ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Evolution Fossil Fish

Have you see about the find of the fossilised fish in Canada, which "proves" how some fish became land animals, and thus proves evolution, and so heralding the end of Christianity and its belief on a Creator?

Join Our Christian Dating and Take The Paganism Bible Quiz
 ---alan8869_of_UK on 4/8/06
     Helpful Blog Vote (8)

Post a New Blog



K--There's no dicotomy. The creation you refer to, I consider the 'design stage'. (And it was good.) The evolution I refer to I consider the 'production stage'.

And I have no problem with there being two stages of creation, because I know my body wasn't created until just a few decades ago.

But when I was designed, that's an entirely different question.
---Nancy on 12/23/07


Mikie: You seem to have a problem staying on point, don't you? I ask "where are all the Archies," and you reply "Hovind offers a shark." Maybe you can give us a Latin name for this sort of disjointed thinking (I don't think non sequitor is a strong enough term.) Can you see why we have trouble with your credibility?
---jerry6593 on 12/11/07


Kitso uses a subjectiv4e standerd to establish that other are engaged in 'cognitive dissonance' to maintain their conlusions. Velief is subjective, science is objective, science 101

BTW-There are plenty of transitional fossils.
---MikeM on 12/7/07


It's notable that not only Archaeopteryx but the fully beaked bird Confuciusornis is "dated" to 135 million years. This makes it 10 million years older than its alleged "feathered dinosaur" ancestors like Sinosauropteryx, even according to their own dating methods!
---Ktisophilos on 12/3/07


Nancy, it amazes me that people can have such cognitive dissonance to believe in both creation and evolution. Evolution not contradicts how the Creator SAID that He created.

And it invokes death, "the wages of sin" (Romans 6:23) and "the last enemy" (1 Cor. 15:26), and posits that it is what God called "very good" at the end of His creative acts (Gen. 1:31).
---Ktisophilos on 12/3/07




Jerry, Did not hovind offer a deformed shark as a dinosaur? So much for his credibility! (Maybe he can explain it when he gets out of prison.)

Anomolies can always be found, they do not show inherint weakness.
---MikeM on 11/29/07


Warwick: Interesting! One also must wonder why, if Archy is the missing link between reptiles and birds, he is not found universally across the earth, rather than only in one quarry in Germany.
---jerry6593 on 11/29/07


Unless I am mistaken everyday ordinary birds have been found in 'older'sedimentary layers than Archaeopteryx which thinking in evolutionary terms makes Archy redundant & therefore not a transitional fossil between reptiles & birds, as evolutionsits claim.
---Warwick on 11/27/07


Mike M: Wasn't that the same British Museum that brought us the Piltdown hoax? So much for their credibility!
---jerry6593 on 11/26/07


It never ceases to amaze me that people cannot believe in both evolution and the Creator.

It's really quite simple: the world was Created. Life was Created.

Evolution is the way Created Life is divvied up into different forms for different times.

(And to my mind, a changing Creation is infinitely more wonderful than a static one. Makes Earth a whole lot more interesting, you know.)
---Nancy on 11/25/07




1.Archaeopterix, in 1985, a group including astronomer Fred Hoyle and physicist Lee Spetner published a series of papers claiming that the feathers on the Berlin and London specimens of Archaeopteryx were forged. Their claims were repudiated by Alan J. Charig and others at the British Museum (Natural History).
---MikeM on 11/20/07


2.Their evidence for forgery was based on unfamiliarity with the processes of lithification, for example, they proposed that based on the difference in texture associated with the feathers, feather impressions were applied to a thin layer of cement. without realizing that feathers themselves would have caused a textural difference!
---MikeM on 11/20/07


3. They also expressed disbelief that slabs would split so smoothly, or that one half of a slab containing fossils would have good preservation, but not the counterslab. These, though, are common properties of Solnhofen fossils because the dead animals would fall onto hardened surfaces which would form a natural plane for the future slabs to split along, leaving the bulk of the fossil on one side and little on the other.
---MikeM on 11/20/07


4.They also misinterpreted the fossils, claiming that the tail was forged as one large feather when this is visibly not the case. They claimed that the other specimens of Archaeopteryx known at the time did not have feathers, which is untrue, ALL other specimens have obvious feathers. They attempted to show the presence of cement on the London specimen through X-ray spectrometry.
---MikeM on 11/20/07


5. Their suggestions have not been taken seriously by paleontologists, as their evidence was largely based on ignorance of geology, and they never discussed the other feather-bearing specimens, which have greatly increased in number since then. They have been reduced to sectarian rhetoric.

