Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.



View Active Topics       View Your Posts       Latest 100 Topics       FAQ Topics       Mobile Friendly Theme


Macro Evolution Debunked - No Transitional Species

Discuss science and technology topics here.

Moderators: fschmidt, jamesbond

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27635
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Winston » April 16th, 2011, 12:47 pm

Globe, you don't get it. If macro-evolution were true, there would be millions of transitional fossils that are like half fish/half mammal, etc. But there aren't. That's a huge huge thing AGAINST the theory.

Even Darwin himself said in his book "Origin of the Species" that if he was right, then transitional fossils should be found, and that if they can't be found, then he could be wrong. Well, by his own criteria, he was proven wrong.
Last edited by Winston on April 16th, 2011, 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

The_Adventurer
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1384
Joined: August 23rd, 2007, 5:17 pm

Post by The_Adventurer » April 16th, 2011, 1:37 pm

There's more than one ancient society that writes of "ages" of man. I remember one of the ancient, somewhat advanced, South American societies wrote that they were the 5th age of man. I also thought about the idea of man having grown to great civilization and then wiped himself out many times over.

I believe that a lot of mythology are attempts to describe tales of these previous ages, passed down orally for so long they have been warped into the outrageous stories we know today. Some mythologies have stories going back hundreds of thousands of years.

And then there's that teacher. You know the guy. He appears in just about every mythology and ancient culture, particularly those that have some sort of pyramid structures or zodiac based beliefs, and teaches pretty much the same thing in all.
“b***y is so strong that there are dudes willing to blow themselves up for the highly unlikely possibility of b***y in another dimension." -- Joe Rogan

globetrotter
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1023
Joined: November 20th, 2009, 8:45 pm
Location: Someplace Other Than This Forum

Post by globetrotter » April 16th, 2011, 1:41 pm

Winston wrote:Globe, you don't get it. If macro-evolution were true, there would be millions of transitional fossils that are like half fish/half mammal, etc. But there aren't. That's a huge huge thing AGAINST the theory.
So a gap in the fossil record disproves the rest of the fossil record that does not have gaps?

Once again, you and Linux Only engage in the same fallacy.

Something SHOULD be.

No, that is your belief.

The fallacies in the above post:

1) You think there SHOULD be these fossils and that we SHOULD have found them by now.
2) You think that there SHOULD be a transitional fossil phase that was long enough so that there was a fossil record. This is your belief, it is not fact.
3) You are assuming that because something has not been found to date, that it does not exist.
4) Like all CT'ers you believe that because one item of a theory is possibly missing, then the entire theory is tossed out. No, that's not how the scientific method works.

It's all based upon your belief that things should be a certain way.

Possible explanations:

- We have not found these fossils yet.
- The fossils were destroyed by natural processes.
- The transition was so swift that the fossil record is tiny and statistically unlikely to survive, or to be so few in number we may never find one.
- The transitional creatures did not have bodies that survived the process of fossilization
- The transitional creatures are amphibians. Aka frogs, mudskippers or the like.

You look at the preponderance of evidence. Yes this gap does call it in to question, however the vast bulk of the fossil record does support the theory of macro-evolution.

You believe that something needs to be without flaw to be a working and sound scientific theory.

Your belief is, once again, false.

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27635
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Winston » April 16th, 2011, 5:00 pm

Globe,
You forget. Darwin himself said in his book "Origin of the Species" that if he was right, then transitional fossils should be found, and that if they can't be found, then he could be wrong. Well, by his own criteria, he was proven wrong.

We DO have millions of fossils found. Yet none of them are transitional. What are the odds that zero out of millions are not transitional fossils?

What evidence for macro evolution is there? Can you name some solid ones? Did you watch the videos posted earlier in this thread?

How did humans lose all that muscle mass from primates to us? How come our bodies are not adapted to live in the wild?

Why are we able to ask "What is life about?" while the animals can't?

Why do we have 95 percent junk DNA? Why does our DNA look spliced?

Why do we have 46 chromosomes while primates and apes have 48?

