Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This was a tactic of evasion and slithering by ywc.
He challenged me to post evidence of his lies and falsified creationist "quotes". After posting about half a dozen, he tried desperately to change the topic.
You and daws do not have a clue.
Punctuated equilibrium
Definition
noun
A theory that describes an evolutionary change happening rapidly and in brief geological events in between the long periods of stasis (or equilibrium). The theory is based on the stasis in fossil records, and when phenotypic evolution occurs, it is localized in rare, rapid events of branching speciation.
grad·u·al·ism
/ˈgrajo͞oəˌlizəm/
Noun
1.A policy of gradual reform rather than sudden change or revolution.
2.The hypothesis that evolution proceeds chiefly by the accumulation of gradual changes (in CONTRAST to the punctuationist model).
Learn your theories so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself. The only thing they have in common is that evolution took a long time.
Now why was the theory of punctuated Equilibrium brought forth ? well because of the lack of transitional fossils in the fossil record.
There is no lack of transitional fossils. This boilerplate creationist claim has been refuted many times.
Your creation ministries have an agenda that strives to keep you ignorant and uninformed
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
You and daws do not have a clue.
Punctuated equilibrium
Definition
noun
A theory that describes an evolutionary change happening rapidly and in brief geological events in between the long periods of stasis (or equilibrium). The theory is based on the stasis in fossil records, and when phenotypic evolution occurs, it is localized in rare, rapid events of branching speciation.
grad·u·al·ism
/ˈgrajo͞oəˌlizəm/
Noun
1.A policy of gradual reform rather than sudden change or revolution.
2.The hypothesis that evolution proceeds chiefly by the accumulation of gradual changes (in CONTRAST to the punctuationist model).
Learn your theories so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself. The only thing they have in common is that evolution took a long time.
Now why was the theory of punctuated Equilibrium brought forth ? well because of the lack of transitional fossils in the fossil record.
There is no lack of transitional fossils. This boilerplate creationist claim has been refuted many times.
Your creation ministries have an agenda that strives to keep you ignorant and uninformed
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
This is all subjective evidence nothing but an opinion through a vivid imagination. Fuck dumbshit you didn't even understand the difference in punctuated equilibrium and Gradualism.
Which is now Neodarwinism.
it's highly sporting considering the whiney tone of :
Is THIS "unsporting" Wake? Or what you would consider "rational and reasonable discourse?"
How about showing some consistency, and chastise daws like you did me, for being "unsporting?"
"This is MY thread, I started it, I can do whatever the hell I want to with it. I've not turned anything into anything, I stated in the OP that some people can't accept spiritual evidence, and there has been plenty of examples in this thread to prove that point correct. I have defended my argument whenever it has been challenged, but frankly, Hollie and daws have offered the least challenge to the OP of anyone here. If you've read any of this massive thread at all, you understand that. I've already pointed out to you, they have NO intention of engaging a reasonable rational debate on the topic, they are here to denigrate, ridicule, insult, mock, make fun of religion and religious people, and further enable their disbelief. Daws has single-handedly posted reams of superfluous nonsense that has nothing to do with the topic, in an attempt to flood the thread so no one can have a conversation. I guess you must interpret that as "sporting and rational," while me calling him out for his dishonest tactics, is "petulant and childish."
I've BEEN ready to converse like a grown up on the topic, when are you going to start?"-boss.
There is no lack of transitional fossils. This boilerplate creationist claim has been refuted many times.
Your creation ministries have an agenda that strives to keep you ignorant and uninformed
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
This is all subjective evidence nothing but an opinion through a vivid imagination. Fuck dumbshit you didn't even understand the difference in punctuated equilibrium and Gradualism.
Which is now Neodarwinism.
Your silly conspiracies won't refute the evidence.
Heck you can't debate with people that are to ignorant to debate.
Heck you can't debate with people that are to ignorant to debate.
This is all subjective evidence nothing but an opinion through a vivid imagination. Fuck dumbshit you didn't even understand the difference in punctuated equilibrium and Gradualism.
Which is now Neodarwinism.
Your silly conspiracies won't refute the evidence.
And your ignorance doesn't make PE any less true, you damned liar.
So which theory do you believe ?
