Scientists have again embarrassed themselves . . . this time in that fanciful Science Magazine. While creationists (including many of the GOP presidential contenders) have shown that the Earth is only 6000 years old, scientists insist that they have found Australopithecus sediba fossils with the skull, pelvis, hands and feet of the ancient hominin. The fossils with both ape and human characteristics were unearthed three years ago in South Africa.
Palaeoanthropologists are unsure of how to fit A. sediba into the evolutionary chain and some believe it may have evolved into H. erectus. Of course, this depends on a belief in evolution which, with the exception of John Huntsman, is now rejected among our candidates for president on the GOP side. The picture above is a depiction of Huntsman’s standing in polls with GOP voters.
What is interesting is that the article below discusses how the 9-year-old son of one of the scientists discovered the first A. sediba fossil in August 2008 while the two were exploring a collapsed cave system. How cool is that. I am just waiting to see his college application review: “applicants worked as assistant manager at McDonald’s and may have discovered missing evolutionary link for homo erectus.”
Such findings (and such superstitious practices like carbon dating) have been dismissed by creationists in light of passages from in the Bible. This young man may want to skip the application to Bob Jones University or any Texas school offering the graduate degree in “creationist science.”
Source: Scientific American
“What we do not see is anything eventually turning into something else, as evolutionism would have you believe happens over billions of years. We simply do not see evidence of such things happening.”
*******************
Tell that to the yellow-bellied three-toed skink which is evolving from oviparious reproduction to live birth.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/09/100901-science-animals-evolution-australia-lizard-skink-live-birth-eggs/
Woah! Yes it is disputed. Every day. Mainly because of the lack of evidence. It can’t be observed. Even Darwin noted that the lack of transitional fossils was one of the biggest problems for evolution. We still haven’t found anything that remotely resembles a ‘transitiona fossil’.
***********************
No it’s not. We’ve found lots of transitional fossils byt he way:
@Slartibartfast: Also easy. Just ask him. If he says “no,” it’s falsified.
And we of small mind have simply wondered why we can’t use our baby picture for our driver’s license photo.
It couldn’t possibly be because we’ve changed incrementally over time. Where’s the proof in that twiddle?
Martin,
And how do you falsify that hypothesis?
@Slartibartfast: Oh, that one is too easy. I can use the same answer for both — “God put it there.”
Fruit Flies Like Pears,
If you can give me a falsifiable hypothesis that explains the following two pieces of data better than evolution, then I’ll admit evolution MIGHT be wrong, otherwise I will ridicule you for the brainless religious zealot with zero understanding of science I believe you to be.
Question #1:
Why does human chromosome #2 have two centromeres and a third telomere in the center?
Question #2:
Why was Tiktaalik found in strata 375 million years old?
Someone who can’t meet this challenge who is nonetheless compelled to question the veracity of evolution can only be a completely illiterate boob who didn’t have the good sense that evolution gave a bacteria.
Gene, maybe FFLP got his science knowledge from comic books. The arguments sound like it. Devoid of both logic and knowledge of how science works. The late Dr. Stephen Jay Gould took great delight in messing with folks like in debates. Watching Gould in action was kind of like watching a cat playing with a hapless mouse before eating it.
“Woah! Yes it is disputed. Every day. Mainly because of the lack of evidence. It can’t be observed.”
Whoa! Yes evolution can be observed. It’s observed every day in labs around the world and in the wild. Even in your own species, Fruit Fly. Evolution is mainly disputed by people who don’t understand either evidence or science. Like Fruit Flies.
@mespo727272
“Isn’t that exactly what they are: products of man-made evolution. In this case, the cars exhibit traits that best suited them for survival – i.e. sales. As new models came on line they kept the most sucessful features like automatic transmissions and added some new desireable traits lilke air conditioning which led to more sales in the environment where that trait was most useful such as the American South and Southwest. While the difference might be that human evolution occurs naturally and our motor vehicles evolve by are own hands, the principle remains the same. Adaption can occur naturally or through intelligent design — our intelligent design, that is, of course.
Thank you for a wonderful example of evolution and survival of the fittest.”