Science has no real answers to these questions. Do you?
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

globetrotter
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1023
Joined: November 20th, 2009, 8:45 pm
Location: Someplace Other Than This Forum

Post by globetrotter » April 17th, 2011, 3:01 am

Winston wrote:Globe,
You forget. Darwin himself said in his book "Origin of the Species" that if he was right, then transitional fossils should be found, and that if they can't be found, then he could be wrong. Well, by his own criteria, he was proven wrong.
You cannot post without appealing to authority. Are you aware of this? Every single time you cannot argue on logic, you 100% of the time must cite an expert to bail you out. You post a video, as though what that person says is true, as though this person is some talisman to you.

So you are claiming that because fossils have not been found now, that they can't be found? Ever?
We DO have millions of fossils found. Yet none of them are transitional. What are the odds that zero out of millions are not transitional fossils?
Very high.
Johannesburg, South Africa – Scientists say they have discovered the first fossil of a dinosaur in Angola, and that it's a new creature, heralding a research renaissance...

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/ ... z1JjzV20D4
Winston this fossil was found a four weeks ago. Therefore new fossils are being found all of the time. Therefore we have not found all of the fossils that exist. Therefore new fossils are likely to be found in the future. Therefore your statement that we can't find transitional fossils is a belief, not a fact. Therefore your assumption that fossils SHOULD have been found by now (there is yet another example of your assuming something SHOULD be so...) is false.

I cannot write it in any simpler terms.

You assume that all we know to date is all that we will ever know. This is a logically false statement. You make this assumption constantly in your many CT posts.
What evidence for macro evolution is there?
The extant fossil record showing, for example, increasing height in proto-humans, increasing brain size in proto-humans. The same for horses, the progress from single cell to multicellular creatures, then small protozoa and bacteria, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds; small mammals, larger mammals, proto-primates, primates, proto-humans, etc.
How did humans lose all that muscle mass from primates to us? How come our bodies are not adapted to live in the wild?
Disuse.

This is not germaine to the discussion of why their are not transitional fossils.

You do this a lot, too. You ignore criticism, you cannot focus, then you toss out more and more suppostions
"Well, what about THIS, then...". That must be magic that I continually point out your meta-context and predict how you will respond.

Must be luck, yes?
Why are we able to ask "What is life about?" while the animals can't?
Focus, Winstoo. You are rambling. This is about transitional fossils. This thread is not about the nature of consciousness.
Science has no real answers to these questions. Do you?
They do, Winston. You just lack the ability to understand the explanation or you refute it with your belief system.

You can believe whatever you want. I don't care. The problem is that you refute fact, science and logic with your emotion based, "People of spirituality", blather.

You should just flatly state:
"I don't believe science, I believe XXX because that's what I believe."
Then those of us who are rational can simply ignore your faith-based views.[/quote]

Seeker
Freshman Poster
Posts: 278
Joined: December 24th, 2010, 9:46 pm

Post by Seeker » December 19th, 2011, 12:55 am

What a load of bullshit.

Practically every fossil is a transitional form between one type and another. Whoever said there are no transitional fossils has no idea how evolution works, or what a transitional fossil really is. Does anyone think that Homo erectus is not intermediate between Homo habilis and Homo heidelbergensis? FFS you don't even know about the fused chromosomes in the human genome.

Anyone who denies that evolution is true is a COMPLETE ignoramus who deserves to be whipped.

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27635
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Winston » December 19th, 2011, 12:32 pm

Seeker wrote:What a load of bullshit.

Practically every fossil is a transitional form between one type and another. Whoever said there are no transitional fossils has no idea how evolution works, or what a transitional fossil really is. Does anyone think that Homo erectus is not intermediate between Homo habilis and Homo heidelbergensis? FFS you don't even know about the fused chromosomes in the human genome.

Anyone who denies that evolution is true is a COMPLETE ignoramus who deserves to be whipped.
You've fallen for the propaganda. They slide fossils between species to try to get transitional fossils. Show me a half reptile half bird fossil. Micro-evolution has been proven but not macro-evolution.

