Creation vs. Evolution

[squadops]

What is the deal with biological dark mater and all this number of domains?

 

[Scaff]

Only Christ was perfect.

No he wasn't.

He said turn the other cheek and then went on a whip wielding rampage in a temple. He said turn the other cheek and then cursed a fig tree for not providing figs* (out of season I might add).

Had he been perfect then neither of these 'slips' of turning the other cheek would have occurred.


*And is also another example of a biblical contradiction. Mark states that the fig tree withers overnight, Matthew says that it happened immediately.

 

[DQuaN]

What is the deal with biological dark mater and all this number of domains?

The deal?

You're going to have to be a little more specific.

 

[Denur]

Because it is impossible to be perfect. Only Christ was perfect.

Christ was perfect? Seriously? Can you really be that backward? The poor man couldn't even control his emotions, as he showed by destroying a fig tree for merely not carrying any fruit while JC was a little hungry. What Jesus showed there, was a very human response to a very human emotion, not one I would expect from an alleged perfect being.

edit> tree'd

 

[DQuaN]

He said turn the other cheek and then cursed a fig tree for not providing figs* (out of season I might add).

The poor man couldn't even control his emotions, as he showed by destroying a fig tree for merely not carrying any fruit while JC was a little hungry.

Can't help but giggle to myself whilst picturing a beardy hippie in sandals screaming at a tree and trying to beat it up.

Actually I think I saw that at Glastonbury one year.

Acid does some crazy things man.

 

[Denur]

Can't help but giggle to myself whilst picturing a beardy hippie in sandals screaming at a tree and trying to beat it up.

Actually I think I saw that at Glastonbury one year.

Acid does some crazy things man.

Whenever I read about the JC & Fig Tree, I always picture the lad going bezerk like a spoiled little child, foot stamping and shouting "I wanna figgy, I wanna figgy, I wanna figgy", followed by a stern look at the poor tree and the Cruciatus Curse.

 

[GBO Possum]

Because it is impossible to be perfect. Only Christ was perfect. No matter how many good deeds you have done, you will always make mistakes which require forgiveness.

So Jesus was perfect?

The same Jesus who tried to set family members against each other?

The same Jesus who bribed people to leave their family?

The same Jesus who rebuked a follower for wanting to bury his recently deceased father?

The same Jesus who berated his mother?

The same Jesus who spoke against "peace on earth"?

The same Jesus who approved of the murderous atrocities in, for example, the book of Deuteronomy?

The same Jesus who said he would kill children?

The same Jesus who advocated the beating of slaves?

The same Jesus who was clueless about health issues and advocated curative such as spitting in a person's eye?

The same Jesus who told us that if you believe in him, you can drink deadly poisons without effect?

The same Jesus who encouraged men to castrate themselves?

The same Jesus who refused to forgive blasphemy. Ever. But would forgive child rape?

The same Jesus who was against free speech?

The same Jesus who was so free with insults?

The same Jesus who encourages us to as "wise as serpents"?

The same Jesus who misled when he forecast his return in these words "Behold I come quickly". For his audience of gullible mortal man, "quickly" implies considerable less than millennia!

The same Jesus who, if he's a god, then could not have sacrificed his life, simply because a god cannot die. If Jesus died as just a man, then he committed suicide.​

Oh the perfection of this man!!

 

[photonrider]

If we are to quote a book while engaged in judging its credibility, then we must realise that:

a: everything in it is false
b: everything in it is true
c: some parts are true, some parts are false

Therefore to use the book to defend the book itself, or use it to attack itself, is a redundancy.
There may be a hundred stories circulating about the same man, but only so much of it can be true. And only so much false.


To get back on topic - the idea of a subject being compulsory at school - Both Creationism and the biological progress of the cell (Evolution) are subjects that should be a matter of choice - whether treated as Sciences or Arts, the archetypes of mankind are as important as its shifting physical plane. These facets may not be mutually exclusive, either. The choice to 'learn' about these subjects should be no different from wanting to learn math or ballet.
To have either one choked down a pupils throat is to take away a basic freedom . . . that a Nijinsky may not be interested in Calculus.

This then boils down to not what is true or what is untrue - but what criteria is used to lay down a subject (whether or not byproducts of our existence and inherited by birthright) as compulsory for all.

 

[DCP]

And if she does nothing wrong, her whole entire life, she is at fault and at sin because of the world around her?


There's also nothing wrong with not believing, and waiting for some actual proof of something before you choose to believe in it.


That's because you've made it quite obvious that you know little about the subject. If you would like for that to stop then why not just get educated on the matter?

If if's and buts....

Waiting for proof will be too late I'm afraid. Way too late.

I definitely know little. Why must I know much about something so painful? I've got everything in life that makes it convenient for me and my family in the natural, yet countless much more in Spirit. How is learning more science going to better that? If it helps the meek, weak, poor, old, hungry and sick, then bring it on. Until then, I'll stick to what is powerful. Prayer

Bollocks.

That is the most backwards, cowardly and evil way of trying to get someone to believe in something.

Let them choose for themselves. Christ forced no one, and rightfully so. Evil would be to leave them helplessly drown in their sins.

