where is the evidence for evolution in the fossil record?? 3-7

[tnafguy1]

al there evidence turns out to be lies.

[Entropy56]

Darwinists caught lying again

[tnafguy1]

@Entropy56 yep

[simpsonmark]

The evidence for evolution is everywhere. Every fossil ever found is evidence of it.

[warriorprince1010]

@simpsonmark The fossil record supports creation and the creation model is fulyl accepted by all science we are aware of.

[alianchild]

It would take three days to explain everything that is wrong with this vid.

[stewpotb62]

From talk origins on Don Patton

When I asked Patton for clarification on this during the [1989 Bible-Science] conference, he stated that he had no degrees, but was about to receive a Ph.D. degree in geology, pending accreditation of QCU, which he assured me was "three days away." Many days have since passed, and Patton still has no valid degree in geology. Nor is the accreditation of QCU imminent.

[MorganMarvinson]

Dr. Patton missed the import of his own slide. Apparently it slipped his mind after he prepared it. The human-chimp DNA "match" is not based on the whole genome, but the 1.6% of replicating genes. This is justified on the basis that the rest would be what was once considered "Junk DNA," a term that has become a bit of an embarrassment to evolutionist since specific functions have been determined for what evolution predicted would be useless leftovers.

[MilletGtr]

Ratings have been disabled... Surprise surprise

[tebinthehouse]

A geologist discussing biological evolution????? Oh goodness. I hope we don't get a psychologist discussing cosmology. lol

[Xamaza]

Geologists should stick to talking about rocks and leave genetics to geneticists and biologists.

[orialairo]

What about homo erectus? What about the Java man fossils and all the other transitional fossils?

[tate22000]

@orialairo Java man was a human female skull, human jaw, and thigh bone of a man, one of the teeth is a human's tooth, the other three were from an orangutan. All fragments were scattered over a 2 mile area and likely none of them came from the same organism.

[orialairo]

@tate22000 Are you joking, an orangutan has a completely different physical size and shape to these fossils, have a look at some of the pictures. Java man fossils resembles a human because it is closely related to present day man. The evidence is all in the fossils. If you don't believe in evolution, how do you explain how complex can organisms exist?

[tate22000]

@orialairo Not sure what bones your talking about here, but it sure isnt Java man. What I listed in my previous post is indeed what they found and how they found it. Now, I dont care whether you believe it or not, but your beliefs are not going to change facts. Java man has been proven wrong decades ago. Unless you want to say your ancestor was an trans gendered with male and female body parts, you should see that.

[tate22000]

@orialairo A team of German scientists traveled to Java in 1907 to unearth more clues on human ancestry. They hired 75 workers and sent 43 crates of fossil material back to Germany, but no evidence of Pithecanthropus could be found. Instead the German scientists found modern flora and fauna in the strata where Dubois had found his Pithecanthropus. Dr. E. Carthaus, a geologist on the expedition concluded that Pithecanthropus was a modern human.

[orialairo]

@tate22000 How many chromosomes does a chimp, orangutan and gorrila have? 48 is the answer. How many does a human have? Answer 46. On examination of human chromosomes we find that two have fused showing that we once had 48 and are indeed related to apes. The earth is very old. How could things stay the same for so long?? Everything is in motion.

[tate22000]

@orialairo None of what you wrote refuted anything I stated. I'm assuming that you did not because you cant. Now, # of chromosomes....it is true that humans have 46, apes have 48....tobacco also has 48. I'd love for you to explain how we are related to tobacco based on that same info that your using to claim we came from apes. Chickens ans dogs both have 76 chromosomes and well, lets face it, they are identical twins right? Earth, other planets, and the sun are about 6,000 years old.

[tate22000]

@tate22000 The real reason they say we came from apes is because we happen to resemble each other. Thats all. And they call that science. You claimed because they have 48 and we have 46 that means we are related. Tobacco has 48. And you did not attempt to answer why you dont think chickens and dogs are related because they both have 76. Why? because they dont look like each other. No, losing chromosomes does not mean it devolves but it is the opposite of gaining new informati

[tate22000]

@orialairo And since Apes have 48 and humans have 46, that is the opposite of evolution. That is losing, not gaining.

[orialairo]

@tate22000 If the earth is 6000 years old how do you explain dinosaur fossils? or any fossils? Few fossils are just 6000 years old. Does that mean there were dinosaurs walking around with humans?? What about carbon dating? That must be wrong too? Chimps and humans share around 97-98% of identical DNA. Same cannot be said for tobacco. If the number of chromosomes decreases it does not mean something de-evolves. There is a reason no scientific papers have been written to support creationism.

[tate22000]

@orialairo Animals that get buried quickly say in a flood fossilize quite quickly. Yes, dinosaurs were living with humans, they were called dragons, the name "dinosaurs" was only invented in the 1800s. If you know anything about carbon dating you know how inaccurate it is. Living snails were dated at 2300 years old. Can snails live that long? How about a freshly killed seal 1300 years old? ete.

[tate22000]

@orialairo No, losing chromosomes does not mean it devolves but it is the opposite of gaining new information which is what evolution claims to do. No we do not share 97-98% of our DNA with apes, it actually is 95%. And do you have any idea how much that 5% difference entails? Even mice have 70 percent to 90 percent of their gene structure in common with humans. These numbers indicate how great is the genetic diversity, not how similar.

[tate22000]

@orialairo If dinosaurs existed millions of years ago, why do we find dino DNA? shouldnt it have disappeared millions of years ago? Yes it would, thus they are not millions of years old. The earths magnetic field is decaying too fast for it to be billions of years old, theres not enough sodium in the sea for Earth to be billions of years old, theres not enough mud on the sea floor, theres too much helium in minerals, I could go on and on. Earth is young.

