Scientists Unveil Missing Link In Evolution

[redneck22]

The scientists wanted to preemptively beat the creationists to the press, because anytime a new fossil is found the creationist groups get in front of the mics and rant on about how this or that is just a hoax or lie or whatever, the scientific community probably has decided enough with this and decided to get to the finish line first this time

Why is that? Are they racing against their own shadow? It’s quite hilarious to watch them run. Didn’t the same thing happen with soft Dinosaur tissue. Anyway the new experimental tests are out and guess what… the creationist appear to be at the finish line without even runnig. Check it out here and here

 

[greg_b]

The evidence for evolution is real and right in front of your faces, you just don’t want to believe in it so you escape into this fantasy land where these evil things called scientists are out to kill you all. talkorigins.org/ this website shoots down every creationist myth out there. And need I remind you people that the fossil record alone by itself proves evolution, so if you deny the fossil evidence you are then accusing God of being a liar.

 

[Adonis33]

The evidence for evolution is real and right in front of your faces, you just don’t want to believe in it so you escape into this fantasy land where these evil things called scientists are out to kill you all. talkorigins.org/ this website shoots down every creationist myth out there. And need I remind you people that the fossil record alone by itself proves evolution, so if you deny the fossil evidence you are then accusing God of being a liar.

I am buy no means an expert in this subject. One thing that has struck me is your “If you don’t agree with me you’r an idiot” style argument. I have always found that insults are indicitave of a lack of an argument.

 

[ready]

First God made the animals with homo erectus and homo habilis being an animal among them. Then later God out of the dust or slime of the earth made a whole new creature, Adam - a human being endowed with supernatural and preternatural gifts. Out of Adam’s rib God created Eve. Why is it so hard to believe that God could have created Adam from dust, when the whole universe was created in the same way. And why is it so hard to believe that God put Adam to sleep and took out his rib and created a woman, when God can do anything?

 

[ready]

If God could create the cosmos out of absolutely nothing it demonstrates he could create Eve out of a rib of man.

 

[tm30]

The evidence for evolution is real and right in front of your faces, you just don’t want to believe in it so you escape into this fantasy land where these evil things called scientists are out to kill you all. talkorigins.org/ this website shoots down every creationist myth out there. And need I remind you people that the fossil record alone by itself proves evolution, so if you deny the fossil evidence you are then accusing God of being a liar.

Now you’re just being hyperbolic and silly.

 

[tm30]

It’s people like Buffalo and their denial of simple reality that causes other Catholics to leave the church and prevents others from joining because we look like a bunch of conspiracy crackpots

I don’t understand the reason for your tone. Are you being held hostage by scientists demanding that you convince Catholics of evolution, or else?

The evolution proponent doth protest too much, methinks.

 

[buffalo]

The evidence for evolution is real and right in front of your faces, you just don’t want to believe in it so you escape into this fantasy land where these evil things called scientists are out to kill you all. talkorigins.org/ this website shoots down every creationist myth out there. And need I remind you people that the fossil record alone by itself proves evolution, so if you deny the fossil evidence you are then accusing God of being a liar.

If one walks down the beach and sees a left footprint as far as you can see, what should we conclude from this? Is there a deceiver at work?

 

[oldcelt]

If one walks down the beach and sees a left footprint as far as you can see, what should we conclude from this? Is there a deceiver at work?

That, or someone who is training for the Olympic hopping team…sorry.

John

 

[debgab]

I’m not trained in the sciences, as you will soon learn from this post, but have a question for anyone who could explain. If the theory that man evolved from primates is studied, how is it that not all of them, (apes) evolved to humans? In other words, explain why it is, that we still have primates, and if the theory was true, that we did in fact evolve from primates, wouldn’t there be a creature somewhere in between human and primate? In some stage of the evolutionary process? Maybe half human and half ape? wouldn’t there be a caveman type of person around today?
Sincerely, Debbie

 

[buffalo]

That, or someone who is training for the Olympic hopping team…sorry.

John

That is one theory. Any others?

 

[dixieagle]

I’m not trained in the sciences, as you will soon learn from this post, but have a question for anyone who could explain. If the theory that man evolved from primates is studied, how is it that not all of them, (apes) evolved to humans? In other words, explain why it is, that we still have primates, and if the theory was true, that we did in fact evolve from primates, wouldn’t there be a creature somewhere in between human and primate? In some stage of the evolutionary process? Maybe half human and half ape? wouldn’t there be a caveman type of person around today?
Sincerely, Debbie

Simple answer: because evolution did not happen in a straight line, but rather in branches. Here is a link to a diagram that might be helpful:

encarta.msn.com/media_461530688/Evolution_of_Modern_Primates.html

None of this in any way opposes Catholic dogma, as faith and reason cannot contradict each other.

