these fossils did not evolve for millions, billions of years.

And this is just box-of-rocks stupid.  You do realize that if species B evolved from species A, that doesn't entail that species A can't exist today?  If you DON'T realize this, you are box-of-rocks stupid and understand pretty much nothing about what you are critiquing.  IF you DO realize this and make the argument anyway, you are a liar.  Which is it?

Quote
The reality is evolution is totally and completely disproven and falsified by the unexpected empirical fact of living fossils like archaebacteria.

No.  That is your "reality", not the real reality.

 

Offline Pon de Replay

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3511
  • Thanked: 1685 times
If you were knowledgeable and intellectually honest, you would admit that common descent explains these things far better, and that the best explanation consistent with Christianity is special creation of Adam and Eve, but later inbreeding with non-human hominids, which would in fact mean that apes share ancestors with us.

No offense, QMR, but once you argue for a "special creation of Adam and Eve," don't you become a creationist of your own sort?  If Adam and Eve were especially created, then the emergence of humans on this planet was not due to evolution, therefore you deny the science.  I'm also not sure why you have to insist they interbred with non-humans, because 1.) not all extant human populations have Neanderthal DNA and 2.) presumably your first two specially-created humans had DNA when they appeared, so you might as well skip that unnecessary addition and say it simply looks like we're descended from apes going by DNA modelling, even though we aren't.  This is essentially a modified version of "Last Thursdayism," only instead of time, it's genetics.  At any rate, you would also have the same problem as Xavier: that the human race appears to have never been at a population bottleneck of two.

« Last Edit: October 14, 2018, 08:13:20 PM by Pon de Replay »
 
The following users thanked this post: Xavier, Matto

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1479
  • Thanked: 998 times
  • Religion: Hopeful Fatalism
If you were knowledgeable and intellectually honest, you would admit that common descent explains these things far better, and that the best explanation consistent with Christianity is special creation of Adam and Eve, but later inbreeding with non-human hominids, which would in fact mean that apes share ancestors with us.

No offense, QMR, but once you argue for a "special creation of Adam and Eve," don't you become a creationist of your own sort?  If Adam and Eve were especially created, then the emergence of humans on this planet was not due to evolution, therefore you deny the science.  I'm also not sure why you have to insist they interbred with non-humans, because 1.) not all extant human populations have Neanderthal DNA and 2.) presumably your first two specially-created humans had DNA when they appeared, so you might as well skip that unnecessary addition and say it simply looks like we're descended from apes going by DNA modelling, even though we aren't.  This is essentially a modified version of "Last Thursdayism," only instead of time, it's genetics.  At any rate, you would also have the same problem as Xavier: that the human race appears to have never been at a population bottleneck of two.

No offense, Pon, but it's impossible to be Christian, Jew or Muslim and not be a creationist in the ultimate sense. Even if you concede that the evolutionary hypothesis aptly describes the diversity of life in the planet today, you still have to resort to God as the ultimate cause. Or to God as an intermediary and special cause in the creation of the first truly human pair. Or even if Adam and Eve are just mythical typologies of a larger primitive human population, nonetheless God is necessary in the immediate sense as the creator of rational souls, mechanical evolutionary processes notwithstanding. You can never have a totally self-explaining and self-containing process of physical causes and effects.

Only if Evolution necessarily implied an atheistic or materialistic framework, or Weltanschauung, would you have a cogent point against QMR.
ΠΙΣΤΟΣ Ο ΛΟΓΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΑΣΗΣ ΑΠΟΔΟΧΗΣ ΑΞΙΟΣ, ΟΤΙ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΗΛΘΕΝ ΕΙΣ ΤΟΝ ΚΟΣΜΟΝ ΑΜΑΡΤΩΛΟΥΣ ΣΩΣΑΙ: ΩΝ ΠΡΩΤΟΣ ΕΙΜΙ ΕΓΩ
 

Offline Pon de Replay

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3511
  • Thanked: 1685 times
No offense, Pon, but it's impossible to be Christian, Jew or Muslim and not be a creationist in the ultimate sense. Even if you concede that the evolutionary hypothesis aptly describes the diversity of life in the planet today, you still have to resort to God as the ultimate cause. Or to God as an intermediary and special cause in the creation of the first truly human pair. Or even if Adam and Eve are just mythical typologies of a larger primitive human population, nonetheless God is necessary in the immediate sense as the creator of rational souls, mechanical evolutionary processes notwithstanding. You can never have a totally self-explaining and self-containing process of physical causes and effects.