Heck you can't debate with people that are to ignorant to debate.
They don't want to debate or engage in any reasonable discussion. All they want to do is vent, ridicule and gloat over their 'wins'.
Just a bunch of poop throwing libtard clowns with very few exceptions.
Your silly conspiracies won't refute the evidence.
And your ignorance doesn't make PE any less true, you damned liar.
Oh my. The fundies have arrived.
And your ignorance doesn't make PE any less true, you damned liar.
Oh my. The fundies have arrived.
Again, you flee from rational discussion of the merits of the claims and fall back on stupid secularists tricks any dog can learn.
Here Hollie, fetch.
Heck you can't debate with people that are to ignorant to debate.
They don't want to debate or engage in any reasonable discussion. All they want to do is vent, ridicule and gloat over their 'wins'.
Just a bunch of poop throwing libtard clowns with very few exceptions.
As expected, those screeching the loudest against the factual data and hard (pun intended) evidence for transitional fossils are the Christian fundies.
But then again, who else but the Christian fundies are loading their posts with "poop". AS their sacred cows are marched into the glaring light of scrutiny, they do tend to get angry, vicious and begin hurling obscenities.
Lovely, lovely folks them-there good xtians.
CC200: Transitional fossils
Claim CC200:
There are no transitional fossils. Evolution predicts a continuum between each fossil organism and its ancestors. Instead, we see systematic gaps in the fossil record.
Source:
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 78-90.
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pp. 57-59.
Response:
1. There are many transitional fossils. The only way that the claim of their absence may be remotely justified, aside from ignoring the evidence completely, is to redefine "transitional" as referring to a fossil that is a direct ancestor of one organism and a direct descendant of another. However, direct lineages are not required; they could not be verified even if found. What a transitional fossil is, in keeping with what the theory of evolution predicts, is a fossil that shows a mosaic of features from an older and more recent organism.
Before Eldredge and Gould alerted their colleagues to the prominence of stasis in the fossil record, most evolutionists considered stasis to be rare or unimportant.[7][19][20] George Gaylord Simpson for example believed that phyletic gradual evolution (called horotely in his terminology) comprised "nine-tenths" (90%) of evolution.[21] Many hypotheses have been proposed to explain the putative causes of stasis. Gould was initially attracted to I. Michael Lerner's theories of developmental and genetic homeostasis. However this hypothesis was rejected over time,[22] as evidence accumulated against it.[23] Other plausible mechanisms which have been suggested include: habitat tracking,[24][25] stabilizing selection,[26] the Stenseth-Maynard Smith stability hypothesis,[27] constraints imposed by the nature of subdivided populations,[26] normalizing clade selection,[28] and koinophilia.[29][30]
Evidence for the existence of stasis has also been corroborated from the genetics of sibling species, species which are morphologically indistinguishable, but whose proteins have diverged sufficiently to suggest they have been separated for millions of years.[31] According to Gould "stasis may emerge as the theory's most important contribution to evolutionary science."[32]
Philosopher Kim Sterelny adds, "In claiming that species typically undergo no further evolutionary change once speciation is complete, they are not claiming that there is no change at all between one generation and the next. Lineages do change. But the change between generations does not accumulate. Instead, over time, the species wobbles about its phenotypic mean. Jonathan Weiner's The Beak of the Finch describes this very process."[33]
The fossil record includes well documented examples of phyletic gradualism and punctuational evolution. As such, much debate persist over the prominence of stasis in the fossil record.
Oh my. The fundies have arrived.
Again, you flee from rational discussion of the merits of the claims and fall back on stupid secularists tricks any dog can learn.
Here Hollie, fetch.
That was predictable. In the face of evidence that refutes your gawds, your only option is to spam the thread.
Spiritual belief is NOT proof that an invisible deity exists. I and others could feasibly believe with absolute certainty that there is a large city of sasquatches on the other side of Pluto, which we cannot see, but that doesn't make what we believe in any more real.
To date there is no more evidence for the existence of a single deity than there was for Odin, Zeus, or Ra. Prayers work no better if you believe in a single invisible deity than if you pray to the ancient ones.
