Real Science Radio's List of Missing Fossils

[Jefferson]

RSR's List of Missing Fossils

This is the show from Friday April 25th, 2014

Summary:

Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams take a survey of one of the most reliable kinds of testimony available in the history of mankind, that is, the contrary to interest testimony of hostile witnesses. Leading evolutionists for 150 years have admitted that the transitional fossils that should exist, if Darwinism were true, are missing. Evolution fails the fossil test. The guys also have a fun time talking about quote mining and the virtually complete nature of the fossil record.

* Darwinism Fails the Fossil Test: Fun! Yes, Darwinism fails the Transitional Fossils test, as evidenced in the quote below and, as of April 25, 2014, on Real Science Radio at rsr.org/missing-transitional-fossils!

 

[6days]

In 1977 Stephen J.Gould wrote Evolution’s erratic pace in Natural History.He says "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches … in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the gradual transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and “fully formed.”’

 

[Jukia]

Another quote mine, gee, thanks 6days.

I'm still waiting for you to put a date on the Neanderthals.

 

[6days]

Another quote mine, gee, thanks 6days.
I'm still waiting for you to put a date on the Neanderthals.

Neandetals? Different thread but post flood.
If you think something is a quote mine, why not explain how the quote is not really what the person meant? Or better yet... why not list the very best example of a transitional fossil?

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

If you think something is a quote mine, why not explain how the quote is not really what the person meant?

Gould is talking about Punctuated Equilibrium .

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

Or better yet... why not list the very best example of a transitional fossil?

What would convince you that a fossil is transitional?

 

[6days]

Gould is talking about Punctuated Equilibrium.

Of course he was. That doesnt change the fact that he said "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches … in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the gradual transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and “fully formed.”’

What he says supports the Biblical creation model...Kinds of organisms appear suddenly...all at once...fully formed.

 

[Jukia]

Of course he was. That doesnt change the fact that he said "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches … in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the gradual transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and “fully formed.”’

What he says supports the Biblical creation model...Kinds of organisms appear suddenly...all at once...fully formed.

No, neither PE nor Gould supported the creation "model". Your ability to understand the written word and the manner in which thoughts and concepts are expressed is lacking. But then you are a fundamentalist who simply must believe a certain way. So sad.

 

[6days]

No, neither PE nor Gould supported the creation "model".

EXACTLY!!! Gould certainly did not support the Biblical model...yet he honestly admitted the evidence was lacking (transitional fossils) for the Darwinian model of s l o w s l o w change.

 

[Jukia]

EXACTLY!!! Gould certainly did not support the Biblical model...yet he honestly admitted the evidence was lacking (transitional fossils) for the Darwinian model of s l o w s l o w change.

Not exactly, but what would I expect you to say. My guess is that you never really read much of Gould. You are more comfortable parroting other quote miners Your lack of intellectual integrity is showing.

 

[aikido7]

...why not explain how the quote is not really what the person meant?

It's never what is said. It's how it is heard.

The various theological viewpoints, discussions and arguments on TOL bear this out.

There are 7 billion people in the world today, and each unique person has their own cultural framework of interpretation through which they view reality. Or, in this case, scripture.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

Of course he was.

Which is why your quote was taken out of context.

That doesnt change the fact that he said "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches … in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the gradual transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and “fully formed.”’

Aye, he was but in the context of Punctuated Equilibrium as it is contrasted with morphological gradualism. If you remove it from that context to imply that he was arguing something which he was not (and we know he was not; his beliefs were no secret) then you are being highly disingenuous.

What he says supports the Biblical creation model

No, it does not. The "gradual" that he is talking about is different from the "gradual" that YECs are talking about.

 

[CabinetMaker]

What would you (anybody on this thread) expect to see in a transitional fossil that would clearly identify it as a transition?

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

What would you (anybody on this thread) expect to see in a transitional fossil that would clearly identify it as a transition?

I asked that very question to no avail.

What would convince you that a fossil is transitional?

 

[6days]

Which is why your quote was taken out of context.

Sorry DS, but you are mistaken. The quote is accurate and in context. Gould observed (as did Darwin) that there isn't transitional fossils *from one kind of animal to another, as many evolutionists believe. *He said*

"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology"


Because Gould did not believe in the Creator, he proposed a model that is sort of a god of the gaps explanation.*


Although Gould did not believe in our Creator, what he observed and saidin that quote fits the Biblical creationist model. *The evidence is that the various different life forms appear suddenly and fully formed. .

 

[6days]

What would you (anybody on this thread) expect to see in a transitional fossil that would clearly identify it as a transition?

I asked for someone to give the best example of a transitional fossil and no one offered anything. Perhaps the reason is things evolutionists consider transitional are invariably shown by science to be false.

Take a look at what has happened with evolutionist beliefs about whale fossils...then take a look at the science and real evidence.

Take a look at some of the news clippings and evolutionists claims from a few years ago of the fossil 'Ida'...then take a look at the science and real evidence.

Take a look at many of the 'apeman' transitional fossils that evolutionists have touted...then take a look at the science and the real evidence. ETC

The problem with 'transitional' fossils is that there really aren't any. This is an over simplification of the process...but imagine taking 10 different dog skeletons. You arrange them in a pattern from poodle to wolf. Then you use that as 'proof' that poodles evolved to become wolves. Its psuedoscience trying to make the evidence fit your beliefs

 

[CabinetMaker]

I asked for someone to give the best example of a transitional fossil and no one offered anything. Perhaps the reason is things evolutionists consider transitional are invariably shown by science to be false.

Take a look at what has happened with evolutionist beliefs about whale fossils...then take a look at the science and real evidence.

Take a look at some of the news clippings and evolutionists claims from a few years ago of the fossil 'Ida'...then take a look at the science and real evidence.

Take a look at many of the 'apeman' transitional fossils that evolutionists have touted...then take a look at the science and the real evidence. ETC

The problem with 'transitional' fossils is that there really aren't any. This is an over simplification of the process...but imagine taking 10 different dog skeletons. You arrange them in a pattern from poodle to wolf. Then you use that as 'proof' that poodles evolved to become wolves. Its psuedoscience trying to make the evidence fit your beliefs

In other words, you have no idea what a transitional fossil would look like so you have no idea if one has ever been found.

I find your analogy with the dog skeletons to be disingenuous. You are neglecting a time factor that dictates how the skeletons should be arranged.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Seems like there are transitional fossils to be found. This seems to be a good definition of a Transitional Fossil.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

I observe that 6Days completely side-stepped the question.

 

[6days]

Seems like there are transitional fossils to be found. This seems to be a good definition of a Transitional Fossil.

Your link says archaeoptrryx is the best known transitional fossil. Are you willing to say that this is the very best example of a transitional fossil...and then defend your belief? If so...what is archaeopteryx transtionlng from and into?