[orialairo]

@tate22000 DNA has been extracted from fossils that are millions of years old. Why do state things that you don't know anything about, lol. There is no evidence dinosaurs ever existed with humans. No dinosaurs and human fossil have ever or will ever be found in the same location. If you claim otherwise you are only lying to yourself. If you don't believe in carbon dating then how about dendrochronology which can be used to date back to 10000 years. Show me some evidence there not enough mud etc

[tate22000]

@orialairo DNA would not have lasted 65 million years, dino skin would not have lasted 65 million years. Thus they did not exist 65 million years. There are fossilized footprints of humans and dinosaurs together, human remains have been found in the same "strata" layers as dinosaur bones and in some cases even below it. Clearly they co existed with humans. Look up "problems with carbon dating" and you'll see what I mean.

[tate22000]

@orialairo If evolution is so well proven, please tell me then: how did cacti evolve? how did the giraffe evolve? how did the wood pecker, bees, and flowers evolve? how could a peacock evolve? with its tail how we see it today? termites....termites eat wood but they can't digest it. They have small critters in their stomachs that actually digest the cellulose. Now the termite cant live without those critters and the critters cant live without the termite...which one evolved first?

[Hzqi]

@tate22000

You do realise that symbiosis is common to just basically every complex organism, right? You yourself, have billions of symbiotic inhabitants that you can't live without. Symbiotic evolution, isn't as mysterious and bewildering as you seem to make it out. I'm surprised you aren't citing the "irreducable complexity" of eyeballs or something.

What you really need to look up, is an understanding of mingled strata layers due to tectonic movement. There is NO evidence of coexisting.

[Hzqi]

@tate22000

Also, what is it about giraffes that you find so inexplicable? Some physiology? Some phylogeny? Here's a word for you to look up. Ready? DISINGENUOUS. If you were actually interested, these are things you can investigate yourself.

[Hzqi]

@tate22000

Here's another term for you to look up. Ready? False Dichotomy. The problem with creationists, is their habit of approaching a pretense to science, as being like little gnats, buzzing around the field, gnawing away, thinking that either valid challenges, or dubious debunkings, somehow, conversely, acts as validation of their own hypothesis (if you can call it one). It's not enough to disprove one notion. You have to actually POSITIVELY prove your own notion.

[SHIBBYiPANDA]

@Hzqi ehhhh so what about this video is incorrect?? I don't know enough about biology to understand what's so wrong with this..

[Hzqi]

Actually, humans and apes have the same number. Two of them are fused on humans. And here's the thing with prediction. They made that prediction, and documented it, well before the results of the research confirmed it. The only reason you think carbon dating is inaccurate, is because you don't know anything about it, and you get too much education from creationist sources, that think a discipline is represented by some aberration of a blunder. Funny thing is, that science corrects ITSELF.

[tate22000]

@orialairo Further suspicions regarding the credibility of Dubois involve two other skullcaps that Dubois expedition had uncovered which were clearly human. He apparently failed to display the human skullcaps when parading his Pithecanthropus. In fact, he kept the skulls hidden under the floorboards of his house for thirty years, then finally made them known in the 1920s

[geilanderable]

Very good case!

He is just dis-proving the "arguments" of evolution. "arguments" of evolution are easily to be disprooved

But we are not fighting against people, but against their un-willingness to aqknowlegde a God that wil jugde their actions.

The problem is that mankind will "invent" a religion (evolution) without sin and without a God that judges.

Peter says: man that supressed the truth bacause they life in their (sinful) lust.

[joda711]

I'm sure you're aware they found where the chromosones fused? It's really quite clear..

[FiverBeyond]

The argument against Haeckel's argument is a strong one (although I haven't seen a textbook yet that hasn't switched to normal photographs, which still show many similarities).

But I have never heard any teacher of evolution point to increasing number of genomes as evidence. I call strawman.

Also, he should know that small changes can be fatal, but they can also be completely harmless. Picking out the smallest changes with the biggest results is deceptive.

[SayNoToTheism]

I love how he uses the picture of the embryos that was drawn in the late 1800's...

[inthedepths714]

I also love the fact that these same pictures you speak of are still widely being used in the textbooks today as evidence for evolution, despite having been discredited and shown to be false and deceptive years ago.

[erinpwnerer]

This guy does realize at 6:25 that more chromosomes does not mean that it is a "higher" species right?

[sausage4mash]

all this crap has been refuted in court , and why is a geoligist discussing biology ?! peer review or shut up

[grenangle]

If you look like a kook , talk like a kook and can be found hanging around kooks , guess what ?

[jamesmagmar126]

What is this man's Ph.D in?

[sausage4mash]

Geology , why is he quoting Darwin ? 150yr old science , really this is such a load of bull ,I can't believe this idiots phd is genuine, if it is the we need to look at our education system

[DelusionalNeverAgain]

the old drawings showing the similarities, with its theory that we are all connected, have been backed up recently by DNA and biology.....right?

[DelusionalNeverAgain]

man, science has come so far with technology since Darwin and even the late 90's...............this is just all old news and misleading too...............I will watch the rest though,

[Pulsar205]

He caught me out with the 2 'fish' at the end! They look very similar like this, but they're not.

So someone thinks sheep are human. Bahhhhhh

[wrestlingfan110]

YEAH !

[jnoort]

Evolution discussed Kent Hovind style!! Oh yeah!!

[JMStuff99]

HOMOLOGY DISPROVEN!