Only if Evolution necessarily implied an atheistic or materialistic framework, or Weltanschauung, would you have a cogent point against QMR.

Correct: evolution has nothing to say on the soul.  On biological processes, however, it says much.  The debate between QMR and Xavier is one of evidences.  QMR claims that all the observable evidence points away from Young Earth Creationism.  I have no argument with him there.  However, if he wants to be consistent in terms of observable evidence, he should surely know (and doubtless does) that the observable evidence also points away from fully-formed mammalian creatures springing up on earth out of thin air since, as biological organisms, they would possess a genome, which would suggest parentage, not sudden appearance.  Every accusation he flings at Xavier ("you have nothing but absurd hand-wringing") could be applied equally as well to his own flimsy contention here.  I know he's trying to bring himself in line with the doctrinal framework of Humani Generis, but this is too clever by half.  As it always does, theistic evolution steps on its own toes: in trying to explain one thing successfully, it accidentally negates something else.

If human beings can appear with DNA that suggests millions of years of ancestry, then really there is no reason why the earth couldn't be seven thousand years old and simply have the appearance of having been around for four billion.  If, that is, God playfully engages in such trickery.
 

Online Xavier

  • Glory to God in the Highest Heaven, and Peace to His people on Earth of good will.
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2734
  • Thanked: 2376 times
  • Blessed Be the Hour that the Son of God was born!
  • Religion: Catholic Christian
Pon is right, and evolution does imply a materialistic framework. Evolution claims man can only come on the scene after chimps have bred, or man supposedly interbred with chimps after he came into being. Materialistic to the core!

And it's evolutionists who do the hand-wringing to run away from the fact that all their ape-men are proven frauds.

From, In the Beginning: "Since 1953, it has been universally acknowledged that Piltdown “man” was a hoax, yet Piltdown “man” was in textbooks for more than 40 years.d
Before 1977, evidence for Ramapithecus was a mere handful of teeth and jaw fragments. We now know these fragments were pieced together incorrectly by Louis Leakeye and others into a form resembling part of the human jaw.f Ramapithecus was just an ape.g  [See Figure 11.]
The only remains of Nebraska “man” turned out to be a single toothh—of a pig.  [See Figure 12.]
Forty years after he discovered Java “man,” Eugene Dubois conceded that it was not a man, but was similar to a large gibbon (an ape). In citing evidence to support this new conclusion, Dubois admitted that he had withheld parts of four other thigh bones of apes found in the same area.i
Many experts consider the skulls of Peking “man” to be the remains of apes that were systematically decapitated and exploited for food by true man.j  Its classification, Homo erectus, is considered by most experts to be a category that should never have been created.k
Heidelberg man (Homo heidelbergensis), supposedly our ancestor, was based on one lower jaw. Many researchers now feel the species should be eliminated
.l
The first confirmed limb bones of Homo habilis were discovered in 1986. They showed that this animal clearly had apelike proportionsm and should never have been classified as manlike (Homo).n

Quare, your boorish temper and petty ad hominem reflects poorly only on yourself. Btw, are you speaking about Neanderthals? Evolutionists were wrong about that as well! It was Creation Scientists who rightly said Neanderthals were just a particular kind of human beings. They interbred with humans because they were human.

"Neanderthals created art, something the evolutionists were astounded to discover: https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/neanderthal-art-discovery/ Creation scientists have for a long time maintained Neanderthals were human. "Neanderthals were human. They buried their dead, used tools, had a complex social structure, employed language, and played musical instruments. Neanderthal anatomy differences are extremely minor and can be for the most part explained as a result of a genetically isolated people that lived a rigorous life in a harsh, cold climate." http://www.icr.org/article/major-evolutionary-blunders-neanderthals/
Mary, our Heavenly Mother, implores those who receive Holy Communion Daily, or at least Weekly, to Offer their Lives. TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: "My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with Your most Precious Blood and Your Sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby Offer my whole Life to the Intention of Your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Together with my life, I place at Your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all Rosaries, all acts of consecration, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the suffering of my entire life for the Adoration and Supplication of the Holy Trinity, for Unity in our Holy Mother Church, for the Holy Father and Priests, for good Priestly vocations, and for all souls until the end of the world. O my Jesus, please accept my life Sacrifice and my offerings and give me Your grace that I may persevere obediently until my death." Amen. https://www.avemariamaternostra.com/life-offering-promises.html It is recommended that you make this Life Offering as soon as you feel ready, and to renew it from time to time.

