Scientists Call Fish Fossil the 'Missing Link'

[Dubb]

anything that causes a stuffy scientist to say "it's like, holy cow." MUST be a big deal.

argue all you want, this is interesting.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Falcon39

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Smartazz

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Time to dig through the bible to find obscure passage that could explain this

Are you serious? Evolution is not a theory, we just have to say it is, we have evidence of evolution, why can't people accept evolution and be religous at the same time, I know some people are, but there are still others who can't, it's odd.

I'm still waiting for evidence....but then again I'm a cynic.

Do you also realize that the therory of evolution has basically contorted itself, because of a lack of evidence, into something similar to creationism......a disprovable postulate. No longer did species gradually evolve, now there were a series of geographically specific mutations cause, you know, that way they'd be nigh impossible to uncover.

Species go extinct all the time.....including plenty of species we've never documented....especially species before man began documenting and keeping track. I mean, hell, we're trying desperately to save numerous species from instinction.....why haven't we seen any benefitial mutations to save any of them? 2,000 years should be more than enough time for one of the millions of spceies on earth to have radically changed, but, instead, the number of species in existence is declining.

Evolution makes sense. There's a logic to it. I think it's faulty logic, but there's logic nonetheless and I'm certainly not going to call anybody an idiot for believing in it. It's a work in progress, what can you expect. To me, however, creationism is more logical.

Go on and call me an uneducated fundamentalist sheep. You're not going to hurt my feelings and you're not going to help your cause, but you are going to make yourself feel better about having, at some point in acquiring your beliefs, agreed to just take somebody's word for it.

2,000 years is no where near enough time to expect to see significant amounts of macro evolution. Despite that we have witnessed some evolution in our time studying evolution. You must not underestimate the vast amounts of time that evolution has been happening for. Never underestimate just how long 2.5 billion years is - that is a ridiculously long period of time.

I agree. But we also have a ridiculous number of species on this planet and they don't all evolve at once. The fossill record would be jam acked with transitional species if this had been going on for several billion years yet scientists are still trying to find one. That's why the new evolution doesn't rely on this theory.

If you are genuinely interested in debating evolution and creationism come visit http://www.evcforum.net where you will find there are people a hell of a lot more intelligent than me who can guide you through exactly how evolution works and show you the staggeringly large amount of evidence there really is.

Sure, I'll check it out. But, my reply here wasn't out of interest in CvE, but, rather, in response to a comment I thought deserved a quick riposte.

 

[ElFenix]

i'd like to point out that, until about 500 years ago, it seemed perfectly logical that god acted on the universe all the time because, otherwise, how else could the sun, moon, and stars move across the sky?

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Listen, as a Christian I accept some type of evolution. God started the world, and put it on it's course. Genesis says that. No one has been able to prove or disprove that.


<<<Silently waits for the "Big Bang" morons to come out.

 

[FeuerFrei]

Evolution is a hypothesis.
To prove your hypothesis you set up an experiment.
If you can repeatedly observe evolution through your experiment, then you have discovered a natural law.
If you can't observe or repeat evolution then it remains a hypothesis.

Discovery of a new species does not constitute evidence of evolution.

 

[thehstrybean]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Listen, as a Christian I accept some type of evolution. God started the world, and put it on it's course. Genesis says that. No one has been able to prove or disprove that.


<<<Silently waits for the "Big Bang" morons to come out.

Hey, that's cool. A belief is yours and yours alone. You shape it. Good for you. At least your not bashing me because I don't believe in evolution.


I believe in the big bang. A big bang started by God...

 

[iamaelephant]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I agree. But we also have a ridiculous number of species on this planet and they don't all evolve at once. The fossill record would be jam acked with transitional species if this had been going on for several billion years yet scientists are still trying to find one. That's why the new evolution doesn't rely on this theory.

To be fair, fossilisation requires very specific parameters that are met very rarely - the odds of something being fossilised are extremely slim so only a very tiny amount of the history of the Earth can be found in the fossil record. Still we have managed to turn up some pretty eyebrow-raising stuff, including what was mentioned in this article.