 

[dixieagle]

Why is that? Are they racing against their own shadow? It’s quite hilarious to watch them run. Didn’t the same thing happen with soft Dinosaur tissue. Anyway the new experimental tests are out and guess what… the creationist appear to be at the finish line without even runnig. Check it out here and here

Actually, what gets scientists really excited about the soft tissue is that it seems to confirm the dinosaur to bird evolutionary link: sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090430144528.htm

It also has scientists talking about the possibility that, in certain conditions (buried under enormous amounts of sandstone, etc.) soft tissue may, indeed, survive, and that it could be more common than thought, though still rare.

However, there is still some controversy surrounding the t. rex soft tissue discovery, as it may not be as originally thought:

sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080729234140.htm

 

[Wolseley]

I think he would prefer the words liberal and modernist.

As you can see by the aims he is dead wrong.

I see we have a Vatican II denier

Wow—you either go whole hog for The Spirit of Vatican II McNewchurch or you’re a sedevcantist, apparently. Similar to the stance that you either accept Darwinism whole hog or you’re a fool.

The evidence for evolution is real and right in front of your faces, you just don’t want to believe in it so you escape into this fantasy land where these evil things called scientists are out to kill you all. talkorigins.org/ this website shoots down every creationist myth out there. And need I remind you people that the fossil record alone by itself proves evolution, so if you deny the fossil evidence you are then accusing God of being a liar.

Now you’re just being hyperbolic and silly.

And vindictive and juvenile----don’t forget those. But I was young once and knew all the answers, too.

 

[TruthisBeauty7]

It seems to me the Catholics who actual promote evolution act more like atheists then Christians.

 

[TruthisBeauty7]

1.the philosophy of evolution is based upon assumptions that cannot be scientifically verified…whatever evidence can be assembled for evolution is both limited and circumstantial in nature." G.A. Kerkut, pro-evolution ([4

2.“In other words, while Osborn, Gregory, and their colleagues considered themselves to have written scientific analysis of human evolution, they had in fact been telling stories (fiction). Scientific stories to be sure, but stories nonetheless.” Misia Landau,

3.“The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone.” T.L. Moor, pro-evolution ([22], p.22

4.“We cannot disprove that it (the universe) was created in 4004 B.C…” George Simpson, pro-evolution

5.“Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists, not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logical coherent evidence, but because the only alternative – special creation – is clearly incredible.” D.M.S. Watson

6.“The incessant repetition of this unproved claim glossing lightly over the difficulties, and the assumption of an arrogant attitude toward those who are not easily swayed by fashions of science, are considered to afford scientific proof of the doctrine.” Richard Goldschmidt, geneticist.

1. I got a real chuckle from this qoute…those silly evolutionists haha '‘It was once thought that ...an organism was assumed to pass through the stages of its evolutionary history during its development as an embryo." "(This) has been thoroughly discredited by scientists today." ([4], p.354 4) What as thought to be gill slits’ is actually the formation of the middle ear canal, jaw, and parts of the head and neck. Haha…Wow…

Evolutionist John Durant ([11], p.312). "…the only reason why most people seem to believe in evolution is either because they want to believe in it or else because they have been cowed into accepting it out of fear of being called ignorant or reactionary or some such fearful name’’. So true…this is what ive been saying all along.

8.We Paleontologists have said that the history of life supports (the story of gradual adaptive change), all the while really knowing that it does not." Miles Eldredge, pro-evolution

9.“If there are so many problems with Darwinism and no satisfactory alternative within the framework of evolution, why not reevaluate the framework?” ([11], p.62 John Durant

1. “(the record of reckless speculation of human origins) is so astonishing that it is legitimate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all.” Solly Zuckerman (

 

[a_priori]

It seems to me the Catholics who actual promote evolution act more like atheists then Christians.

:bigyikes:

 

[dixieagle]

1.the philosophy of evolution is based upon assumptions that cannot be scientifically verified…whatever evidence can be assembled for evolution is both limited and circumstantial in nature." G.A. Kerkut, pro-evolution ([4

2.“In other words, while Osborn, Gregory, and their colleagues considered themselves to have written scientific analysis of human evolution, they had in fact been telling stories (fiction). Scientific stories to be sure, but stories nonetheless.” Misia Landau,

3.“The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone.” T.L. Moor, pro-evolution ([22], p.22

4.“We cannot disprove that it (the universe) was created in 4004 B.C…” George Simpson, pro-evolution

5.“Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists, not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logical coherent evidence, but because the only alternative – special creation – is clearly incredible.” D.M.S. Watson

6.“The incessant repetition of this unproved claim glossing lightly over the difficulties, and the assumption of an arrogant attitude toward those who are not easily swayed by fashions of science, are considered to afford scientific proof of the doctrine.” Richard Goldschmidt, geneticist.

