XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.religion.christian   
   From: jtem01@gmail.com   
      
   On 9/2/25 6:34 AM, 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."        
    Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â  ~   
   > 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   
      
   What stupid people don't understand is that it is the nature of evidence   
   to support more than one conclusion. Instead, they say "Archaeopteryx   
   has feathers, and it's really old, so that proves it's the first bird."   
      
   Problem is that when we're talking the origins of feathers we're already   
   looking into the Triassic, before the so called "Age of the Dinosaurs."   
      
   However...   
      
   This is where you mess up. We can delve into logic, yes, or we can   
   plunge even deeper, talk about computers, binary code -- "Gates" -- and   
   how you can perform insanely complex operations, work intensely   
   difficult questions with just a stream of "Yes" or "No" answers.   
      
   Remember:  Strictly speaking, evidence "Is consistent with" a   
   conclusion, not proof of same. And it's almost always "Consistent   
   with" numerous conclusions. Which is why you search out numerous   
   pieces of evidence, because although they're all going to be   
   consistent with numerous conclusions, they're also going to eliminate   
   any number.   
      
   Animal has fur:  Consistent with a Chimp, a cat and a kangaroo.   
      
   Animal has a tail:  Consistent with a cat and a kangaroo, eliminates   
   Chimp.   
      
   Found on all continents except Antarctica:  Eliminates kangaroos,   
   leaving only cats.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
   --   
   https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)