As a transitional species, they are very secure in that role.
---MikeM on 11/20/07


Mike: Archaeopterix was found to be a fake in 1985. The "feathers" were etched onto a reptile fossil. Only 2 decent specimens were ever found - both from the Dorr quarry in Solnhofen Germany. The likely culprit was Ernst Haeckel, the rabid evoltionist, socialist, teacher and artist who also brought us the fake embryo drawings (still found in textbooks) that seek to prove evolution through the silly notion that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. He also helped foster communism.
---jerry6593 on 11/20/07


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


Someone once said that INHERIT THE WIND is great drama but poor history.
---Jack on 5/10/06


I note ALL biologist, geologist, palentologist, archeologist, etc. who are not Biblical literalist fit under the banner of 'evolutionist.'-A vague 'coined' term for ANY non-literalist. Again, science and scripture need not conflict. I know inherit the wind, and what the social fallout of the Scopes Trial was.
---MikeM on 5/2/06


you never know who your talking to on these things now do you.
---Exzucuh on 4/30/06


Im sorry Mike what I was reading made me laugh so much I though it was.
---Exzucuh on 4/30/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


There is two kinds of authority exsousia and dunamis, dunamis is Gods authority and power,exsousia is the authority given by God alone Mark 3:15 jesus gave his disiples exsousia power to heal, cast out devils. the devil also operates in exsousia power. all authority is given by God. all power in heaven and earth was given to Jesus.
---Exzucuh on 4/30/06


Excuzuh ....Your name seems to give you the same qualities claimed by the Pope.
---alan8869_of_UK on 4/30/06


Excuzuh. is this the humor blog?
---MikeM on 4/29/06


linda the wheat and the tares are maturing, the wheat are beginning to see the fruit of the tares and expose them. they are soon to be plucked out. But first God will give them the oportunity to repent as we give them Gods word.
---Exzucuh on 4/29/06


Send a Free Missing You Ecard


exousia ex-oo-see'-ah
(in the sense of ability); privilege,
i.e. (subjectively) force, capacity,
competency, freedom, or (objectively)
mastery (concretely, magistrate,
superhuman, potentate, token of control),
delegated influence:--authority, jurisdictio
---Exzucuh on 4/29/06


Hey, Excuzuh....I'm a locust eater, a rearguard, and a frog gigger myself. Greetings brother!
---Linda6563 on 4/29/06


---Exzucuh ... I have long been intrigued by your name. Can you explain it?
Thanks
---alan8869_of_UK on 4/29/06


I am here to bring light to darkness, I am here to fulfill righteousness, I am here to defeat the anti-christ, the spirit of the world, I am a frog gigger, looking for the voice of the frog. rev 16:13 I am a watchman blowing the trumpet the enemy is upon us and time is short.
---Exzucuh on 4/29/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


Mike, you are beginning to rave like a typical rabid evolutionist. You skirt the science of the questions asked of you, and resort to name-calling and ridicule. This is the same technique your evolutionary forebears used to recover from their defeat at the scopes trial. The only "science" they brought to their case was a pig's tooth they called "Nebraska Man."
---jerry6593 on 4/29/06


---Exzucuh, then why are you here? (internet, is a product of science.)
---MikeM on 4/29/06


1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: faith without works is dead, people of faith believe the word. Dead people believe science.
---Exzucuh on 4/29/06


Mr. Jerry; You did not really read my post carefully. I look at 11,500 foot San Gorgonio outside my window and see the glacial carvings all over it. Its a pretty sight. If you lived here I suppose you would have the curtians closed all the time to protect an idiosyncratic paradigm based on completly on feelings. I am reminded of the person on the jury when shown all the evidence who waves his hands and says, "Don't bother me with all the facts, my mind is made up."
---MikeM on 4/29/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


The complete obsolescence of the old cosmic dust argument has been so completly debunked I am shocked people still bring it up! It's a no brainer. They use pre-1940 infromation from some psuedo-science creation scince writings. Let me help you with some relevent infromation; H. J. van Till, D.A. Young, and C. Menninga, Footprints on the dusty moon, In: Science Held Hostage, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois, ch. 4, pp.6782.
---MikeM on 4/29/06


Mike, why must everyone back up a theory except you?
Who wound up your watch 80,000 years ago to give you a time line. Explain why if I lay a log in my yard it rots in 3 years but yours laid for 6 million years and turned to stone. Explain why at the rate that comic dust falls on the Moon it is less that 2 inches deep if your theory is correct. Back it up.
---Elder on 4/28/06