The problem with the analogy involving cars is, they had a designer. Evolution allegedly goes on, undirectd, unpurposed, unguided, over billions and billions of years. Without any guiding hand. A car, on the other hand, was designed. It had several designers. It was assembled by workers. From the very beginning, it had a purpose and plan. That’s something contrary to the foolish belief of evolutionism.
For an accurate model of evolutionism, the design of the car doesn’t exist. That’s the end result. Each part of the car, every nut and bolt, every wire, etc… had to have ‘evolved’ previously. Then by who-knows-how, all the parts had to be in the same place at the same time and they had to be together somehow, at the right place, in order to function. The fuel had to have evolved, and made its way into the tank, somehow. The key had to fit, somehow, and was able to start the car, somehow.
What a friggin’ mess. There’s a lot of ‘somehows’ in there, but yet we are to believe it’s just true. No questions asked. It just happened. That’s all. And we have this alleged pile of evidence to back such a notion up.
Riiiight. I was born at night, but not last night.
Human Ape:
“a belief in evolution”
“I’m wondering, where did you get the idea that a basic scientific fact like evolution, which is supported by tons of extremely powerful evidence from molecular biology and other branches of science, is a belief?”
Appeal to numbers logical fallacy. Just because a lot of people believe something to be true, that doesn’t mean it is.
Give me one extremely powerful example of all this alleged evidence there is to support evolutionism??? Give me one “FACT” of evolutionism?
Bacteria coming up with more resistance isn’t evidence. The bacteria is still bacteria. Where evolutionism leaves the road and ventures off into a belief system is when we’re told to believe that a man is a distant relative of a field mouse. Or pineapples and porcupines share a common ancestor. That isn’t anything factual. That is a BELIEF. It’s a just-so story and we are told that it is true, without evidence. Some BELIEVE it to be true.
“Do you seriously think facts are beliefs?
Or are you an evolution denier?
Either way there’s something wrong here.”
I’m not sure who you were talking to, but I deny evolutionism. It’s all BS – psuedoscience. The evolution nutjobs have to keep perpetuating this foolish idea of evolutionism while knowing deep down there isn’t any evidence, and at the same time, shun people from discussing all the different problems with evolutionism. Therefore, evolutionism has become this politically protected sacred cow and no one dares to open up the hood and see what makes it tick. To do so will invoke all sorts of ad hominem personal attacks.
Yes there is something wrong. How can so many supposedly intelligent people believe this garbage and even dare call it science, and it has been allowed to grow into this monstrosity that has basically thrown a wrench in the works of modern science. Shameful.
nose is quite brown….or in your case it could be knows….
Fruit Flies Like Pears
You said this on….http://jonathanturley.org/2011/09/10/erskine-college-professor-fired-for-supporting-science/#comment-266408
Science isn’t at odds with God. God created science. Science isn’t some kind of entity that has powers. Science is simply knowledge gained by observation. Testable, provable, measurable, weighable, countable, etc… If this nutjob was trying to peddle something other than plain old science, then that’s where the problem is. I’m curious as to what he was trying to teach. If he’s an atheist, like someone said, then there’s the problem. Atheism is devoid of logic and common sense.
Here you said this:
We don’t have any evidence of things evolving from something else. All this exists as simply ‘just-so’ stories. We are told it has happened but aren’t given any cold hard evidence that leads to a conclusion without a shadow of a doubt. The whole thing about evolution is in doubt, but it is a politically protected sacred cow and we’re not allowed to question it. Just blindly accept it.
********************
Do you see any conflicts?
Science isn’t at odds with God. God created science.
Say what
Just blindly accept it.
I think you are a picker and chooser….and you say what fits at the moment….Are you a legislative assistant or in politics somehow….or a concierge someplace? It appears your knows is quite brown….is that a fleck of charmin I note?
Berliner:
“Evolution isn’t disputed, because unlike the history of life on earth (which already happened, and we can only reconstruct it by interpreting the signs it has left) it can be observed:”
Woah! Yes it is disputed. Every day. Mainly because of the lack of evidence. It can’t be observed. Even Darwin noted that the lack of transitional fossils was one of the biggest problems for evolution. We still haven’t found anything that remotely resembles a ‘transitiona fossil’.