Please read the Blessed Mother's promises in the link: those who make it seriously will face no Purgatory (promise 5) since they would have completed it here, will have all their loved ones released from Purgatory the day they offer their life with intent to persevere (promise 4), and can save the souls of all their family members in due time by their life offering (promise 3). It will benefit all souls who have ever lived until time's end (promise 2) A simple effective way for thousands of us to save millions of souls. Inflamed in Large Letters of Love, you will have your name written in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary forever (promise 1).
 

Online Xavier

  • Glory to God in the Highest Heaven, and Peace to His people on Earth of good will.
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2734
  • Thanked: 2376 times
  • Blessed Be the Hour that the Son of God was born!
  • Religion: Catholic Christian
Re: The Fossil record as demonstrative disproof of evolution: Living Fossils.
« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2018, 09:43:11 AM »
1. Now, to the op evidence Quare is running away from - evolutionists base their lie against God on the claim that microevolution+time=macroevolution. Coelacanth fish and especially cyanobacteria furnish powerful refutations of this. In 3.5 billion and 350 million years, these species are still reproducing according to their own kind, proving that like produces like.

A consistent evolutionist living 3 billion whatever years ago would predict coelacanth fish would evolve into sea monsters (and the parent kind would most likely not survive the turbulent tide of millions of millenia) by this time and cyanobacteria would evolve into cyanopeople.

That is the logical implication of the evolutionist equation and the claim that higher forms of life evolve from lower ones and most often replace them.

2. It is an absurd argument to say, similarities imply common descent without proving this from fossil intermediates. Darwin himself admitted the number of intermediate forms would have to be inconceivably great, yet evolutionists cannot point to any well documented find in the required numbers of their "missing link" between men and apes. This is what is necessary to prove apes-to-men evolution.

Question: why did this missing link parent species go extinct, granted that it could have continued to exist even while supposedly branching out into modern apes and humans? You see, evolution doesn't really explain or predict anything, it just hypothesizes something clearly false.

Just imagine if someone called the police claiming he had seen 10s of thousands of apes running all over his backyard. Yet, when the police investigate the actual evidence, they find nary a trace and hardly a single footprint of these alleged apes. That would close the case with moral certitude. And it is the same with the proven hoaxes and "missing links".

I want to reiterate the discovery - "Many modern plants in dinosaur rock!
“In the dinosaur rock layers, we found fossils from every major plant division living today including: flowering plants, ginkgos, cone trees, moss, vascular mosses, cycads, and ferns. Again, if you look at these fossils and compare them to modern forms, you will quickly conclude that the plants have not changed. Fossil sequoias, magnolias, dogwoods, poplars and redwoods, lily pads, cycads, ferns, horsetails etc. have been found at the dinosaur digs.”

The most logical inferences from this are (1) either the vast majority of plants and animals do not really change significantly (i.e. macroevolution never takes place no matter how much time is thrown in) even over millions and billions of years, or (2) all those plants and animals, and the dinosaurs and other ancient fossils, are much, much younger than is commonly believed. And in either case - it does not really matter which - evolution did not happen and man was created.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2018, 10:12:35 AM by Xavier »
Mary, our Heavenly Mother, implores those who receive Holy Communion Daily, or at least Weekly, to Offer their Lives. TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: "My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with Your most Precious Blood and Your Sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby Offer my whole Life to the Intention of Your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Together with my life, I place at Your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all Rosaries, all acts of consecration, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the suffering of my entire life for the Adoration and Supplication of the Holy Trinity, for Unity in our Holy Mother Church, for the Holy Father and Priests, for good Priestly vocations, and for all souls until the end of the world. O my Jesus, please accept my life Sacrifice and my offerings and give me Your grace that I may persevere obediently until my death." Amen. https://www.avemariamaternostra.com/life-offering-promises.html It is recommended that you make this Life Offering as soon as you feel ready, and to renew it from time to time.