I had to laugh at a religious coworker who once came in to work saying that he prayed to god for a parking place and when he got to work, found one. This of course, convinced him that prayer works.
I asked, "so you believe that your prayer was more important than the prayers of tens of thousands in foreign lands who pray for food but starve to death?" His response was, "yes." Stupidity and arrogance know no bounds.
They don't want to debate or engage in any reasonable discussion. All they want to do is vent, ridicule and gloat over their 'wins'.
Just a bunch of poop throwing libtard clowns with very few exceptions.
As expected, those screeching the loudest against the factual data and hard (pun intended) evidence for transitional fossils are the Christian fundies.
But then again, who else but the Christian fundies are loading their posts with "poop". AS their sacred cows are marched into the glaring light of scrutiny, they do tend to get angry, vicious and begin hurling obscenities.
Lovely, lovely folks them-there good xtians.
CC200: Transitional fossils
Claim CC200:
There are no transitional fossils. Evolution predicts a continuum between each fossil organism and its ancestors. Instead, we see systematic gaps in the fossil record.
Source:
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 78-90.
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pp. 57-59.
Response:
1. There are many transitional fossils. The only way that the claim of their absence may be remotely justified, aside from ignoring the evidence completely, is to redefine "transitional" as referring to a fossil that is a direct ancestor of one organism and a direct descendant of another. However, direct lineages are not required; they could not be verified even if found. What a transitional fossil is, in keeping with what the theory of evolution predicts, is a fossil that shows a mosaic of features from an older and more recent organism.
Good for you, Hollie-dog. But I am not arguing for YEC or any of its variations.
I am simply pointing out that science is not ever at rest and in stasis. Science is constantly churning, revising and adapting to new evidence...except for dogmatic people like you who always seem to filter what you believe through your secularist lenses first.
Punctuated Equilibrium:
Punctuated equilibrium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Before Eldredge and Gould alerted their colleagues to the prominence of stasis in the fossil record, most evolutionists considered stasis to be rare or unimportant.[7][19][20] George Gaylord Simpson for example believed that phyletic gradual evolution (called horotely in his terminology) comprised "nine-tenths" (90%) of evolution.[21] Many hypotheses have been proposed to explain the putative causes of stasis. Gould was initially attracted to I. Michael Lerner's theories of developmental and genetic homeostasis. However this hypothesis was rejected over time,[22] as evidence accumulated against it.[23] Other plausible mechanisms which have been suggested include: habitat tracking,[24][25] stabilizing selection,[26] the Stenseth-Maynard Smith stability hypothesis,[27] constraints imposed by the nature of subdivided populations,[26] normalizing clade selection,[28] and koinophilia.[29][30]
Evidence for the existence of stasis has also been corroborated from the genetics of sibling species, species which are morphologically indistinguishable, but whose proteins have diverged sufficiently to suggest they have been separated for millions of years.[31] According to Gould "stasis may emerge as the theory's most important contribution to evolutionary science."[32]
Philosopher Kim Sterelny adds, "In claiming that species typically undergo no further evolutionary change once speciation is complete, they are not claiming that there is no change at all between one generation and the next. Lineages do change. But the change between generations does not accumulate. Instead, over time, the species wobbles about its phenotypic mean. Jonathan Weiner's The Beak of the Finch describes this very process."[33]
The fossil record includes well documented examples of phyletic gradualism and punctuational evolution. As such, much debate persist over the prominence of stasis in the fossil record.
ha
Heck you can't debate with people that are to ignorant to debate.
Against your compelling and authoritative "Fuck dumbshit you didn't..., no, fundie creationists truly are too ignorant to debate.
As usual, you make no sense. "Secularism" has nothing to do with the facts of evolutionary science and paleontology.
Your young earth creationism being challenged causes you to react with pith and vinegar just as what's-his-name does.
Heck you can't debate with people that are to ignorant to debate.
Against your compelling and authoritative "Fuck dumbshit you didn't..., no, fundie creationists truly are too ignorant to debate.
The mark of someone who truly understands a subject is their ability to debate well for all sides involved.
Your conceit and hubris prevent you from even going to the bother of listening, much less understanding anything.
You are an embarrassment to modern civilization as your ignorance is shameful and repulsive.