The fused chromosome is a theory without basis. It isn't a fact. The chromosomes appear to have been artificially fused. Nothing in nature could do that. You have to tell the difference between speculation and fact.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27635
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Winston » November 6th, 2012, 4:47 pm

The brain size of the skulls of fossils that would be evidence for Darwinism, are serenely placeable in human taxon human or in ape taxon.

We do not have before us a gradual evolution, we are just dealing with some extinct human races and apes extinct.

"Man is not descended from monkeys, Man is descended from Man"
(Giuseppe Sermonti)

Image
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

User avatar
Adama
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 6207
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 10:37 pm

Post by Adama » May 21st, 2013, 9:26 pm

Winston wrote:I just don't see how all the beauty and order around me is due to random mutations only.

Why does nearly every living being have two eyes, one mouth, one nose, two ears, etc.? How can that be a coincidence?

Besides, how can consciousness arise out of the unconscious dead matter of the universe? It just doesn't make sense.

To Atheists and Evolutionists:

Do you ever consider that there might be order at a level that is beyond your perception and mind?
Obviously the Earth was seeded by Reptilian Aliens.
A good man is above pettiness. He is better than that.

Flatland
Freshman Poster
Posts: 11
Joined: May 21st, 2013, 10:03 pm

Post by Flatland » May 21st, 2013, 10:30 pm

Winston wrote:Globe,
You forget. Darwin himself said in his book "Origin of the Species" that if he was right, then transitional fossils should be found, and that if they can't be found, then he could be wrong. Well, by his own criteria, he was proven wrong.

We DO have millions of fossils found. Yet none of them are transitional. What are the odds that zero out of millions are not transitional fossils?

What evidence for macro evolution is there? Can you name some solid ones? Did you watch the videos posted earlier in this thread?

How did humans lose all that muscle mass from primates to us? How come our bodies are not adapted to live in the wild?

Why are we able to ask "What is life about?" while the animals can't?

Why do we have 95 percent junk DNA? Why does our DNA look spliced?

Why do we have 46 chromosomes while primates and apes have 48?

Science has no real answers to these questions. Do you?
Where did you get that there are no transitional fossils?

The fact is that there are PLENTY of transitional fossils:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html

Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 4772
Joined: April 28th, 2013, 3:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

Post by Moretorque » May 22nd, 2013, 2:09 am

Christer's christer's christer's come out where ever you are.

One fossil in a billion is preserved correctly according to geology, just look at how long the Dino reigned here ( 100's of millions of years ) and how big and plentiful they were and geologist have a hard time finding complete specimens of them. So then take like a smaller life form, I believe the last time I looked the average living specimen series lives here on earth for like 3 million years before it goes extinct and then only like one in a billion bones ( or is it complete specimens ? ) is preserved correctly. You then see why there would be lots of gaps in the chain when a very limited amount of people have been piecing the Earth's story of life together over the last 150 years and most life forms are not very big.

The pieces are out there to piece this together but it takes time, as far as the genetic code being similar from species to species why would evolution change something that work's ? evolution is the rode to perfection so when something works perfectly for the advancement of new and diversified life here why change it?

It makes more sense for life to keep the code simple between species in advancing the cause of life, just make small changes to go forward as needed to adapt to the environment and arms races between species to stay ahead for gaming purposes.

Major changes would never survive that is why the changes are made a little at a time as needed, the Kittie Cat called the Liger proves this, a liger is a cross between a lion and a tiger that ends up with a 900 pound cat. Only man has done this playing around and " guess what " that animal the Liger could never make it in the wild because it cannot adapt to the environment of this planet. To many gapping holes in it's design to survive on it's own because nature did not create it to work in what nature made, MAN DID! so for that reason man has to take care of it because it does not work in the real world.

One last thing to Mr. Winston, I think from our geological records from when the first Asexual bacteria has been found to today, I believe that is about 3 billion years or so ago and that is alot of time for small changes to make big differences in the time of things.
"
That is like 1/5 the age of the Universe we live in" that we understand " for life to grow from simple bacteria to us, Your time of life here on this planet equates to 1/100,000,000 millionth of the time life has been here on this rock and just look at how the planet has changed in every way shape and form just since you have been here. Now times that by 100,000,000 and you get an idea of just how old the changes n adapt process for life is or how old Mother and Father really are to get to this point to where they can communicate like this and enjoy the fruits of their labor " lots off FUC KING ", that created all the diversity of life here.