 

[iamaelephant]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Listen, as a Christian I accept some type of evolution. God started the world, and put it on it's course. Genesis says that. No one has been able to prove or disprove that.


<<<Silently waits for the "Big Bang" morons to come out.

It is your right to disbelieve Big Bang but calling some of the smartest, most well educated and renouned men on the planet "morons" is going to far. Big bang isn't just some idiotic theory put in place by some pimply teen in his basement - it is an extremely robust theory that explains a hell of a lot about the universe in it's current state. I'm not going to try to convert you to believe in it, but I think calling people like Carl Sagan, Brian Greene, Roger Penrose, Edwin Hubble and even Albert Einstein "morons" says more about you than it does about them.

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: thehstrybean

Originally posted by: Kyteland

Originally posted by: Falcon39
Excellent stuff. Not that it will ever shut the Evos up, but it gives us yet more ammo. As if we needed it.

Unfortunately, you will never have enough ammo to win that war....

That's so true. How many "missing links" has evolution had? Too many, there's no way, IMHO, that evolution can be true...

Evolution is one heck of a lot more likely to be true than Creation is.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Greyd

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

Originally posted by: thehstrybean

Originally posted by: Kyteland

Originally posted by: Falcon39
Excellent stuff. Not that it will ever shut the Evos up, but it gives us yet more ammo. As if we needed it.

Unfortunately, you will never have enough ammo to win that war....

That's so true. How many "missing links" has evolution had? Too many, there's no way, IMHO, that evolution can be true...

The odds of a creature being fossilized are very very low, the odds that that fossil will survive are very very low, and the odds that we will find it are very very low.

Your faith is indeed great.

Wow, I've never seen so many people misinterpreting posts in a row. Maybe instead of digging up fossils to find the missing link between homo sapiens sapiens and dumb apes, they should just stop by ATOT

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
#2. That moth example was disproven. Think about it. Once soot covers everything, white moths are easier to spot and be preyed upon. Black moths would then increase in numbers as the white moths were killed off. That's, in fact, what happened. The moths were different types. Look it up.........you owe it to yourself when your belief system is based on it.

Yes, and there's a word for that phenomenon. NATURAL SELECTION.

 

[blahblah99]

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Therein lies the problem.

 

[Dominionion]

We were camping on the beach one time and as I was sleeping, one of those things crawled into the sleeping bag with me. When I woke up and noticed it, it looked me square in the eyes and said "Shame about Farscape being cancelled". I scream! I jumped out of the sleeping bag and started running for the car. Then I realize I didn't have the keys. I looked back toward the sleeping bag and the fish was holding my keys, waving them at me! Next he... Oh wait... Nevermind... I was drunk.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Time to dig through the bible to find obscure passage that could explain this

.haha. And ya know somebody will.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Falcon39

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Listen, as a Christian I accept some type of evolution. God started the world, and put it on it's course. Genesis says that. No one has been able to prove or disprove that.


<<<Silently waits for the "Big Bang" morons to come out.

It is your right to disbelieve Big Bang but calling some of the smartest, most well educated and renouned men on the planet "morons" is going to far. Big bang isn't just some idiotic theory put in place by some pimply teen in his basement - it is an extremely robust theory that explains a hell of a lot about the universe in it's current state. I'm not going to try to convert you to believe in it, but I think calling people like Carl Sagan, Brian Greene, Roger Penrose, Edwin Hubble and even Albert Einstein "morons" says more about you than it does about them.

No, not really. I am interested in knowing why God could not have set that Big Bang in motion. Why that could not be creationism in and of itself? All the so called intelligent people you listed would say that can't be. Yet they can't say what is either.

Is that intellegence on their part, or an avid ignorance of something that they dont' get because they can't "prove" it? I don't know the answer to that question. Sounds like you think you have it figured out better than I do.

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Falcon39

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Listen, as a Christian I accept some type of evolution. God started the world, and put it on it's course. Genesis says that. No one has been able to prove or disprove that.


<<<Silently waits for the "Big Bang" morons to come out.