Mikey my boy, don't you realize that your answer for the polystrate tree confirms the young age of the layers as laid down quickly at the flood. Congratulations for having abandoned your unsupportable long age layer theories.
---jerry6593 on 4/28/06


I have never subscribed to the idea that every single word of the bible is literally & physically accurate. I do not believe that God or my faith is in any way diminished if I believe that some parts are figurative.
BUT, when I hear that in the UK schools are being told that they MUST teach evolution as proven fact, and exclude other teaching (as I understand has happened in the US) I begin to wonder.
---alan8869_of_UK on 4/28/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


Elder; Back it up.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


You see mikie I mostly agree with you except for the time lines. The insects could not excape because they were trapped instantly. We always hear "Why couldn't God have done it over a million years?" Well, why couldn't He have done it instantly?
---Elder on 4/27/06


John T; mtDNA lineages date from before 80,000 years ago in Africa, This clearly suggests an early spead of modern humans within Africa, before anywhere else. Based upon point source mutations on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and the Human Y chromosome, the oldest changes in our genome took place in Africa 130,000 - 190,000 years ago. The methods for DNA sequencing and sequence analysis are best explained by the ongoing human genome project, unless one denies mtDNA exist.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


The list of human vestigial structures not absolute. It includes the appendix, and coccyx. The coccyx is a remnant of a lost tail, as confirmed by structural DNA blueprinting. Wisdom teeth and the plica semilunaris-the fold of tissue on the inside corner of the eye, is the vestigial remnant of the nictitating membrane (the third eyelid) in other animals. ADAPTATION is natural selection, Biology 101
---MikeM on 4/27/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


Psalm 93:1 from the KJV, '... the world also is established, that it cannot be moved'
---MikeM on 4/27/06


How literal? My issue is with literalism, NOT scripture. If you really take scripture literally, then the sun, moon and staRs go around the earth. (ECCLESIASTES 1:4-7,JUDGES 9:33 says, "...as soon as the sun is up, thou shalt rise early, and set upon the city" 'Rise' means to physically move.)The Bible is about salvation, it is not a textbook about the specifics of creation, only that God created this complex planet, its complexity and beauty a testament to His majesty.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


Scientific theories and scientific law are falsifiable- if evidence contradicts any given theory comes to light, or if the theory is proven to no longer fit with the evidence, the theory itself is modified to be consistent with new evidence. Creationism rest on subjective faith, its construction is based on literal absolutes, in scripture narrative, which cannot be falsified, no matter how strong the evidence is to the contrary, thus rendering science irrelevant.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


Amber is an insoluble bituminous substance-thus related to coal. It uses three alkene chemicals for polymerization. This process takes tens of thousands of years, shall I explain the process? As to why them bugs don't crawl out, I have no idea. Maybe the same reason they did not crawl out of the tar pits 20,000 years ago, becoming fossilized. Again, how does the formation of 'amber' conflict with scripture? Its a false duality.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


Elder; No, amber is fossilized resin, millions of years old, found mostly in Oligocene strata. It is also derived from even earlier Tertiary deposits (Eocene); and it occurs also as a derivative mineral in later formations. The resin contains flora and insects, 'confirming' relations between plant/insect life with the flora of North America.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


3. Jerry; I do not see how science in any way conflicts with scripture, or faith in scripture. This 6,000 year belief is 100% subjective, refuting it is first grade. Refuting an atheistic paradigm is second grade. I see evidence of creation everywhere. I would suggest Dr. Behe, or Dr. Hugh Ross, well educated men of faith.
---mikeM on 4/27/06


MikeM: Gasping you say?
Simple tree amber with an insect in it disproves the millions of years theory that you hold on to.
An insect is stuck in amber (tree sap) and Scientist claim it took thousands of years for it to harden and preserve the insect inside.
Why didn't the insect rot or crawl away? Why didn't some bird or other insect eat the one stuck?
Yes, one of us is gasping. Hope you catch your breath before another thousand years pass.
---Elder on 4/27/06


2.The answer is simple. In Mt Saint Helens fossilization of 'upside down trees' in strata left by eruptions,-(only thousands of years old) AND 'subsequent' 'new' stream beds give the appearence of multi-strata, and as fossilization occurs it will appear more so. This is seen in old mud flows in Yellowstone as well. it would appear to be an anomalous geologic microcosm, but not one to providing any evidence for the creation of an alternate, and- idiosyncratic creation story.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


