Science Talk Science Talk    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Forums Science Forums Biology Math Astronomy Physics Technology Chemistry Social Sciences History Psychology Philosophy Sociology Linguistics Religious Studies Economics Man Woman Ethno Ask an Expert World Records Society Issues Education People Alternative Science Controversy 7          Science Talk Forum Index -> Creationism View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message apobetics Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:03 pm    Post subject: Controversy 7 Controversy 7 The Fossil Record Point seven: The fossils clearly demonstrate evolution. The missing links will one day show up because, as of now, the fossil record is poor and incomplete. Counterpoint: The fossil record is rich; over 200,000,000 fossils have been collected and are in museums for all to see. Despite this, the direct ancestors of present animals and even those gone extinct have no direct ancestors nor have any transitional fossils ever been found. Once again with evolution claiming itself to be truth it denies this fact and yet the whole sorry theory is based on this missing evidence. With creation we would not expect to find any transitional fossils -and that is just what the record shows... 6/24/6000 Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Ken Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Even MORE stupid crap spewed from Apo (0) Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Ken Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:54 pm    Post subject: Re: Even MORE stupid crap spewed from Apo The fossil record is rich; over 200,000,000 fossils have been collected and are in museums for all to see. Despite this, no direct ancestors of Apo or any related fossils ever been found, other than one dried monkey carcass thah had a banana shoved up it's ass Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Wombat Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:14 pm    Post subject: Re: Controversy 7 On 2 Jul, 18:03, apobetics <apobet...@gmail.com> wrote: Quote: Controversy 7 The Fossil Record Point seven: The fossils clearly demonstrate evolution.  The missing links will one day show up because, as of now, the fossil record is poor and incomplete. Counterpoint: The fossil record is rich; over 200,000,000 fossils have been collected and are in museums for all to see.  Despite this, the direct ancestors of present animals and even those gone extinct have no direct ancestors nor have any transitional fossils ever been found. Once again with evolution claiming itself to be truth it denies this fact and yet the whole sorry theory is based on this missing evidence.  With creation we would not expect to find any transitional fossils -and that is just what the record shows... Why do you lie? Is it your master, the prince of lies, that makes you lie? You are to be deeply pitied in your ignorance and subservience. Wombat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Sam Buckland Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:37 pm    Post subject: Re: Controversy 7 apobetics wrote: Quote: The fossil record is rich; over 200,000,000 fossils have been collected and are in museums for all to see. Despite this, the direct ancestors of present animals and even those gone extinct have no direct ancestors nor have any transitional fossils ever been found. Uhh, bullshit. That's pretty much all that needs to be said about your assertion. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Devil's Advocaat Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Controversy 7 On 2 Jul, 17:03, apobetics <apobet...@gmail.com> wrote: Quote: Controversy 7 The Fossil Record Point seven: The fossils clearly demonstrate evolution.  The missing links will one day show up because, as of now, the fossil record is poor and incomplete. Counterpoint: The fossil record is rich; over 200,000,000 fossils have been collected and are in museums for all to see.  Despite this, the direct ancestors of present animals and even those gone extinct have no direct ancestors nor have any transitional fossils ever been found. Once again with evolution claiming itself to be truth it denies this fact and yet the whole sorry theory is based on this missing evidence.  With creation we would not expect to find any transitional fossils -and that is just what the record shows... 6/24/6000 The scarcity and patchiness of the fossil record actually contradicts creationism. And I will tell you why. According to creationists, the global flood described in Genesis was a real event. Only a very small percentage of the animals alive were supposedly taken on board the ark. All the rest drowned in the flood, and so should have been covered by all those sedimentary layers, which creationists claim were laid down by that very same global flood. Therefore there should - according to the creationist "model" - billions of fossils. But there are not billions of fossils, as you "apobetics" have clearly pointed out. How does it feel to keep on shooting yourself in the foot? Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Cory Albrecht Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:20 pm    Post subject: Re: Controversy 7 apobetics wrote: Quote: Controversy 7 The Fossil Record Point seven: The fossils clearly demonstrate evolution. The missing links will one day show up because, as of now, the fossil record is poor and incomplete. Counterpoint: The fossil record is rich; over 200,000,000 fossils have been collected and are in museums for all to see. Despite this, the direct ancestors of present animals and even those gone extinct have no direct ancestors nor have any transitional fossils ever been found. None?. None at all? Have you never heard of Pakicetus, Indohyus, Rodhocetus, Ambulocetus, Remingtoncetus, Kutchicetus, Artiocetus, Aetiocetus, Dorudon, Basilosaurus, Kentriodon, Eurhinodelphis, Mamamalodon, Hadrodelphis and Squalodon? (Cetaceans) Or of Hyracotherium, Orohippus, Epihippus, Duschesnehippus, Mesohippus, Miohippus, Parahippus, Merychippus, Calippus, Pliohippus, Dinohippus, Plesippus and Equus? (Horses) Or Osteolepsis, Eusthenopteron, Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Elginerpeton, Obruchevichthys, Acanthostega, Icthystega, Hynerpeton, Tulerpeton, Pderpes and Eryops? (Fish to amphibians.) Or Procynosuchus, Thrinaxodon, Morganucudon, Yanoconodon? (Synapsids to mammals) Or Epidendrosaurus, Pedopenna, Archeopteryx, Confuciusornis snd Ichthyornis? (Dinosaurs to birds) Quote: Once again with evolution claiming itself to be truth it denies this fact and yet the whole sorry theory is based on this missing evidence. With creation we would not expect to find any transitional fossils -and that is just what the record shows... 6/24/6000 Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Science Talk Forum Index -> Creationism All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum Science Talk----------------Science TalkAstrologyNanotechnologySETISociology-- Elections-- LibertarianCreationismMathematicsPolitics  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Australian Debt Consolidation Experts medical insurance Wedding Trova Escort e Accompagnatrici sui portali di annunci (www.EscortForum.com, www.BestAnnunci.com, www.PiccoleTrasgressioni.com ...) New Zealand Swingers Contacts Mail Order remortgages Make Your Own Website Cheap phone calls to UAE Long island Cleaning service black mold UK Swingers Genuine Contacts Site Janitorial Supplies Hoover Vacuum Bags 192 Attacks blocked Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group