Please read the Blessed Mother's promises in the link: those who make it seriously will face no Purgatory (promise 5) since they would have completed it here, will have all their loved ones released from Purgatory the day they offer their life with intent to persevere (promise 4), and can save the souls of all their family members in due time by their life offering (promise 3). It will benefit all souls who have ever lived until time's end (promise 2) A simple effective way for thousands of us to save millions of souls. Inflamed in Large Letters of Love, you will have your name written in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary forever (promise 1).
 

Offline Quaremerepulisti

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3817
  • Thanked: 1255 times
  • Religion: Catholic (Byzantine)
Re: The Fossil record as demonstrative disproof of evolution: Living Fossils.
« Reply #11 on: October 18, 2018, 12:38:24 PM »
This is (part of) the ugly side of religion.  We're on the side of the angels: therefore we can dispense with logic, intellectual rigor, intellectual honesty, and even acquisition of a competent knowledge of the subject material.  Anyone who says anything about this is evil and therefore a legitimate target for character assassination.  If a believer calls us on this, it just shows he is in bed with the enemy.  If an unbeliever calls us on this, it just shows how blinded to the truth he is. 

But if you are truly on the side of the angels, which is to say on the side of truth, your commitment to logic, intellectual rigor, intellectual honesty, and a sufficient knowledge base should be beyond question.  You should be outshining, by far, unbelievers on all of these.  That is, in part, how you become the light shining on the hill which attracts unbelievers.  Instead, people like you are doing exactly the opposite.  You eschew rigorous logical argumentation for cheap rhetoric.  Yes, I am holding you to a higher standard than "evolutionists", because you should be held to a higher standard.  You are, in effect, saying you will defend the truth by means of lies.


1. Now, to the op evidence Quare is running away from...

That there is any evidence whatsoever I am "running away from" is an out-and-out lie.  Believe it or not, it is possible to furnish a legitimate intellectual refutation and that is not the same thing as "running away from" and it is not the same thing as a "lame excuse" either.

Quote
- evolutionists base their lie against God on the claim that microevolution+time=macroevolution.

Not sure that this is the basis of materialism, but yes it is what they claim.

So, the right way to refute this is to show that the mechanism for microevolution cannot produce macroevolutionary changes, or at least there is a limit to what kind of macroevolutionary change can be produced, with arguments from the fitness landscape, the necessity and extreme improbability of simultaneous random mutations, and so on, as people like Michael Behe and William Dembski do.  Of course, I will also point out that to show that macroevolution is not the sum of lots of microevolution does not prove that macroevolution can not or did not occur (and Behe accepts that it did).

But your arguments are nowhere close to a legitimate refutation.  They are wrong, and laughably wrong.  Of course you don't see this, because you dispense yourself from critical thinking and doing your homework.  But I can see they will elicit (and rightly so) nothing but guffaws from unbelievers who know something about science and critical thinking.  But you will refuse to believe that has anything to do with you, and instead rail on about "scientism", materialism, and atheism.  You are on the side of the angels; how could you possibly be at fault?  In fact IMO this arrogant manner of thinking has much to do with the Vatican II collapse.

Quote
Coelacanth fish and especially cyanobacteria furnish powerful refutations of this. In 3.5 billion and 350 million years, these species are still reproducing according to their own kind, proving that like produces like.

But what you need to prove is not that like can produce and most often does produce like (which no one disputes), but that like cannot produce unlike (at least not via microevolutionary processes).  So this is a logic fail.

Quote
A consistent evolutionist living 3 billion whatever years ago would predict coelacanth fish would evolve into sea monsters (and the parent kind would most likely not survive the turbulent tide of millions of millenia) by this time and cyanobacteria would evolve into cyanopeople.

In the first place, your cheap rhetoric about "monsters" and "cyanopeople" is a stupid straw man and you know it.