1. Obviously, the sediments must have been laid down suddenly, not at the gradual rates, as in uniformitarian geology. In most instances the fossil trees show no evidence of having roots, nor roots with rootlets; or of having roots that are truncated. In about 1 out of 50 instances it appears that they may have roots that are complete. I note this is seen in Nova Scotia and in Yellowstone.
---MikeM on 4/27/06


MikeM: Please explain the existence of polystrate tree fossils which span supposed millions of years of strata. How can a tree stand in place (sometimes upsidedown) for millions of years? The trees I have seen get old, die, fall down and rot.
---jerry6593 on 4/27/06


MikeM, I don't think Elder was grasping... just commenting that you've already made up your mind - much like a willfull child. John has very clearly debunked your arguments, yet you persist that you are correct and the rest of us are ignorant. The "science" you keep turning to is exactly what I referred to earlier, junk science, which is based more on presupposition, imagination, and conjecture than it is on fact.
---daphn8897 on 4/25/06


Elder; Your steak/baby analogy; rather trite, like a last gasp? What pearls of wisdom do you have for me? I mostly misunderstand whatmy misunderstanding is supposed to be. I am no secularist, by far. Through I am no 'dittohead' I am no liberal. One hero is Alexis De Tocqueville, who saw Americas real source of power as from its church's. Real faith has NO fear of debate, if ones faith fears debate, its done.
---MikeM on 4/22/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Mike:
Entropy means that there is a set quanity of erg in a closed system like the Universe. Uknow that, &this tends toward equilibrium.

Evolution is an open system admitting new species, evolving. Thus the energy is "lost" dissipating, and ramdomness, not order prevails. Thus chaos rules, not order.(Dog breeding is a good exercize in chaos theory.)
You need to demonstrate not only conservation of energy, but also energy creation to maintain evolution as viable in open systems.
---John_T on 4/21/06


Rev Jim ... it ill becomes you to discourage from this site all those whose detail beliefs do not accord with yuors. If you had our way, you would probably hsve no-one left to discuss things with.
There is nothing unChristian in believing that the Creation account was using different time-definitions, or that God used various methods to create what is here now.
---alan8869_of_UK on 4/21/06


Molly glad to have you back again. God Bless you.
Mike did not run anyone away. It is like feeding steak to a baby, you get tired of seeing it thrown in the floor.
Mike wants us to go to a secular college to get spiritual reference there by he shows where his misunderstanding comes from.
---Elder on 4/20/06


Mike:
Your education is good, but not a substitute for faith. You seem to say, "In science I trust." Correct?

Re vestigal organs: They prove ADAPTION, not evolution. Organisms adapt to stimuli, the whale remains a whale but evolution says that large lizards became another specie.

Re DNA: We both know that there are very few strains of human mitochondrial DNA, and that points to young creation. That is not the same sort of DNA used in court for conviction.
---John_T on 4/20/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


The earth is 6,000 years old, no real evidence of anything else has ever been found anyplace only wild speculation. These are Christian blogs Mr. MikeM so maybe more reading and less words on your part would do you some good.
---Rev_Jim on 4/20/06


MikeM. You ran everybody off do not gloat about it you won the battle so what I believe in Bible not silly science.
---Molly on 4/20/06


I believe that God is big enough that scripture certainly can be taken literally - in context - line upon line, precept upon precept. The NT is clear that we are no longer bound to the OT rituals, yet the principles contained in many of those laws and rituals are certainly applicable to our lives today. I agree, that TRUE science doesn't conflict with scripture, but there's plenty of garbage/junk science folks try to pass off as fact.
---daphn8897 on 4/20/06


2. Go to any science dept. any any college and call it 'philosophy. History 101. Check the history of the Bible, its assembling was very political, and influenced by 'philosophy,' gnostic, hellenstic, etc. The term 'sola scriptora' was invented by someone who rejected it later, yet the concept survives. I believe Paul spoke of apostasy.

DNA is "exact" enough to send people to the 'chair.' Try usiing that argument to get out of jury duty(I might)
---MikeM on 4/20/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


1.I would have to be shown where scripture and science conflict. I take the scriptures seriously, not literally. Those are not the same. I'm not 'boxed in' by literalism which, in the final analysis would be me having a subjective understood, meaning self-serving misuse of scripture. If I took the scripture literally then I would have to kill the Wicca people, kill my kids if they were disobedient, believe the sun goes around the earth and so on. Imutable-the Bible is not a talisman, but it is inspired.
---MikeM on 4/20/06


