Macro evolution never happened. The fossil record proves this.

[SavedByTheLord]

Macro evolution never happened. The fossil record proves this.

Evolution cannot make large jumps. To do that would require a miracle of miracles. And sexual reproduction will end all such events anyhow. But if evolution is gradual, there should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing. There are now many tens of millions of fossils that have been discovered. Why are they all missing? They should be finding missing links every day. Why not? The fossil record shows stable disparate species all fully formed and functional, just as exists today in the world.

The odds against all the millions of chains of missing links still missing from the fossil record are about 10^10 million to 1.

And the species today in the world are not making jumps in evolution and are not descended from other species but like kind produces like kind just as the Bible says. So macro evolution never happened. And all those creatures that have been fossilized are just the result of the worldwide flood. The same thing would happen if there were a worldwide flood today. But since there is no macro evolution in the fossil record, it collapses the time that the sedimentary rock layers that contain fossils were laid down to only about a year. But then that means that the earth’s surface in only thousands of years old. That also disproves the false science of uniformitarianism and proves catastrophism true. But that disproves all dating of things to date the earth as incorrect. That also proves that the earth and the moon are only thousands of years old. But that disproves the dating of things in the solar system. And that then disproved the dating of the universe and refutes the Big Bang. Evolution and billions of years are like a house of cards, pull out one and it all collapses.

 

[rossum]

But if evolution is gradual, there should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing.

You forget, once we find a link, then it is no longer missing, instead it is a found link. Tiktaalik was once a missing link, but it is no longer missing. It is a found link.

I await the successful conclusion of your search for the currently missing link of Seth's skeleton.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You forget, once we find a link, then it is no longer missing, instead it is a found link. Tiktaalik was once a missing link, but it is no longer missing. It is a found link.

I await the successful conclusion of your search for the currently missing link of Seth's skeleton.

But the millions of chains of missing links are all missing In the current fossil record.

 

[rossum]

But the millions of chains of missing links are all missing In the current fossil record.

And the many chains of found links are documented in the scientific literature, and many are displayed in museums.

Missing links are all missing, until they are found. Obviously.

I await you finding of Seth's skeleton, a missing link from your side.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

And the many chains of found links are documented in the scientific literature, and many are displayed in museums.

Missing links are all missing, until they are found. Obviously.

I await you finding of Seth's skeleton, a missing link from your side.

There have been no chains found at all.
Evolution does not jump.

Not only have I proven abiogenesis false but there are 2 other super great miracle of miracles to explain and these may be even more miraculous than the first living creature which itself was impossible.
If the first living creature is RNA only, how did DNA evolve?
And if the first DNA creature reproduced by asexual reproduction how did sexual reproduction evolve?

 

[rossum]

There have been no chains found at all.

False. Gould's work on Cerion shows some chains.

Evolution does not jump.

It can, but rarely. The Lyko paper I referenced shows just such a jump; a single mutation resulted in a new species.

Your failure to produce Seth's skeleton shows that YEC cannot show the chain that it claims happened. Better get looking SBTL.

Not only have I proven abiogenesis false but there are 2 other super great miracle of miracles to explain and these may be even more miraculous than the first living creature which itself was impossible.
If the first living creature is RNA only, how did DNA evolve?
And if the first DNA creature reproduced by asexual reproduction how did sexual reproduction evolve?

Dr. Dunning, meet Dr. Kruger.

Overblown claims and questions do not amount to proof.

Where is Methuselah's skeleton? Where are the C-14 dates showing that he was as old as claimed?

Have I proved the Bible false by asking a question you will not answer? That is what you seem to think.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

False. Gould's work on Cerion shows some chains.


It can, but rarely. The Lyko paper I referenced shows just such a jump; a single mutation resulted in a new species.

Your failure to produce Seth's skeleton shows that YEC cannot show the chain that it claims happened. Better get looking SBTL.


Dr. Dunning, meet Dr. Kruger.

Overblown claims and questions do not amount to proof.

Where is Methuselah's skeleton? Where are the C-14 dates showing that he was as old as claimed?

Have I proved the Bible false by asking a question you will not answer? That is what you seem to think.

You have not even descent of any species from another unless you are pawNing off adaptation within created kind as macro evolution.
Well he was buried when he died just before the flood.
As to where his skeleton is, I do not know.
Of course, if mankind has been around for over 100,000 years and just as inteilgent as us, where are all their billions of skeletons?