It is your right to disbelieve Big Bang but calling some of the smartest, most well educated and renouned men on the planet "morons" is going to far. Big bang isn't just some idiotic theory put in place by some pimply teen in his basement - it is an extremely robust theory that explains a hell of a lot about the universe in it's current state. I'm not going to try to convert you to believe in it, but I think calling people like Carl Sagan, Brian Greene, Roger Penrose, Edwin Hubble and even Albert Einstein "morons" says more about you than it does about them.

No, not really. I am interested in knowing why God could not have set that Big Bang in motion. Why that could not be creationism in and of itself? All the so called intelligent people you listed would say that can't be. Yet they can't say what is either.

Is that intellegence on their part, or an avid ignorance of something that they dont' get because they can't "prove" it? I don't know the answer to that question. Sounds like you think you have it figured out better than I do.

Instead of telling you why God could not have created the big bang and induced creationism, why don't you tell me why a big block of cheddar cheese couldn't have created the universe. When you can answer that, you have answered your own question.

 

[ScottyB]

What I don't understand is why these discoveries never make it in the "liberal media" outlets that we keep hearing about. Instead, we get a small article written in the science section of the on-line version of the NY Times weeks, months, years after the discovery (how long did it take exactly to construct that replica?). Alternatively, we are saturated with news of baseball players' steroid use, or the latest pop-cultural icon's leaked sex tape, or some politician lying out his ass to garner more votes. No wonder Americans are falling behind the rest of the industrial world in so many areas.

 

[Schadenfroh]

They look tasty.

 

[iamaelephant]

Originally posted by: dnuggett
No, not really. I am interested in knowing why God could not have set that Big Bang in motion. Why that could not be creationism in and of itself? All the so called intelligent people you listed would say that can't be. Yet they can't say what is either.

Is that intellegence on their part, or an avid ignorance of something that they dont' get because they can't "prove" it? I don't know the answer to that question. Sounds like you think you have it figured out better than I do.

Einstein was a christian, so are a great many cosmologists. None of them have ever said that God didn't do it - God is completely irrelevent in science. God is impossible to disprove or test. Science deals with how nature works, regardless of whether or not there is a God behind it.

 

[Smartazz]

Evolution does make sense and so does creationism, neither has a huge ammount of proof, I'm beginning to see both sides of this issue now.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: FeuerFrei
Evolution is a hypothesis.
To prove your hypothesis you set up an experiment.
If you can repeatedly observe evolution through your experiment, then you have discovered a natural law.
If you can't observe or repeat evolution then it remains a hypothesis.

Discovery of a new species does not constitute evidence of evolution.

Evolution is NOT a hypothesis. Evolution is a theory. The idea that evolution isn't observable or that there is not proof is a MYTH perpetuated by the media. Joe Sixpack sees a creationist and an "evolutionist" arguing on TV and assumes that it's a tossup. Maybe his preacher indoctrinates him too. The entire scientific community, and even the Vatican, agree that evolution is real, yet it's presented as a real debate.

There is a huge mountain of genetic, biogeographic, and paleontological evidence that supports evolution. Meanwhile, there is not a shred of evidence that disproves evolution.

Here's one example of evidence that you almost never hear about... mitochondrial DNA can reveal how long ago speces branched from one another. We are closer to gorillas than cats. Cats are closer to dogs than they are to crocodiles. Crocodiles and cats are closer to us than they are to jellyfish.
If species didn't branch off and speciate, there would be no such relationships. All species' mitochondrial DNA would be equally similar to one another.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Falcon39

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Listen, as a Christian I accept some type of evolution. God started the world, and put it on it's course. Genesis says that. No one has been able to prove or disprove that.


<<<Silently waits for the "Big Bang" morons to come out.

It is your right to disbelieve Big Bang but calling some of the smartest, most well educated and renouned men on the planet "morons" is going to far. Big bang isn't just some idiotic theory put in place by some pimply teen in his basement - it is an extremely robust theory that explains a hell of a lot about the universe in it's current state. I'm not going to try to convert you to believe in it, but I think calling people like Carl Sagan, Brian Greene, Roger Penrose, Edwin Hubble and even Albert Einstein "morons" says more about you than it does about them.

