A Perspective on Evolution

[superdave5221]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution#Homo_habilis

really the information provided here should be more than enough. no one is trumpeting the views of what you see as scientists who despise Gods word. Modern science found its beginnings in religious scientists. einstien a clear example. science diverged from the church because the empirical data was not consistent with the churches ideas. there was no sinister plot. scientists seek the truth without preconcieved ideas. it is scientists who set out to prove such things as the 7 literal day theory that are at fault.

the scientific community has come to the consensus that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old
this is not so much a theory that can be disproven in a second. this is a model based on many forms of testing that are held in high confidence. the evidence is varied and there for all to see thanks to the internet.

the obvious point in regards to evolution that no, repeat NO, fossils of fully formed modern humans have been found past around 200000 years ago. what does that mean? that means that unless the collective homo sapien sapien species were hiding their dead, or the scientific community has merely missed the boat on this one, then the support of the argument is not complicated and well documented.
it is YOU that needs to provide some sort of proof other than the biblical verses if you want to contest this view point. as in why have we found Lucy and the australeopithicus, but not halloween type skeletons that look exactly like our skeletal make up today? are the evil scientists hiding all the bodies in the woods?

Every example in the website you posted are members of the same genus, i.e. homo. IF THEY ARE ALL THE SAME GENUS, HOW CAN THEY BE TRANSITIONAL? I CAN'T DEAL WITH THIS IGNORANCE ANY LONGER!

 

[thelevite]

please note this particular section its about 2/5 of the way down the page

Ardipithecus (5.5–4.4 Ma), with species Ar. kadabba and Ar. ramidus;
Australopithecus (4–2 Ma), with species Au. anamensis, Au. afarensis, Au. africanus, Au. bahrelghazali, and Au. garhi;
Kenyanthropus (3–2.7 Ma), with species Kenyanthropus platyops
Paranthropus (3–1.2 Ma), with species P. aethiopicus, P. boisei, and P. robustus;
Homo (2 Ma–present), with species Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo ergaster, Homo georgicus, Homo antecessor, Homo cepranensis, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo rhodesiensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo sapiens idaltu, Archaic Homo sapiens, Homo floresiensis

the incompetence is staggering.

 

[EnochxGenesis]

*rolls eyes at this thread*

 

[superdave5221]

please note this particular section its about 2/5 of the way down the page

Ardipithecus (5.5–4.4 Ma), with species Ar. kadabba and Ar. ramidus;
Australopithecus (4–2 Ma), with species Au. anamensis, Au. afarensis, Au. africanus, Au. bahrelghazali, and Au. garhi;
Kenyanthropus (3–2.7 Ma), with species Kenyanthropus platyops
Paranthropus (3–1.2 Ma), with species P. aethiopicus, P. boisei, and P. robustus;
Homo (2 Ma–present), with species Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo ergaster, Homo georgicus, Homo antecessor, Homo cepranensis, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo rhodesiensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo sapiens idaltu, Archaic Homo sapiens, Homo floresiensis

the incompetence is staggering.

You stilll don't understand. No one is disputing that evolution goes on WITHIN species. WHERE IS THE EVOLUTION BETWEEN SPECIES?????????

Evolution within species is NOT evidence of Neo-Darwinism.

I guess someone hid all of the bodies of those intermediate creatures that would be necessary BETWEEN species!!!!!

What we have here is a lawn. Not a tree of life.

 

[Demeter]

I guess someone hid all of the bodies of those intermediate creatures that would be necessary BETWEEN species!!!!!

What we have here is a lawn. Not a tree of life.[/QUOTE]

I assume you are referring to the "missing link" as the intermediate creatures that would be necessary between species.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/05/090519-missing-link-found.html

however Im afraid no one had hid the bodies, it is quite possible that humans have evolved from other creatures. Overlooking such evidence would be truly ignorant.

 

[superdave5221]

I guess someone hid all of the bodies of those intermediate creatures that would be necessary BETWEEN species!!!!!

What we have here is a lawn. Not a tree of life.

I assume you are referring to the "missing link" as the intermediate creatures that would be necessary between species.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/05/090519-missing-link-found.html

however Im afraid no one had hid the bodies, it is quite possible that humans have evolved from other creatures. Overlooking such evidence would be truly ignorant.[/quote]

Overlooking any evidence would be ignorant. However in this case, the evidence is far from conclusive. We've been down this road before, with evolutionist coming up empty. After 200 years of searching, and we have one maybe. Oh, you may be able to produce a few more maybes. The earth should be filled with them. Those boogers really hide. Sure takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution. I'd rather reserve my faith for God.