 

[rossum]

You have not even descent of any species from another unless you are pawNing off adaptation within created kind as macro evolution.

False. The Lyko paper shows you are wrong. Also a "created kind" is not the same as a biological species. I was talking about biological species, where speciation is well demonstrated.

Well he was buried when he died just before the flood.
As to where his skeleton is, I do not know.

However, science knew roughly where Tiktaalik would be found. Thus demonstrating the superiority of science over YEC.

If the failure to find fossils is a problem, then YEC has far more of a problem; YEC has no fossils at all.

Of course, if mankind has been around for over 100,000 years and just as inteilgent as us, where are all their billions of skeletons?

Of course, if all mankind (except eight) had been drowned in a recent flood, where are all the billions of skeletons?

Do you never check to see how easy it is to turn some of your points straight back at you? You should.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

False. The Lyko paper shows you are wrong. Also a "created kind" is not the same as a biological species. I was talking about biological species, where speciation is well demonstrated.


However, science knew roughly where Tiktaalik would be found. Thus demonstrating the superiority of science over YEC.

If the failure to find fossils is a problem, then YEC has far more of a problem; YEC has no fossils at all.


Of course, if all mankind (except eight) had been drowned in a recent flood, where are all the billions of skeletons?

Do you never check to see how easy it is to turn some of your points straight back at you? You should.

No.
Modern science does not have a very good classification system.

If mankind has been around for over 100,000 years and just as intelligent as us, where are all their billions of skeletons?
Where are all their writings, inventions, paintings, tools, buildings, roads, ships, and cities?

 

[rossum]

Where are all their writings, inventions, paintings, tools, buildings, roads, ships, and cities?

You want paintings? See here.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You want paintings? See here.

Maybe 4500 years tops.

If mankind has been around for over 100,000 years and just as intelligent as us, where are all their billions of skeletons?
Where are all their writings, inventions, paintings, tools, buildings, roads, ships, and cities?

 

[rossum]

Maybe 4500 years tops.

Why do you ask us questions if you don't bother to read the answers? Very impolite of you.

The oldest known cave painting is a red hand stencil in Maltravieso cave, Cáceres, Spain. It has been dated using the uranium-thorium method to older than 64,000 years and was made by a Neanderthal. (emphasis added)​

Your claim is wrong. You need to find a better website to read. YEC sites lie to you.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Why do you ask us questions if you don't bother to read the answers? Very impolite of you.

The oldest known cave painting is a red hand stencil in Maltravieso cave, Cáceres, Spain. It has been dated using the uranium-thorium method to older than 64,000 years and was made by a Neanderthal. (emphasis added)​

Your claim is wrong. You need to find a better website to read. YEC sites lie to you.

I have shown that these dating techniques are not reliable at all.
They are all based on the same false assumption of no God.
Almost all sedimentary rock layers are only about 4500 years old because they were made as a result of the flood.

 

[rossum]

I have shown that these dating techniques are not reliable at all.

You have done nothing of the sort. Lying YEC websites make that claim, but they are lying to you.

They are all based on the same false assumption of no God.

Your beliefs are based on the false assumption of no Vishnu. See how easy that is.

Almost all sedimentary rock layers are only about 4500 years old because they were made as a result of the flood.

Complete and utter rubbish. There were rocks already in existence before the flood to form the land.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You have done nothing of the sort. Lying YEC websites make that claim, but they are lying to you.


Your beliefs are based on the false assumption of no Vishnu. See how easy that is.


Complete and utter rubbish. There were rocks already in existence before the flood to form the land.

Wring again.
Even isochron dating yields very inconsistent and contradictory results.
This is proven fact.

 

[rossum]

Wring again.

My clothes are already dry, thankyou.

Even isochron dating yields very inconsistent and contradictory results.
This is proven fact.

Even the Bible is wrong as shown by the dates given for King Ahaziah.
This is a proven fact.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

My clothes are already dry, thankyou.


Even the Bible is wrong as shown by the dates given for King Ahaziah.
This is a proven fact.

I already showed that that was no error at all.

 

[rossum]

I already showed that that was no error at all.

22 = 42 is an error, any way you look at it.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

22 = 42 is an error, any way you look at it.

Unless one is comparing 2 different things, in which case it is not.