Go to God as The Universe as an Organism
- Add a comment
- Go to A COURSE IN INTELLIGENT DESIGN NEEDS
actually it comes from TV
much of it -- History, Natonal Geographic, Discover channels -- PUblic Television.
then National Geographic magazine.
yes, there are discoveries of some fish in intermediate stages between water and land animals -- fossils found -- .
we have to remember that the record is iuncompletes, but that it is growing constantly.
there was a time when great gaps existed in the paleontololgical record -- but these are being filled in.
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 6, 2006 at 1:13 PM
| link to this | reply
xeno-x I am proud of you, you did your homework
I guess that I am not much of a paleantologist. I probably watch too much TV. I saw a thing on TV (I think it was the Discovery channel). It showed how evolution was taught in Germany in the 1930's. They had this textbook. It showed an old decrepit looking skull. This skull was presented as a "Jewish" skull. Then there was this bright, shiny, new looking skull, which was of course, an "Arien" skull. I guess that I am opinionated because I watch too much TV instead of doing real, hard research like you. I have never seen any evidence of a "missing link", between fish and amphibians, or between amphibians and reptiles, or reptiles and mammals, but that does not mean that there is no such thing. You must know all about these things. I am impressed.
posted by
redwood
on June 6, 2006 at 6:51 AM
| link to this | reply
well, redwood, I want to take a quote from that website
The Cambrian Explosion
The “Cambrian explosion” refers to the geologically sudden appearance of many new animal body plans about 530 million years ago. At this time, at least nineteen, and perhaps as many as thirty-five phyla of forty total (Meyer et al. 2003), made their first appearance on earth within a narrow five- to ten-million-year window of geologic time (Bowring et al. 1993, 1998a:1, 1998b:40; Kerr 1993; Monastersky 1993; Aris-Brosou & Yang 2003). Many new subphyla, between 32 and 48 of 56 total (Meyer et al. 2003), and classes of animals also arose at this time with representatives of these new higher taxa manifesting significant morphological innovations. The Cambrian explosion thus marked a major episode of morphogenesis in which many new and disparate organismal forms arose in a geologically brief period of time.
To say that the fauna of the Cambrian period appeared in a geologically sudden manner also implies the absence of clear transitional intermediate forms connecting Cambrian animals with simpler pre-Cambrian forms. And, indeed, in almost all cases, the Cambrian animals have no clear morphological antecedents in earlier Vendian or Precambrian fauna (Miklos 1993, Erwin et al. 1997:132, Steiner & Reitner 2001, Conway Morris 2003b:510, Valentine et al. 2003:519-520). Further, several recent discoveries and analyses suggest that these morphological gaps may not be merely an artifact of incomplete sampling of the fossil record (Foote 1997, Foote et al. 1999, Benton & Ayala 2003, Meyer et al. 2003), suggesting that the fossil record is at least approximately reliable (Conway Morris 2003b:505
This is old information. It assumes a "Cambrian Explosion", basically referring to decades old assumptions. Within the last several decades,however, pre-cambrian fossils have been discovered in more abundance than had been discovered previously.
I remember this argument from the 1960's -- from the original debater of evolution versus creationism -- Garner Ted Armstrong. Yes, indeed, he did present some compellilng arguments for Divine Creation. Compared to what most people knew and understood at the time, his line of reasoning built what at the time seemed quite a substantial case.
However, in the succeeding four decades, and yes, even at that time, there was enough evidence supporting evolution that the process was and is highly demonstrable.
heck, you could bring us some quotes from that website. Did you ever notice in a court of law (eventhe fake TV trials) that the supporters of a viewponit (guilty/not guilty -- lawsuits) will present evidence in favor of their viewpoint.
this is aq courtroom, in a manner fo speaking. we each have an opportunity to present evidence supporting our point of view so that those in a more or less neutral stance can make better decisions.
if you want to shirk your responsibility -- that is, say that something is true and fail to back it up -- fine.
I will go ahead and, as I have done above -- take a quote from the website and then demonstrate if I can where it lacks substantive evidence.
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 6, 2006 at 6:21 AM
| link to this | reply
The Design of Mind
Intelligent Design does indeed exist my dear friend. It is not that God writes in clay of human's birth, but rather in the laws of evolution. He has conceived us at some point, for evolution has only evolved so far in the past. The Origins are forever the unexplainable and men will always grasp at it, leaping fish to the tastiest worm the world has to offer, always dangling above them just a few inches out of reach. Little do the fishes know, that the best jumper gets a spear through the throat.
Be wary of your journey if you wish to find the divine. A warning from my own experience.
Greg'
posted by
Death_Smith
on June 5, 2006 at 6:38 PM
| link to this | reply
xeno-x - there is a think tank about 50 miles from where I live -
It is called Discovery Institute. It is all about intelligent design. It is in Seattle. Their website is http://www.discovery.org. You probably will not log into it , though, because you are an "expert". And you know what Harry Truman said about experts; "an expert is someone who is afraid that he may learn something new, because then he will not be an expert anymore".
posted by
redwood
on June 5, 2006 at 4:09 PM
| link to this | reply