 

[greatkraw]

This is one of the major problems with the old earth/ evolution theory

we should be neck deep in fossils showing continuous transition

in fact fossils are hard to find and they show distinct species hhmmmmmmmmmmmm.............

 

[MahogonySnail]

God deliberately put old bones in the earth as a test of faith, and to confuse evolutionists.

 

[Brackenzee]

Overlooking any evidence would be ignorant. However in this case, the evidence is far from conclusive. We've been down this road before, with evolutionist coming up empty. After 200 years of searching, and we have one maybe. Oh, you may be able to produce a few more maybes. The earth should be filled with them. Those boogers really hide. Sure takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution. I'd rather reserve my faith for God.

Once again, there are literally thousands of species. I showed you the list on Wikipedia. I'm not going to sit here and type out the list in this thread because you're too lazy or intellectually dishonest to read it. The information is there; you simply wish to ignore it.

 

[thelevite]

You stilll don't understand. No one is disputing that evolution goes on WITHIN species. WHERE IS THE EVOLUTION BETWEEN SPECIES?????????

Evolution within species is NOT evidence of Neo-Darwinism.

I guess someone hid all of the bodies of those intermediate creatures that would be necessary BETWEEN species!!!!!

What we have here is a lawn. Not a tree of life.

i apologize for my continuing lack of clarity on the subject. but to be fair evolution is clearly defined as the change in genetic structure over time leading to the emergence of new species. If you would take another look at the list that i provided they are of DIFFERENT species. you are confusing species with families.

if however you wish to see more evidence than the that (which is the most studied and well documented) then please direct your attention to the following site.

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

after reading through this site and checking the validity (as best you can) of its referenced sources, then please

and straight from the devil himself

http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?viewtype=text&itemID=F373&pageseq=359

here is a resource illustrating your view of "entire chains missing"

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences27.html

this is a valid point because fossil records are not complete. equilateral conditions or extreme cold are required to preserve fossils. this would naturally lead to more and more gaps the further back in time we travel. however, we can look at the extensive records we do have (aka. first site) and make certain assumptions based on that. the large availability of complete chains of evolution (see below link) provide compelling evidence that these gaps are merely gaps in our fossil record, and not indicative of some sort of divine intervention.

the following site is interesting because it points out another flaw in your thinking. the missing link is not only accounted for in various records, but in living organisms.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19726451.700-evolution-what-missing-link.html?full=true

the fundamental fault in your thinking of missing links this. if a link is missing in a chain then the later half of the chain cannot exist (in this context). so God must have placed it there. So in every gap in the fossil records God is stepping in and creating a new related species? and this continued to happen for 6000 years i suppose. in this thinking why would God not merely create his finished product in one flourish?

 

[Brackenzee]

Levite has a point. Even with all the gaps in the fossil record and the uncertainties inherent with any scientific theory, the evidence we do have demonstrates that the biosphere didn't come about in just six days. I do not mean to diminish God's role in creation in the slightest when I say that the Genesis narrative is an allegory; I simply wish to state the facts as we've established them through investigation.

 

[Graybeard]

1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1Co 1:28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
1Co 1:29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

 

[Cup-of-Ruin]

the fundamental fault in your thinking of missing links this. if a link is missing in a chain then the later half of the chain cannot exist (in this context). so God must have placed it there. So in every gap in the fossil records God is stepping in and creating a new related species? and this continued to happen for 6000 years i suppose. in this thinking why would God not merely create his finished product in one flourish?

He did create the finished product, how else do 70 trillion multi-cells come together, you have to form it all at once, with the blood flowing through the veins and the heart pumping and the brain operational, in one momentary instant, it all must be formed in adult form, both male and female, perfectly, the first time.

What do you think happened? Just by blind chance, cells just bumped into each other accidently in a watery soup over billions of years, lol.

 

[superdave5221]

This is one of the major problems with the old earth/ evolution theory

we should be neck deep in fossils showing continuous transition

in fact fossils are hard to find and they show distinct species hhmmmmmmmmmmmm.............

Right on. If Charles Darwin was right, taxonomists would have a very difficult job!

 

[greatkraw]

God deliberately put old bones in the earth as a test of faith, and to confuse evolutionists.

lol.................

 

[pickles]

A simple solution. Trust all to the scriptures, then let Our Lord God take care of the rest.
God bless, pickles.