Now, the fact that coelacanth fish and cyanobacteria still exist today does not entail that other species could not have descended from them in the past.  If you do not understand this, this is a 101-level knowledge fail of evolution and population genetics.  Evolution/popgen does not entail that the founder species go extinct; even when the rare beneficial/transformative mutation occurs, plenty of children are being produced without it.  Now it is true that evolution/popgen predicts that in the (vast) majority of cases, selective pressure will cause ancient species to go extinct.  Which is, of course, exactly what we see.  But even though the odds of any individual species surviving for a long time is quite low, the relevant statistic is the odds of a small number surviving, given all the species that were there.  It's  similar to the old fallacy of arguing that, since the odds of any individual ticket winning the lottery are very low, the odds of there being any winning ticket are low.  And this is a statistics fail.

Quote
That is the logical implication of the evolutionist equation and the claim that higher forms of life evolve from lower ones and most often replace them.

No, it isn't.  If they most often replace them, then it is logically possible in some cases they don't.

All this is not rocket science.  These are elementary, 101-level errors in logic, science, and statistics present in this "definitive" disproof of evolution.  And yet it appears to bother Xavier not one whit, for whom pointing out these errors merely constitutes "lame excuses" of "evolutionists".

Quote
2. It is an absurd argument to say, similarities imply common descent without proving this from fossil intermediates. Darwin himself admitted the number of intermediate forms would have to be inconceivably great, yet evolutionists cannot point to any well documented find in the required numbers of their "missing link" between men and apes. This is what is necessary to prove apes-to-men evolution.

For this argument to work, you would need to show: 1) apes-to-man evolution requires an intermediate species (or at least makes one highly likely); and 2) there is a strong likelihood that intermediate species would have left fossil evidence of its existence.  Otherwise, the lack of fossil intermediates does not constitute strong evidence against apes-to-man evolution and leaves the way open for other types of evidence (such as genetic) to be produced in its favor.  You don't produce any evidence for 1) whatsoever (what Darwin said is not evidence); and neither for 2).  So until you provide evidence, what is gratuitously claimed will be gratuitously denied.

Quote
Question: why did this missing link parent species go extinct, granted that it could have continued to exist even while supposedly branching out into modern apes and humans? You see, evolution doesn't really explain or predict anything, it just hypothesizes something clearly false.

Well, we don't know exactly why it went extinct (assuming it existed).  We don't know exactly why lots of species went extinct, given they hypothetically could have continued to exist.  Neither do you.  Your point is?

Quote
Just imagine if someone called the police claiming he had seen 10s of thousands of apes running all over his backyard. Yet, when the police investigate the actual evidence, they find nary a trace and hardly a single footprint of these alleged apes. That would close the case with moral certitude. And it is the same with the proven hoaxes and "missing links".

This is another statistics fail.  In short, absence of evidence of something is not necessarily evidence of absence of that something.  You have to take into account the likelihood of the evidence given that something.  In the case of apes in the backyard, the likelihood is pretty near 1.  In the case of a species which existed only for a relatively short time, the likelihood of finding fossils of it might be pretty near 0.

Quote
I want to reiterate the discovery - "Many modern plants in dinosaur rock!
“In the dinosaur rock layers, we found fossils from every major plant division living today including: flowering plants, ginkgos, cone trees, moss, vascular mosses, cycads, and ferns. Again, if you look at these fossils and compare them to modern forms, you will quickly conclude that the plants have not changed. Fossil sequoias, magnolias, dogwoods, poplars and redwoods, lily pads, cycads, ferns, horsetails etc. have been found at the dinosaur digs.”

But what about the fossils of species of plants living today that weren't in the digs?  Or the fossils of plants in the digs that aren't living today?  These far outnumber the ones that overlap. 

Quote
The most logical inferences from this are (1) either the vast majority of plants and animals do not really change significantly (i.e. macroevolution never takes place no matter how much time is thrown in) even over millions and billions of years, or (2) all those plants and animals, and the dinosaurs and other ancient fossils, are much, much younger than is commonly believed. And in either case - it does not really matter which - evolution did not happen and man was created.

And the refutation of this is therefore the same as it is for coelocanth and cyanobacteria.  There is a small number of plants and animals that survive to the present day, which isn't in conflict with the fact that the odds of any individual species surviving is low.  And, if (1) is true, then why aren't these plants found in lower strata than dinosaur rock?