No, not really. I am interested in knowing why God could not have set that Big Bang in motion. Why that could not be creationism in and of itself? All the so called intelligent people you listed would say that can't be. Yet they can't say what is either.

Is that intellegence on their part, or an avid ignorance of something that they dont' get because they can't "prove" it? I don't know the answer to that question. Sounds like you think you have it figured out better than I do.

Instead of telling you why God could not have created the big bang and induced creationism, why don't you tell me why a big block of cheddar cheese couldn't have created the universe. When you can answer that, you have answered your own question.

Wow. Just wow. That's the best you have? You reduce it to that? :laugh: Actually I expected that, that type of comment usually happens at least once or twice in a conversation like this.


If we go that route let's just call that Big Bang a giant fart from another dimension eh? Is that fair to say?

The simplest way to defeat your argument is to use science to prove that a block of cheddar cheese did not create the universe. What way do you have to defeat mine?

 

[dnuggett]

DP

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Falcon39

Originally posted by: dnuggett
No, not really. I am interested in knowing why God could not have set that Big Bang in motion. Why that could not be creationism in and of itself? All the so called intelligent people you listed would say that can't be. Yet they can't say what is either.

Is that intellegence on their part, or an avid ignorance of something that they dont' get because they can't "prove" it? I don't know the answer to that question. Sounds like you think you have it figured out better than I do.

Einstein was a christian, so are a great many cosmologists. None of them have ever said that God didn't do it - God is completely irrelevent in science. God is impossible to disprove or test. Science deals with how nature works, regardless of whether or not there is a God behind it.

Last time I checked calling something irrelevant meant it was unrelated to the matter being considered. If God is unrelated to the Big Bang, he couldn't have caused it. That is indeed saying God didn't do it.

 

[Chadder007]

Well this fish here can walk on land too and has a basic lung.....and its alive today. So how does this prove anything?
http://www.nbc4.com/News/1534300/detail.html

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Falcon39

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
Listen, as a Christian I can't accept evolution. God created the world, universe, and everything in it. Some Christians will say that God created one species and allowed it to evolve. I don't see Genesis as saying anything like this. That's just my belief.

Listen, as a Christian I accept some type of evolution. God started the world, and put it on it's course. Genesis says that. No one has been able to prove or disprove that.


<<<Silently waits for the "Big Bang" morons to come out.

It is your right to disbelieve Big Bang but calling some of the smartest, most well educated and renouned men on the planet "morons" is going to far. Big bang isn't just some idiotic theory put in place by some pimply teen in his basement - it is an extremely robust theory that explains a hell of a lot about the universe in it's current state. I'm not going to try to convert you to believe in it, but I think calling people like Carl Sagan, Brian Greene, Roger Penrose, Edwin Hubble and even Albert Einstein "morons" says more about you than it does about them.

No, not really. I am interested in knowing why God could not have set that Big Bang in motion. Why that could not be creationism in and of itself? All the so called intelligent people you listed would say that can't be. Yet they can't say what is either.

Is that intellegence on their part, or an avid ignorance of something that they dont' get because they can't "prove" it? I don't know the answer to that question. Sounds like you think you have it figured out better than I do.

Instead of telling you why God could not have created the big bang and induced creationism, why don't you tell me why a big block of cheddar cheese couldn't have created the universe. When you can answer that, you have answered your own question.

Wow. Just wow. That's the best you have? You reduce it to that? :laugh: Actually I expected that, that type of comment usually happens at least once or twice in a conversation like this.


If we go that route let's just call that Big Bang a giant fart from another dimension eh? Is that fair to say?

As expected. You cannot seem to grasp the idea that the question I asked you was the exact one that you ask of us with cheese in place of god. That should not change the answer in any way.

Once again, you ask us to tell you why god could not have created the big bang. I then ask you to tell me why a block of cheese could not have created the big bang. The point of this is to show you that your question is rediculous.

You cannot walk up to a person and say "X created you, me, and the entire universe, prove me wrong" That is just rediculous.