Challenge for evos

YEC · Post by **YEC** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:56 am

Show me a series of fossils that clearly demonstrate the evolution of one species into another species in which the new species is a member of a different taxonomic rank of Family.

Or (if you don't like taxonomic ranks and you're a cladistics fan)

Show me a historical series of fossils that clearly demonstrate the evolution of one species into another species that shows a detailed common ancestral phylogenetic link in which the new species has a group of derived traits which is proceeded by primitive traits.

YEC · Post by **YEC** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:13 am

Below are 5 so-called transitionals as presented bythe evos.

1. Ophiacodon, Early Permian, Texas: "skull had changed from the small low shape...this allowed for longer jaw muscles to develop."

2. Phthinosuchus (: Base of Late Permian, USSR: " strikingly similar...but with larger synapsid opneings behind the eyes.. paelontologists believe this to be intermediate in structure between pelycosaurs and Therapsids.

3. Thrinaxodon, Early Triassic, South Africa, Antartica: "Another mammalian trend seen in the lower jaw... teeth were set into a signle bone,, the dentary, which had become larger at the expense of the smaller bones at back of jaw."

4. Cynogathus: Early Triassic, South Africa, Argentina: practically the whole lower jaw on each side was made up of a single bone, the dentary...coronoid process at back of dentary articluiated with the skull and meant the jaws could open wide.

5. Morganucodon: Late Triassic to Early Jurassic, Africa, Europe, Eastern Asia: see pictures presented.

Lets trace out their travel plans....

In the first Picture, Ophiacodon packs his bags and heads north from Texas to the USSR and then becomes Phthinosuchus. I wonder how much trouble this guy had crossing the Appalachian mountains on his journey to evolve?

Then a few yers later Phthinosuchus decides to head south, passing through Pennsylvania and New Jersey...and ends up in South Africa and Antartica where it becomes Thrinaxodon.

Thrinaxodon then hangs out there for a while, evolves into Cynogathus then decides to head north again and takes a trip to East Asia.

I suppose some where on this journey Cynogathus decided to evolve into Morganucodon during the early Jurassic.

WOW....What a trip

All that time, all that distance, all that evolution....and the transitionals are spread out all over the globe... with no evolving fossils found on the way? why?
Could it be the scientist that have a faith in evolutionism...collected these fossil fragments from all over the world...picked out the ones that made sense to their theory...and lined them up?

Aximili23 · Post by **Aximili23** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 10:50 am

All that time, all that distance, all that evolution....and the transitionals are spread out all over the globe... with no evolving fossils found on the way? why?

You know, it's been explained to you repeatedly, and you yourself have stated, that fossilization is a rare occurence. The gaps in the fossil record do not really present a serious threat to the ToE.

Anyway, do you have a better SCIENTIFIC theory that explains the origin and distribution of these fossils? Can you back up that theory with any evidence? Until you do, any objection you have against evolution is empty. Regardless of the gaps in the fossil record, evolution is by far the best (and only) scientific theory we have to explain the diversity of life.

YEC · Post by **YEC** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:57 am

Well Aximili23, there is the ah, er, clears throat...flood models that explain the fossils found in our geological column better than the evo models.

But of course, you already knew that.

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:25 am

flood models that explain the fossils found in our geological column better than the evo models.

No, there isn't. I mean, there isn't. There is no such model. Creationists don't have a model, a theory, or any other collection of unified hypotheses about the creation, the flood, or other parts of history.

Don't you remember some of us, me in particular, begging you to tell us about these theories? Creationists uniformly refuse to tell us about their theories. You refused to even say if you accept or reject Bishop Ussher's chronology.

DanZ

Aximili23 · Post by **Aximili23** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:55 am

YEC wrote:But of course, you already knew that.

No, I certainly didn't. I've been participating in various evolution vs creation forums for a few months now, and I have never encountered a comprehensive creationist model that accounts for the origin and distribution of fossils worldwide. Not even one that isn't evidence-based. I have not even encountered one yet in creationist websites.

Please enlighten us.

Aximili23 · Post by **Aximili23** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:21 pm

By the way YEC, your opening post was a challenge to be presented with "a series of fossils that clearly demonstrate the evolution of one species into another species in which the new species is a member of a different taxonomic rank of Family"

I have presented to you a webpage in TalkOrigins containing many such series:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

which describes fossil series that demonstrate:

Transitions from primitive fish to sharks, skates, rays
Transitions from primitive fish to bony fish
Transition from fishes to first amphibians
Transitions among amphibians
Transition from amphibians to first reptiles
Transitions among reptiles
Transition from reptiles to first mammals (long)
Transition from reptiles to first birds
Transitions among mammals

Note that the website includes a fairly comprehensive chronology that describes when various traits and species arose; and demonstrates a gradual increase in complexity throughout geologic time. As juliod has pointed out, no such chronology is provided by creationism, even a speculative one.

You have been presented with "evodense" for evolution. Can you show us evidence for creation?

YEC · Post by **YEC** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:33 pm

Aximili23 wrote:By the way YEC, your opening post was a challenge to be presented with "a series of fossils that clearly demonstrate the evolution of one species into another species in which the new species is a member of a different taxonomic rank of Family"

I have presented to you a webpage in TalkOrigins containing many such series:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

which describes fossil series that demonstrate:

Transitions from primitive fish to sharks, skates, rays
Transitions from primitive fish to bony fish
Transition from fishes to first amphibians
Transitions among amphibians
Transition from amphibians to first reptiles
Transitions among reptiles
Transition from reptiles to first mammals (long)
Transition from reptiles to first birds
Transitions among mammals

Note that the website includes a fairly comprehensive chronology that describes when various traits and species arose; and demonstrates a gradual increase in complexity throughout geologic time. As juliod has pointed out, no such chronology is provided by creationism, even a speculative one.

You have been presented with "evodense" for evolution. Can you show us evidence for creation?

With all due respect, this talk.origins/hunt style list has already been refuted....for an example scroll up 5 post and look at the globe pictures.

YEC · Post by **YEC** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:35 pm

Want another example....click on previous and check out the skull transitionals I posted.

MagusYanam · Post by **MagusYanam** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:19 pm

So wait... you're saying that this 'evodense' Aximilli presented was refuted by a cartoon map of what the Earth might have looked like during the Jurassic period? My friend, if this is all you have to try to refute talkorigins, you have a lot of explanation ahead of you.

The list presented was data and / or observations made concerning those data. If you want to refute them, you will have to point out specific errors in the observations or the techniques used in recovering the data themselves. A cartoon completely unrelated to talkorigins' research isn't going to help you here, nor is a series of photos similarly disconnected from the actual question. You have given interpretations of the map and the photos. Good. Now allow others to come to their own conclusions regarding the aforementioned and we can analyse those to see which one fits best.

That is how science works. If you don't like it, you won't have much ground to stand on when you try to defend creationism as science.

YEC · Post by **YEC** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:42 am

I noticed that MagusYanam didn't really address the topic but instead tried to steer it in a different direction.

My "cartoon" works very well as an opening in this conversation. It shows the unlikely route the species had taken....according to the evos...to evolve.