 

Offline Quaremerepulisti

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3817
  • Thanked: 1255 times
  • Religion: Catholic (Byzantine)
Re: The Fossil record as demonstrative disproof of evolution: Living Fossils.
« Reply #12 on: October 18, 2018, 07:09:02 PM »
No offense, QMR, but once you argue for a "special creation of Adam and Eve," don't you become a creationist of your own sort? 

Well, yes.  That's why I said the best explanation consistent with (Western) Christianity, not the best scientific explanation, period. 

But I'm not willing to do like Xavier and deny the science; that is irrational and one quickly becomes unreal.
And I'm also not willing to deny my personal experience of faith; that is a denial of reality in a different way. 

Quote
If Adam and Eve were especially created, then the emergence of humans on this planet was not due to evolution, therefore you deny the science. 

This depends on what you mean by "deny the science".  That my scenario is ad hoc, like eccentrics and epicycles for geocentrism, I concede; that it is not consistent with the empirical data, I deny.

Quote
I'm also not sure why you have to insist they interbred with non-humans, because 1.) not all extant human populations have Neanderthal DNA and 2.) presumably your first two specially-created humans had DNA when they appeared...

The argument is over what is in the DNA today, not what the DNA was like when they first appeared.  The odds of even one endogenous retrovirus occurring in the exact same location in the genome and then becoming fixed in the population are astronomical.  And there are many more than one, and whaddya know, the insertions match the phylogenetic tree.  Similarly for the GULO pseudogene (which is a broken gene for vitamin C synthesis, which is why we need to get it from external sources) which is broken in the exact same way.  Creationists really have only hand-waving responses.  Yes, there are insertion hot spots for ERVs, but the probability is still astronomical even given that.  Yes, there are a few inconsistent with the phylogenetic tree, but they are NOT in the same location in the genome, indicating independent insertions, or are easily explainable via incomplete lineage sorting.  Yes, some have been shown to have a function, but that function is unrelated to their particular identity as an ERV (e.g. what's the rest of the ERV, with its long terminal repeats, etc., for) - and what are we supposed to believe, the original "pristine" DNA had a virus in it?

These problems all go away once it is admitted humans mated with non-human hominids after being specially created.

Quote
so you might as well skip that unnecessary addition and say it simply looks like we're descended from apes going by DNA modelling, even though we aren't.  This is essentially a modified version of "Last Thursdayism," only instead of time, it's genetics. 

No, because if humans mated with non-human hominids as some point along the line, it wouldn't just look like we're descended from apes, it would actually be the case.

Quote
At any rate, you would also have the same problem as Xavier: that the human race appears to have never been at a population bottleneck of two.

Yes, but if humans mated with non-human hominids, there is a real reason for the genetic diversity we see.
 

Offline Pon de Replay

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3511
  • Thanked: 1685 times
Re: The Fossil record as demonstrative disproof of evolution: Living Fossils.
« Reply #13 on: October 18, 2018, 08:35:39 PM »
The argument is over what is in the DNA today, not what the DNA was like when they first appeared.  The odds of even one endogenous retrovirus occurring in the exact same location in the genome and then becoming fixed in the population are astronomical.

But by the same token, what are the odds of two mammalian creatures appearing out of thin air?  Whatever the odds are for your ERV occurrence, the odds would have to be infinitely slimmer for the happenstance of complex biological organisms suddenly popping into existence apropos of nothing.  If that can be the case for any creature, even a single pair, then the theory of evolution is toast—because if it is telling us anything reliably, it is telling us how species come to be (they evolve).  Yet if your theory is true in any sense, then all other earthly phenomena can equally be chalked up to such a miracle, and voilà—you have creationism.

And there are many more than one, and whaddya know, the insertions match the phylogenetic tree.  Similarly for the GULO pseudogene (which is a broken gene for vitamin C synthesis, which is why we need to get it from external sources) which is broken in the exact same way.  Creationists really have only hand-waving responses.  Yes, there are insertion hot spots for ERVs, but the probability is still astronomical even given that.  Yes, there are a few inconsistent with the phylogenetic tree, but they are NOT in the same location in the genome, indicating independent insertions, or are easily explainable via incomplete lineage sorting.  Yes, some have been shown to have a function, but that function is unrelated to their particular identity as an ERV (e.g. what's the rest of the ERV, with its long terminal repeats, etc., for) - and what are we supposed to believe, the original "pristine" DNA had a virus in it?

