allenmaher said:
OooSnap said:
Another thing that totally destroys the evolution story (to me at least) are "living fossils" and amber fossils.
Living and amber fossils doesn't give credence to the idea that all life evolved from a common ancestor.
The story about humans rapidly evolved from some ape ancestor in just
5-7 million years (which requires drastic anatomical, biochemical,
physiological etc. changes is ridiculous. The common answer I receive on this is something of the effect of "because they just so happen to be increased
competition." I call this utter dog poo. That's really one weak cop-out to explain it away.
There are thousands of organisms, some even supposedly 140+ million years, that are virtually the same. You would think all those supposed meteor impacts, ice ages, genetic mutations, volcanic eruptions etc. etc., they would have evolved as much as humans supposedly evolved in the last 7 million years or so. But nope according to the evolutionists.
Some examples of organisms that supposedly said no to Evolution even after millions and millions and millions and millions of years:
Peripatopsis: South Africa "endless-walk type of family Onychophora. This creature has remained unchanged since the beginning of the Cambrian period. With more than 500 million years of stability. Therefore, peripatopsis conveniently votes no for evolution.
Lingula: Commonly called the lampshell because it's unusual shape, is a kind of Lingula brachiopods. No fossils or lead away the lingula. This creature has unchanged since the Silurian period, 435 million years. Lingula conveniently votes no to evolution.
Neopilina and Nucula: Two kinds of marine animals both have retained the same manner as their ancestors had more than 400 million years. They also vote no for evolution.
Pyenogonum: A kind of fifty marine species which resemble spiders. They have not changed since 350 million years. These troublemakers vote no for Devonian evolution.
Hutchinsoniella: A bottom-dwelling marine genus of the family
cephocardia remained constant at 340 million years. Another vote for no change.
Liphistius spiders hatch. Their ancestors are unknown. The first fossil remains were found in the Permian period 275 million years ago. Trapdoor spiders then were very similar to spiders hatch now. A wolf spider preserved in amber from the Eocene, 55 million years, is identical to the species of modern times. Again, we find creatures that appear suddenly in great shape and stay the same at present. With bacteria, lampshells, and marine animals, spiders vote no to evolution.
Nautilus: A kind of shellfish which has defied evolution 270 million years. One more vote for no change.
Anaspids: a kind of sectoral water bugs and Limulus: The horseshoe
crab fossils from both 250 million years. Neither has changed over the
centuries. Again, two more vote against evolution.
Latimeria chalumnae: A coelacanth, a species of ray-finned fishes glans remained unchanged for 200 million years. No fossils or lead away of Latimeria. This voice Triassic surviving prohibition period of evolution.
Entemnotrochus: Another type of marine animals that have no
ancestors known. It has a fossil record dating back 180 million years.
They have not changed. Entemnotrochus votes no to evolution.
Ornithorhynchus anatinus: duck-billed platypus has remained unchanged for 160 million years. They vote not to evolution.
Sphenodon punctatus: Tuatara usually called in English. This reptile
has no known ancestors and descendants do not know. And showed little
change for 140 million years since the late Jurassic. He voted no to
change too.
Leiopelma: An archaic frog of the genus in New Zealand. They are considered living fossils from the Cretaceous period. For 135 million years these frogs have resisted change. Again, no evolution. Therefore, votes Leiopelma no to evolution.
Apteryx Genre kiwi, a flightless bird. Their fossil date from the Cretaceous period 95 million years. The bird has not changed. Apteryx votes no to evolution.
Lepisosteus: Garfish; Lanthanotus boorneenish: A family of lizards of moderate size, and Didelphis: Opossums are all represented in the fossil record 70 million years ago. They have not changed. Gar, lizards, possums and all vote no to evolution.
Cheroptera: Bats. Again, we see creatures make a sudden appearancein the form we know them today. The oldest known bat, 50 million years.is indistinguishable from modern bats. We have a continuous fossil record of these animals since the beginning of the Eocene period. No sign of change and their ancestors are unknown. Bats vote no to evolution.