1. I got a real chuckle from this qoute…those silly evolutionists haha '‘It was once thought that ...an organism was assumed to pass through the stages of its evolutionary history during its development as an embryo." "(This) has been thoroughly discredited by scientists today." ([4], p.354 4) What as thought to be gill slits’ is actually the formation of the middle ear canal, jaw, and parts of the head and neck. Haha…Wow…

Evolutionist John Durant ([11], p.312). "…the only reason why most people seem to believe in evolution is either because they want to believe in it or else because they have been cowed into accepting it out of fear of being called ignorant or reactionary or some such fearful name’’. So true…this is what ive been saying all along.

8.We Paleontologists have said that the history of life supports (the story of gradual adaptive change), all the while really knowing that it does not." Miles Eldredge, pro-evolution

9.“If there are so many problems with Darwinism and no satisfactory alternative within the framework of evolution, why not reevaluate the framework?” ([11], p.62 John Durant

1. “(the record of reckless speculation of human origins) is so astonishing that it is legitimate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all.” Solly Zuckerman (

Oh dear.

Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis (esp. paragraph 36)
papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12HUMAN.HTM

Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (Truth Cannot Contradict Truth)
newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02tc.htm

Even the conservative Pope Benedict XVI:
catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=9968

As a Catholic, you should at least be familiar with the fact that accepting evolution in no way contradicts the faith…as long as you accept that God is the ultimate Creator. How He did it should not be troubling to us; it is the WHY that concerns us.

And we do not “believe” in evolution, we believe in God. Truth cannot contradict Truth.

 

[dixieagle]

It seems to me the Catholics who actual promote evolution act more like atheists then Christians.

With all due charity, and I’m trying really hard here…what a perfectly ridiculous and insulting statement.

It seems to me that Catholics who stick their fingers in their ears and refuse to hear what the Church actually teaches about evolution act more like Protestant fundamentalists than Catholics.

You would likely have a problem with several Popes. (And truth really is beauty, btw…)

 

[ready]

1.the philosophy of evolution is based upon assumptions that cannot be scientifically verified…whatever evidence can be assembled for evolution is both limited and circumstantial in nature." G.A. Kerkut, pro-evolution ([4

2.“In other words, while Osborn, Gregory, and their colleagues considered themselves to have written scientific analysis of human evolution, they had in fact been telling stories (fiction). Scientific stories to be sure, but stories nonetheless.” Misia Landau,

3.“The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone.” T.L. Moor, pro-evolution ([22], p.22

4.“We cannot disprove that it (the universe) was created in 4004 B.C…” George Simpson, pro-evolution

5.“Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists, not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logical coherent evidence, but because the only alternative – special creation – is clearly incredible.” D.M.S. Watson

6.“The incessant repetition of this unproved claim glossing lightly over the difficulties, and the assumption of an arrogant attitude toward those who are not easily swayed by fashions of science, are considered to afford scientific proof of the doctrine.” Richard Goldschmidt, geneticist.

1. I got a real chuckle from this qoute…those silly evolutionists haha '‘It was once thought that ...an organism was assumed to pass through the stages of its evolutionary history during its development as an embryo." "(This) has been thoroughly discredited by scientists today." ([4], p.354 4) What as thought to be gill slits’ is actually the formation of the middle ear canal, jaw, and parts of the head and neck. Haha…Wow…

Evolutionist John Durant ([11], p.312). "…the only reason why most people seem to believe in evolution is either because they want to believe in it or else because they have been cowed into accepting it out of fear of being called ignorant or reactionary or some such fearful name’’. So true…this is what ive been saying all along.

8.We Paleontologists have said that the history of life supports (the story of gradual adaptive change), all the while really knowing that it does not." Miles Eldredge, pro-evolution

9.“If there are so many problems with Darwinism and no satisfactory alternative within the framework of evolution, why not reevaluate the framework?” ([11], p.62 John Durant

1. “(the record of reckless speculation of human origins) is so astonishing that it is legitimate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all.” Solly Zuckerman (

I took a course on evolution and found natural selection to occur in nature based on what Darwin observed and wrote about in his books The Voyage of the Beagle and The Origin of Species, but never found any evidence whatsovever (and I still don’t) that man shares common ancestry with apes. I have no problem at all in really believing the universe was created in 4004 B.C… I even call myself a creationist open to what the evolutionist have to say - but disbelieving, just the same. I will not fool others when it comes to what I know about God and science and I will not be fooled by others who don’t know God or who practice bad science. I liked your post.