These problems all go away once it is admitted humans mated with non-human hominids after being specially created.

But you are nevertheless asserting that a pair of humans (genetically speaking, I presume) with binocular vision, opposable thumbs, fingernails, primate genitalia, and a coccyx, appeared on this planet one day without parents.  All these primate features of theirs, and the genes for these features, were, in your version, not due to their parentage (since they had no parents), but they were "made" with these features and the genes for them.   Taxonomically, going by DNA, they would have to be classified as great apes, but you contend that they only became apes proper when they interbred with hominids who had evolved naturally.

How, then, is your claim consistent with the empirical data gleaned from DNA?  Your hypothesized first pair would've had primate DNA even before they interbred with other primates.  Because that's what it means to say someone is a human, according to the data: it means they are a human primate.  There are peoples in sub-Saharan Africa who have neither Neanderthal DNA nor Denisovan DNA; do you therefore contend that they are not related to apes in any way?

« Last Edit: October 18, 2018, 08:47:16 PM by Pon de Replay »
 

Online Xavier

  • Glory to God in the Highest Heaven, and Peace to His people on Earth of good will.
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2734
  • Thanked: 2376 times
  • Blessed Be the Hour that the Son of God was born!
  • Religion: Catholic Christian
Re: The Fossil record as demonstrative disproof of evolution: Living Fossils.
« Reply #14 on: October 19, 2018, 08:08:24 AM »
Quote
There are peoples in sub-Saharan Africa who have neither Neanderthal DNA nor Denisovan DNA ...

True. But Pon, many evolutionists at one time posited Neanderthal man was an ape-man or some kind of intermediate between man and the brute. The fact that human beings mated with them shows that they were homo sapiens too, of our genus and of our species both. I have two questions for you, Pon, regarding the fossil record and how we came forth from our alleged evolutionary ancestors (1) A transition from a last common ape-like ancestor branching out to humans and to modern apes would certainly have occurred over millions of years - this evolutionist BBC article (and what we were discussing in the other thread about poor England becoming astonishingly liberal in such a short time mainly because of evolution holds good here as well) concedes as much. http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170517-we-have-still-not-found-the-missing-link-between-us-and-apes "the researchers calculated that humans and gorillas had last shared a common ancestor roughly 11 million years ago." Other evolutionary skeptics of this study put it even higher, e.g. "if the 14-million-year-old Ramapithecus really was a human ancestor [Of course it was not, please see the excerpt from In the Beginning posted earlier on this thread for more on this if interested - Xavier], gorillas and humans cannot possibly have shared a common ancestor just 11 million years ago, as Pauling and Zuckerkandl were suggesting." Some put it slightly lower.

Then, in these 11 million, or 14 million, or 7 or whatever million, years, the alleged ancestor (the missing link that is still missing) would have multiplied 10s of millions of times and there would have been a vast preponderance of fossils of the missing link species - most likely in the millions. How is it we find not even one? I will ask the second question after we discuss this.

Quare, I have cited Dr. Behe in the past, and agree with Irreducible Complexity; but you are now running away from Dr. Brown's and Dr. Werner's demonstrations against macro-evolution. "Creationists and evolutionists agree that microevolution (and natural selection) occur. Minor change has been observed since history began. But notice how often evolutionists give evidence for microevolution to support macroevolution. It is macroevolution—which requires new abilities and increasing complexity, resulting from new genetic information—that is at the center of the creation-evolution controversy ...



"Figure 4: Microevolution vs. Macroevolution. Notice that macroevolution would require an upward change in the complexity of certain traits and organs. Microevolution involves only “horizontal” (or even downward) changes—no increasing complexity. Also note that all creationists agree that natural selection occurs. While natural selection does not result in macroevolution, it accounts for many variations within a very narrow range.