Insects: Ants, mites and aphids have been captured a yellow ooze together in 35 million years. Their appearances have not changed. Insofar as evolution goes, all three insects have stalled since. Where are the effects of mutations and natural selection? For 35 million years these forces have somehow bypassed the ants, mites and aphids. instead of a gradual change, there are three compelling examples of long-term stability. Ants, aphids, mites and all vote no to evolution.
Tupaia: Treeshrews; ferox Crytoprocta: Mongoose, and Dicerorhinus sumatrensis: Rhinoceros all fossil records of 30 million years. No significant changes occurred. All three did not vote for evolution.
Tipirus: Tapirs look the same as their 25 million year old ancestors. Also vote no to evolution.
Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/science-articles/fossils-vote-on-evolution-169225.html
How convenient a lot of these organisms didn't evolve over 100+ million years. "They don't need to evolve" = a cheap cop-out that only dogmatic evolutionists would buy.
Here is an interesting video on amber fossils. Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6rvCR5TmkA
|
For the record macro evolution is BS. All evolution consists of changes in heritable traits (genetic information) within a population of individuals. These genetic changes will over time alter populations such that they become incompatible (infertile) with other populations. Phenotypic changes, the way things look, does not always change. Appearances and body forms that have survival advantage tend to be around an exceptionally long time. Other phenotypes, such as those that will help you get a mate are also strongly selected for. The rate of change in a population is governed by several things, the manner of reproduction (asexual, sexual, male/female preferences, and so on), the lifespan of individuals in the population, and exposure to mutagens along with the species genetic repair mechanisms. A fossil or a species is simply a snapshot of a population in time, they are constantly evolving.
While mutation is random, selection is not. Sharks are incredibly adept animals and have many features that have endured for a long time for example, this does not mean that they do not evolve, they do change (developing a very interesting adaptation to the increasing salinity of the oceans for example). Your other examples are all, well, just silly straw man arguments that don't hold up on close examination. Any resemblance of a 50 million year old fossil to a modern species is likely partial skeletal similarity (there are not a lot of complete 50 million year old skeletons) and artist renderings using modern examples to flesh out the massive amount of information we don't know about those species. There are 1240 or so bat species today for example, which points to the exact opposite of your claim, they have evolved and radiated into a magnificent array of populations that have common ancestry and some similar inherited traits.
I am sure you will take issue with me not addressing every single one of your straw men, but believe it or not time is limited. If you spent some time checking your arguments, I think you would find them all to be fallacious since they are based largely on the eronious arguments of macro evolution. The encyclopedia of life ( http://eol.org/) is a great starting place where you can see a tremendous number of different species and thier common ancestors, plus lots of fun nifty stuff about them. EOL tends to deal with current species but there are great credible paelentology sites out there too.
|
I agree Macroevolution is BS. But other evolution proponents on this forum say otherwise.
Phenotypic changes? You mean phenotype? The way things looks does not always change? What?
So get me this straight. You actually believe that organisms supposedly 100+ million years old, and some that are supposedly 400+ million years old, can remain the same physically, but humans supposedly evolved from an ape ancestor in just 7 million years? Really? If you want to believe that story.
There are many amber fossils, supposedly millions and millions of years old, and they look exactly identical like their modern counterparts. Somehow they just said no to evolution.
Evolutionists are shocked to see it. It was not expected. It goes against their evolution story pressupposition. Hence the following quote:
“Many leading evolutionary theorists ... have been persuaded by punctuated equilibrium that the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem.”Gould, S.J. and Eldredge, N., 1993. Punctuated equilibrium comes of age, Nature, 366:223–224.
To say "well, some organisms just don't evolve even after 400+ million years" is a cheap cop-out. Seriously, it makes me laugh to think people think of evolution as scientific.
Prove that bats evolved. The following scientistswill take issue with your claim:
“Like the bats, the whales (using this term in a general and inclusive sense) appear suddenly in early Tertiary times, fully adapted by profound modifications.”
Colbert. E. H., M. Morales, and E. C. Minkoff. 2001. Evolution of the vertebrates: A history of the backboned animals through time, 5thed., New York: Wiley-Liss, Inc. p. 392