It's a total travesty for our children.
Last edited by Moretorque on August 2nd, 2014, 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Time to Hide!

RickyRetardo
Freshman Poster
Posts: 159
Joined: June 6th, 2014, 9:47 am

Post by RickyRetardo » July 27th, 2014, 6:12 am

Any fossil is potentially a "transitional fossil" unless it is a fossil from a line that completely died out, and never "transitioned".

Categories like "fish" and "reptile" are not entirely biologically-based. Neither "fish" nor "reptile" is an actual clade of organisms. These categories are largely culturally-based.

Do you doubt that the tiger and the house cat share a common ancestor?

What about the house cat and the serval, or the Old World Monkeys and the New World monkeys?
Let's get together and feel alright.

alexbrown
Freshman Poster
Posts: 10
Joined: April 9th, 2015, 7:49 am

Re: Macro Evolution Debunked - No Transitional Fossils

Post by alexbrown » May 12th, 2015, 10:48 am

Eah, now I recollect that is were I got the looked into data about our DNA being controlled, Lloyd knows his poop. i hear him out on Coast to Coast AM alot. When he completes his DNA discoveries on the star kid i wager conventional science will at present figure out how to bash his discoveries.

Well relying upon how one needs to decipher our explanation behind being here there could be various reasons. I for one think this measurement is just a methods for our higher selves to experience things in a 3 dimensional physical configuration. I kinda concur with DAvid Ike's hypothesis about our motivation and presence here. I began perusing his freshest book, its really intriguing and jives with a ton of things I've found all alone through different types of examination and compositions.

There's a motivation behind why animals have similitudes... Anyway, its excessively terrifying for the normal individual, making it impossible to examine so they simply eat at the trough of lack of awareness like the greater part of the populace does.

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27635
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Macro Evolution Debunked - No Transitional Fossils

Post by Winston » August 25th, 2016, 3:45 pm

Questions for evolutionists:

A primary problem with Evolution is that there are no transitional species or not enough. For example, if reptiles turned into birds after millions of years, then there would be transitional forms between them. For example, you'd see species that are part reptile and part birds. Also from an evolutionary standpoint, there's no advance for a reptile or mammal to develop a partial wing to eventually turn into a bird. You can't fly with a partial wing so there's no advantage to it. It'd probably be a disadvantage. So in that sense, evolution makes no sense. How do you explain that?

Also it doesn't explain the sudden explosion of human intelligence in the brain. Why didn't other animals evolve to build cars and planes too? Also there are no transitional species between hominids like Cro Magnon and modern humans. How do you explain that?
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

El_Caudillo
Freshman Poster
Posts: 285
Joined: July 18th, 2016, 2:39 pm

Re: Macro Evolution Debunked - No Transitional Fossils

Post by El_Caudillo » August 25th, 2016, 4:10 pm

Who says there aren't any transitional species? Archaeopteryx was a bird with dinosaur features. It is classified as a bird only for the need to classify it as something. What about early whales having their nostrils further forward on the nose like land mammals? Their nostrils gradually moved back to facilitate breathing on the surface of the ocean. Sure it would be good to have more transitional fossils - but the nature of the fossil record is that it is incomplete because the conditions for a complete animal to be preserved rarely happen. If life was brought here by a comet, where did it land? How did life survive the crash, let alone the high speed ride through the universe? Did all species get here on that comet? Why should we chose a very undeveloped theory over a more developed one?

Accepting micro evolution and not macro is like doing the same thing with economics or anthropology, which seems illogical to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeG1HDOgzCQ

If you are looking for a half-reptile half mammal you really don't get it. You need to look for the common ancestor of each...i.e the fish.
Even Billy knows that, just ask Mr S!

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Science and Technology”