Evolution - Who wants to KNOW?

I dont think that "fossil evidence" means anything to Rex and Bib. The fossils of a feathered dinosaur from Liaoning Provinceare from the early Jurassic volcanic ash deposits , just about the same time as the Archeopteryx was in the Solnhofen Limestone (fine limey mud). There are others like microraptor.
The important thing is that the Dromaeosaur with feathers (Sinornithosaur) , even the given name "Chinese bird lizard" comments on its structures. Ive seen the blow ups and , if you put the dromaeosaur next to archeopteryx , you could see the 22 points of similarity in the evolutional relationship between birdies and dinos, as published by Gauthier.

You Creatiionists have a hard row here. The evidence just keeps piling on as finds of new species keep increasing (mostly because the Gobi and other provinces of China are opening up to outsiders and research). So , I have respect for the futility of your methods. My only question has always been
"why dont the Creationist organizations go and fund some field work to find evidence to counter the sciences" Ive never been adequately answered. The minutae that youre left with to try to argue away what are obvious features in the samples of the fossil record just arent making it any more. You guys are lost in the last to centuries when the fossil record wasnt as rich and the stratigraphic column and geochronological techniques were limited, then maybe youd have scored some debate points.
. Isnt it just marvelous at how all these fossils show remarkeable morphological changes through time and through the stratigraphic measures from which they were collected?Youve just zipped by Diablos synapsid to mammal evolution. as if it were some delusion. Remember , all that data came from real fossils, first published in the 1960s by Colbert .If you just ignore items, well assume youve stipulated to them. So we have a bunch of "stipulations " built up here

Hey Bib, I traded in my old laptop so my responses may be a bit more prolix from now on.


So, by homolgy we accept your stipulation that archeopteryx was , indeed an intermediate form (we dont all agree of what). Youve stipulated to mosaic evolution , and youve stipulated to diablos synapsid evolutionary trend model, oh yeh, and rosbornes killer "SOME DINOSAUR FOSSILS DID HAVE FEATHERS"



.

Well, I'm sure it doesn't mean anything to Bib, who's just running around like an Imp in this whole thread. But Rex might actually be sincere in his arguments, even if we disagree with his/her position. We'll see.

I found the names of the two Creation "scientist" who carved the "footprints" along side real Dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy shale of Texas. Theyve become a couple of outstanding representatives of "skullduggery" in the name of religion The name of the footprint Creator was Wayland Lee Adams. I havent put this into a search engine yet , but , as an unofficial archivist of these "science scams" Im trying to compile only those fakes that go back 20 years or less.
I must say , however the Sinoropteryx fossil is still under question by National Xien Gong U of Taiwan, because they feel that the mineral layering is not equivalent throughout the matrix of the specimen. So, in all honesty, Im keeping any fakes and questionable fossils in document.

Do you think we would have a complete fossil record if early hominids had invented museums of natural history? (I realize this sounds like ridicule, but I actually wonder if that would have made a difference.)

At risk of sounding pedantic, I would point out that the fossil record will never be "complete" because we cannot hope to find every fossil which exists.

Early Hominids didn't have the tools necessary for extraction and storage that our civilization provides today, so I doubt they could have done much to add to our current collections. Of course they could have added some items, just by pure chance and time, but in the overall scheme of thigns, I don't think it would have made much of a difference.

Even today, many paleontologists sometimes recommend curtailing excavation efforts in places where more damage is being done with current technologies than might be done in the future. It's a balance between wanting to know now, and wanting to preserve the sites in anticipation of better tools/methodologies to come.

The caves of lascaux have been sealed because exposure to natural conditions is degrading the paintings. Maybe sometime in the future, preservative mechanisms will exist which will allow the caves to be reopened without risking them.

Thank you, Rosborne.

I felt silly asking that question but your answer gives better information than I could have ever hoped for.

???Your Irish eyes are always smiling? Haven't ever seen a smile from a rude pig.

Philosophy & Debate? Figures. Your head is much too fat, is this topic closed to all but the fat heads? Some old Abuzz "philosophers."

sunlover, Bib goes on-line and uses a limited vocabulary to shoot ad-hominems at people rather than engage them . Just let him be, hes not dangerous.

A columnist recently wrote: "I believe the world will end before humans agree on how it began."

Now, there's a thought...

cicerone,

good to hear from you again. were you really in antarctica?

wandeljw, Try this link. http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=44518&start=60

cicerone,

thanks for the link. beautiful pictures!

DOVER PENNSYLVANIA UPDATE

On February 15, candidates can start collecting signatures for a seat on the Dover School Board. Those unhappy with the current school board's decision undermining the teaching of evolution, see this as an opportunity to determine public opinion on this issue in the Dover area.

If one truly wanted to know that there is no difference between the two "theories" of creation and evolution they could study the readings on this subject at the Edgar Casey Foundation in Virginia Beach. I believe it is called, now, the Association of Research and Enlightenment (A.R.E).

Within the 15,000 readings found in the A.R.E. library is found information on how man (as spirit) actually created him/her self by "pushing" into the animals that were already in place on this planet. Yes, into animals large & small -- lizards, birds, horses, dinosaurs (?). And, yes, it was agonizingly painful for most.

This is how "we" evolutionized, and still are in that process, physically and mentally. Possibly, the creationist think "God" stepped in with assistance of the design of the body, and possibly evolutionist think "we" managed over time eternal by natural selection.

This doesn't mean, either, that science doesn't have to prove it all -- that does mean "ALL." But, it does seem we humans must be given an answer before we are able to prove the question, doesn't it?

If someone reads all this crazy stuff about mixed-up birds and animals and calls it "science," then they really must read ALL books written on the subject, both subjects. There are hundreds of books written on the Casey readings, by scientists, geologists, psychologists, most any given field where someone applied the material to a particular subject, including spirituality. The A.R.E. also houses the largest metaphysical library in the world, as far as I know, but I read this material back in the 1970s and 1980s.

The "Sun," is the giver of light, in every way imaginable. I love knowledge.

sunlover,

You are the first person to mention a metaphysical angle. Most of us at A2K have been arguing natural versus supernatural explanations of the origin of life.

Thank you for bringing a new perspective to this topic and welcome to A2K!

What's the difference between metaphysical and supernatural?

Bibliophile is the one that gives us definitions. Whatever happened to him, anyway?

Supernatural has to do with miracles such as a miraculous cure of an illness, or blindness by a power outside the natural world.

Metaphysics is, I guess, anything beyond physics. (The study of "being" and the structure of the universe.)

What would ontology and cosmology have to do with "supernatural?"

EDGAR CASEY-oy, next were gonna have Lyndon Larouche