Even though evolution is disputed, evolutionists ‘own the microphone’ so you aren’t going to hear a lot about the problems dealing with evolution. Anyone who dares question the stupid theory are met with all sorts of ad hominem personal attacks, fired, ran out of town, etc… It is really ridiculous.
“Take for example the antibiotic resistance bacteria develop every time a new antibiotic is used wildly. New antibiotics put selection pressure on bacteria and they adapt to survive these pressures: evolution.”
What does the bacteria ‘evolve’ into??? Let me guess. More bacteria? Sorry but that doesn’t quite do anything for evolution. What we observe is things coming from their own kind. Bacteria makes more bacteria. Cows make more cows. Dogs make more dogs. What we do not see is anything eventually turning into something else, as evolutionism would have you believe happens over billions of years. We simply do not see evidence of such things happening. Because bacteria can come up with new resistance, that just shows how awsome the ‘programming’ is for the bacteria in the first place.
“Or the breeds of domestic animals and plants created by selective pressure by man in recorded history: for example a guy named Max von Stephanitz started to breed dogs in January 15,1898 with a very specific goal in mind — the result was the German Shepherd. He put selection pressure on a population of dogs, and the phenotype of that population was drastically changed due to that pressure: evolution.”
Again, dogs give birth to other dogs. Different breeds doesn’t violate science. It’s still a dog. Remember, evolution doesn’t have someone directing it. We are told to believe it just happens, on its own, over billions of years. You are using an example where someone deliberatley controlled the breeding of dogs. That would more fit the scenario of a Designer at work, or some external force at work, rather than the breeds of dogs eventually coming up with something else at random. That’s an example that opposes evolutionism.
“To say that the phenotype of populations is static and hasn’t changed since some arbitrary point in time (say the fifth and sixth day of creation) is just demonstratively false. The mechanism we call “evolution” does undoubtedly exist.”
It does not exist. There isn’t any evidence of evolutionism. Creation of God gives us all the different varieties of living things, breeds, etc… and the programming to carry on over thousands and thousands of years. To think that we are a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy and we are still able to function and have miraculous things going on at the cellular level in our bodies is quite an accomplishment. Something evolutionism could never do. It’s been said that the human body alone is a ‘statistical monstrosity’ for evolution. There simply hasn’t been enough time for ANYTHING to have ‘evolved’.
“Which species evolved from which (and when, and where, and why) are questions of paleontology, of life’s history.
Depending on the available evidence these questions may be debated, new evidence may change that debate, and some historical facts may be unprovable (e.g. the behavior of long extinct species), but none of that puts the underlying mechanism of evolution in doubt, because they hold true in other, falsifiable, areas of the life sciences.”
We don’t have any evidence of things evolving from something else. All this exists as simply ‘just-so’ stories. We are told it has happened but aren’t given any cold hard evidence that leads to a conclusion without a shadow of a doubt. The whole thing about evolution is in doubt, but it is a politically protected sacred cow and we’re not allowed to question it. Just blindly accept it.
But I don’t.
Mespo,
30 or 40 years would be more than enough generations to speciate fruit flies, but humans would take a little longer to “cook”…
AN,
I said that as part of my sense of humor…Others may consider it misogyny..
I heard one comedienne tell jokes about Joan Rivers….I think she can also be attributed this one as well…
Joan Rivers was not very good at following directions….then someone told her wet floor…..and she did….
No, no “lifts”… yet…but I’ve learned to “never say never”…
AN,
I take it you are not a Joan Riivers look alike…She had so many face lifts she eventually….
I thought it had a little goatee — not that I have one…. yet…. 8)
Thanks for trying, AY. One would think that the “victory” emoticon might work, but… what I want is a little, lame “smiley face” like the one above, holding up it’s little arm and giving us the “V” sign…
Given my general disdain for “smiley faces”, I hate to use them at all, but what’s a person to do online… 😎