Mike M, While I appreciate that science is a useful tool, I will ALWAYS choose scripture when the two seemingly conflict. God's Word is imutable - the philosophy of science is not. Historically science was always acknowledged as one of the philosophical veins. It is the anti-God community that trys to make it more. DNA testing is not an "exact" science either, but is still growing in its accuracy and effectiveness. Scientific "facts" can change, God's Word does not.
---daphn8897 on 4/20/06


daphn8897; In a court of law often scientific evidence, such as DNA evidence is used to PROVE OR DISPROVE a defendents guilt. If YOU were a defendent, and DNA would PROVE you not guilty, whould you call that 'evidence'- 'mere philosophy,'only an-opinion or belief? Or would you deem it factual evidence? One must define, and know what these terms, like philosophy and science mean, for them to have any meaning, or useful application.
---MikeM on 4/20/06


As to heatenergy the 2nd law of thermodynamics does favor formations of the majority of ALL known complex and ordered chemical compounds directly from their simpler elements. The second law does not dictate the decrease of ordered structure by its predictions. It only demands a "spreading out" of energy when such ordered compounds are formed spontaneously. The heat energy ratio formula is basic physics 101, confirming the triteness of urban myths about 2nd law conflicting with natural selection.
---MikeM on 4/20/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


Second law of thermodynamics; The total entropy of any isolated thermodynamic system tends to increase over time, approaching a maximum value. Describing a probability distribution for a (on the surface) closed paradigm 'clock winding down' is too much for here, but here I defer to scripture, where my ontology is an argument for initial creation. This would take 100 paragraphs. Atheist run from me faster than Fundamentalist.
---MikeM on 4/20/06


In cetaceansone small vestigial leg bones are found,(like whales.) Night eyes on horses, wings of ostriches, on and on and on. Molecular biology and genetics, far more than taxo-graphic evidence provides the real evidence of similarities between the development of organisms; CONFIRMING vestigial remnents, and so much else. I think to some cognative dissonance is masking as something else. Most Christians have no issue here. One person of faith I know is Hugh Ross.
---MikeM on 4/20/06


Perhaps the International Commission on Stratigraphy is filled with liberal democrats? Exxon hired several of my fellow grads for exploration, no room for truncating the timeline and not too many liberals at Exxon. You cannot truncate the timeline based on a personal, and rather idiosyncratic theological belief system. Uranium-235's decay. argon-potassium, etc, etc. Its an understandable, but passe' reactionary position. As for me, God is 'bigger' than that.
---MikeM on 4/20/06


Jerry; I am a Jeffersonian strict-constitutionalist libertarian.(small-'L') Before college I liked C.S. Lewis, but found Sinclair Lewis far more relevant, and grounded in reality. Your generalization is a variation of an old fallasy, personal attack; on educators. At UNLV they were a refreshing mix of liberals and conservatives, a million miles from Berserk-ly. Strata has no politics. nonsequitor. The vanguard of Mr. Bryan's remaining knights in formation are fighting in the 4th crusade.
---MikeM on 4/20/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


PM to Jerry:

See, we are on the same page when it comes to the essentials.

As to the other things, I think we kicked that around quite a bit, so we will not go there.

My purpose in being so stubborn was to help you see some other facets, and consider them, not to belittle you, OK?
---John_T on 4/19/06


Mike, What you tout as proof is nothing more than more theory and conjecture. Assumption and presuposition does not a fact make. As I've stated before, science is a philosophy - a way of looking at things. It is not the be all end all. Check out history - there are many things scientists stated as fact that have in more recent years found to be false. So, if it's a choice between trusting "science" and scripture, I will choose scripture EVERY time.
---daphn8897 on 4/19/06


Alan: "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" is one of the three "proofs" of evolution I learned in Historical Geology. It simply means that the developing human embryo retraces its evolutionary past during development. The other, equally stupid "proofs" were comparative anatomy (actually bones only) and vestigial structures (e.g. human appendix and coxix).
---jerry6593 on 4/19/06


Mike: You didn't answer the question "where did you get the dates for your fossils?" You know full well that K-Ar dating is not possible for fossil-bearing layers. Besides, how do you overcome the problem of leak rates of Ar gas in rock being much too high for multi-million year dates? You should spend more time in libraries and less time listening to liberal democrat professors. I had to unlearn many falsehoods acquired in my university days.
---jerry6593 on 4/19/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


Well, the bible is quite vague about the creation of man, scientific evidence cannot deny the vague idea that "man was created" the Lord created all life, so therefore EVERYTHING, has a creator, not just you, you just happen to be created in the Lord's image.
---Chaz on 4/18/06


1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
---Exzucuh on 4/18/06


Mike as strongly as I disagree with your view you can at least take a joke...many can't.
---Elder on 4/18/06


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.