Science must always base conclusions on what is seen and reproducible. So what is observed? We see variations in lizards, four of which are shown at the bottom. We also see birds, represented at the top. In-between forms (or intermediates), which should be vast in number if macroevolution occurred, are never seen as fossils or living species. A careful observer can usually see unbelievable discontinuities in these claimed upward changes, as well as in the drawing above.

Ever since Darwin, evolutionists have made excuses for why the world and our fossil museums are not overflowing with intermediates."

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences2.html

Quote
For this argument to work, you would need to show: 1) apes-to-man evolution requires an intermediate species (or at least makes one highly likely);

What? Apes evolved directly into men without an intermediate species? Sure you want to claim or defend that? Read the BBC link above: even the evolutionists don't say that, but rather the claim of their pagan theory is that Apes and Humans have a common ancestor. I'm not interested in your petty plays to the crowd, and appeals for support, else I would say this is an "epic fail" from you. I'm more interested that souls be saved, and error be overcome - and unlike your secularist evolutionary utilitarian lies, we Traditional Catholic Christians believe that it is not permissible to tell one single small white lie even if by it a soul could be delivered from hell, because as the Apostle says, we cannot do evil that good may come out of it, nor do the ends justify the means, as the godless Communists whose evolutionary fables you support believed and lived. Up to now I've ignored this ridiculous rhetoric, yet the lies, the fakes and the proven frauds are all on the evolutionist side like the Piltdown man hoax. You just refuse to recognize that eminently well qualified and highly intelligent Creation Scientists like Dr. Werner and Dr. Brown have good arguments you don't want to have to deal with.

Quote
and 2) there is a strong likelihood that intermediate species would have left fossil evidence of its existence.

This has already been done. See above. See also ""In contrast to this scant and uncertain evidence, Ales Hrdlicka, of the Smithsonian Institution, speaking of a single locality, says, "Near Lyons, France, the skeletons of 200,000 prehistoric horses are scattered. In one cave in Monrovia, there are enough mammoth teeth to fill a small sized hall. From the Heidelberg man, there is practically no record for about 200,000 years. The kinship of the Piltdown Java and Heidelberg man is open to dispute. The Neanderthal man may not have been a direct ancestor of the species which produced Shakespeare, Napoleon and Newton." Remains of the unchanged ape are abundant. But the alleged human remains are scanty and uncertain. Now if there were millions and billions of human beings developing from the brutes, should we not expect as many remains as of horses and mammoths and apes? We do not have millions of them, simply because they did not exist. Is not this well nigh a demonstration?" http://www.ldolphin.org/wmwilliams.html

Quote
You don't produce any evidence for 1) whatsoever (what Darwin said is not evidence); and neither for 2).

Darwin at least had the honesty to concede his theory would require almost innumerable transitional fossils, which have not been found because his theory is wrong. Even many evolutionists, and ID theorists you claim to agree with like Prof. Denton, also conclude it does.

So you are well out of the mainstream - which seems to matter to you so much - on claiming fossil intermediates are no problem.

We will discuss ERV's on another new thread. More later.
Mary, our Heavenly Mother, implores those who receive Holy Communion Daily, or at least Weekly, to Offer their Lives. TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: "My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with Your most Precious Blood and Your Sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby Offer my whole Life to the Intention of Your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Together with my life, I place at Your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all Rosaries, all acts of consecration, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the suffering of my entire life for the Adoration and Supplication of the Holy Trinity, for Unity in our Holy Mother Church, for the Holy Father and Priests, for good Priestly vocations, and for all souls until the end of the world. O my Jesus, please accept my life Sacrifice and my offerings and give me Your grace that I may persevere obediently until my death." Amen. https://www.avemariamaternostra.com/life-offering-promises.html It is recommended that you make this Life Offering as soon as you feel ready, and to renew it from time to time.

Please read the Blessed Mother's promises in the link: those who make it seriously will face no Purgatory (promise 5) since they would have completed it here, will have all their loved ones released from Purgatory the day they offer their life with intent to persevere (promise 4), and can save the souls of all their family members in due time by their life offering (promise 3). It will benefit all souls who have ever lived until time's end (promise 2) A simple effective way for thousands of us to save millions of souls. Inflamed in Large Letters of Love, you will have your name written in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary forever (promise 1).