XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.religion.christian   
   From: andrew.321.remov@usa.net   
      
   "Dawn Flood" wrote in message news:10972c0$iuqh$1@dont-email.me...   
   > Andrew wrote:   
   >> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:   
   >>> "Andrew" wrote:   
   >>>> "I will lay it on the line - there is not one such fossil for which   
   >>>> one could make a watertight argument. The reason is that statements   
   >>>> about ancestry and descent are not applicable in the fossil record.   
   >>>> Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds? Perhaps yes, perhaps no   
   >>>> there is no way of answering the question. It is easy enough to make   
   >>>> up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons   
   >>>> why the stages should be favoured by natural selection. But such   
   >>>> stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to   
   >>>> the test." ~ Dr. Colin Patterson, paleontologist   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record   
   >>>> persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees   
   >>>> that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of   
   >>>> their branches; the rest is inference..not the evidence of   
   >>>> fossils." ~ Stephen J. Gould, paleontologist   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and   
   >>>> paleontology does not provide them. The gaps must therefore be a   
   >>>> contingent feature of the record."   
   >>>> ~ David B. Kitts, Ph.D, zoologist, paleontologist   
   >>>   
   >>> Many species now going extinct may vanish without a fossil trace   
   >>> March 21, 2016   
   >>>   
   >>> The researchers were shocked to find that more than 85 percent of the   
   >>> mammal species at high risk of extinction lack a fossil record.   
   >>> Viewed from the perspective of the fossil record alone, the magnitude   
   >>> of the current mammal die-off thus appears markedly reduced. The   
   >>> picture may be even more distorted for other land-dwelling   
   >>> vertebrates: only 3 percent of today's threatened bird species and 1.6   
   >>> percent of threatened reptile species have a known fossil record.   
   >>> https://today.uic.edu/many-species-now-going-extinct-may-vanish-without-   
   >>> a-fossil-trace/   
   >>>   
   >>> If a species never gets fossilized can you claim it never existed?   
   >>   
   >> No, but neither could one claim that they did. And that does not negate   
   >> the fact that there is no empirical evidence of transitional forms   
   >> ever existing.   
   >>   
   >> Bottom line, you have been deceived. Which   
   >> would not have happened if you had not been   
   >> so gullible.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Andrew,   
   >   
   > Here are two neat little books; I've posted about these here before, but   
   > you'll never read either:   
   >   
   > https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/1886/science-and-cre   
   tionism-a-view-from-the-national-academy-of   
   >   
   > with an updated version:   
   >   
   > https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/6024/science-and-cre   
   tionism-a-view-from-the-national-academy-of   
   >   
   > They are both free, of course, but I doubt that you will click either link.   
      
   If you send me a link, I will certainly go to it.   
      
   So what about them do you want to discuss?   
      
   They cite evidences for evolution which are   
   true.   
      
   But their origins model "excludes a priori "   
   the possibility of an intelligent causation.   
      
   For anyone, or any organization to exclude   
   anything as a possible answer to a question   
   is evidence that they are biased, and are not   
   interested in the truth.   
      
   And if you are interested in truth, you must   
   go beyond that.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)