How? Has he even spoken to anyone properly and not that "In Spirit" and "Believe it" 🤬 either. If believing in the Heart of the Cards doesn't work than believing that some "upper being" can talk to you won't work either.

Careful now. No need to go there. If you've lost your faith, that's okay. Keep calm.

@Famine
Like most prisons of the world that condemn crime, the criminals are judged and sentenced according to their crimes. Some even to the point of death.
Likewise, it's the same judgment all criminals before a Holy Judge will face.
Perhaps naturally you might know of kind people, but you unfortunately don't know what they do behind closed doors, and you and science certainly don't know what burdens, grudges, hate and lust they carry in their hearts.
I'd like to think that a big screen will appear before all sinners, of reminders of the times they sinned in their hearts even, and the times where they felt a need to change, yet brushed it off only a few minutes later. I couldn't bare going through that pain alone.

@dylansan
The inbetweeners is just that, the tasty part of the sandwich. The fact is, you and your gods are still searching for truth that you will never find, only because the God of Wonders knows this.
Clues lead to more clues and more clues. If your hearts desire continues looking for these clues, that's just it. Your hearts desires, or your willingness to prove christians and their bible wrong. We have the Great I AM. Nothing changes that.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/abundant-o...r-shows-conditions-life-are-universal-1495510

3000 years ago, the bible told us that the heavens are covered by water, well yip, science is slowly but surely catching up with the good ol book.

http://klfy.com/2015/04/09/nasa-predicts-alien-life-could-be-found-by-2025/

I reckon that is too long. Perhaps in 2-4 years you will see the fallen. No doubt. You will see all kinds of hideous creatures that even hollywood would be proud of. I truly hope you don't though.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25723-massive-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core.html

Battling to keep up with the bible again.
The flood, the damage was done by the fountains of the deep, which were broken up.
Where did all that flood water go, perhaps back where they came from, and perhaps becoming the seas we have today?
Better than that mystery comet bombardment theory we think.

II Peter 3:5
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

Do you guys have some insight of this big bang when it was the size of a pin head?

 

[ImaRobot]

If if's and buts....

Waiting for proof will be too late I'm afraid. Way too late.

No it wont, because by you, I can just accept god and everything's fine right? So I'm sure I can wait it out. That is, unless you tell me thats not allowed now?

I definitely know little. Why must I know much about something so painful? I've got everything in life that makes it convenient for me and my family in the natural, yet countless much more in Spirit. How is learning more science going to better that? If it helps the meek, weak, poor, old, hungry and sick, then bring it on. Until then, I'll stick to what is powerful. Prayer

The funny thing is, is that its actually already doing that. Still, you ask why you must learn about something so painful? Have you read the bible?(I already know the answer to that) There is pain in there, boatloads of it.

EDIT: I didnt realize that I wasn't in the "Do you believe in god thread?", I apologize for going off topic.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Can't help but giggle to myself whilst picturing a beardy hippie in sandals screaming at a tree and trying to beat it up.

Actually I think I saw that at Glastonbury one year.

Acid does some crazy things man.

As I think I've said before... when I took two tablets and went into the hills I wrote nearly two full albums. Moses managed ten commandments. Lightweight.

II Peter 3:5
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

You should have continued, it gets sillier;

But the heavens and earth, which are now, are kept by the same word in store, and reserved unto fire against the day of condemnation, and of the destruction of ungodly men.

The flood, the damage was done by the fountains of the deep, which were broken up.
Where did all that flood water go, perhaps back where they came from, and perhaps becoming the seas we have today?
Better than that mystery comet bombardment theory we think.

Who are we? And you know that less than 0.3% of the Earth is water, right? And we know where it all is... not because science is hunkum-bunkum story telling but because even simple individuals can learn to observe and calculate. Admittedly it takes cleverer ones to build better survey equipment, but look at their sandals. You'd love them.

Who hath measured the waters in his fist? and counted heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure? and weighed the mountains in a weight, and the hills in a balance?

Humans, that's who.

 

[Scaff]

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/abundant-o...r-shows-conditions-life-are-universal-1495510

3000 years ago, the bible told us that the heavens are covered by water, well yip, science is slowly but surely catching up with the good ol book.

Except that source says that water (and other complex molecules) are abundant in the universe, not that the universe is covered in water.

Here is a quick hint, if you have to cherry pick the information and exaggerate one part of it to fit your 'good ol book' then its not science, its wish fulfillment.

http://klfy.com/2015/04/09/nasa-predicts-alien-life-could-be-found-by-2025/

I reckon that is too long. Perhaps in 2-4 years you will see the fallen. No doubt. You will see all kinds of hideous creatures that even hollywood would be proud of. I truly hope you don't though.

That would be the demons then would it?

So should we ever encounter alien life you would automatically be hostile towards it because it will be 'of satan'?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25723-massive-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core.html

Battling to keep up with the bible again.
The flood, the damage was done by the fountains of the deep, which were broken up.
Where did all that flood water go, perhaps back where they came from, and perhaps becoming the seas we have today?

Except that not one bit of evidence exists to indicate that these waters suddenly rushed up from 700km down, flooded the entire planet and then rushed back down. It managed it without leaving a trace?

That is of course ignoring that the whole biblical flood myth was stolen wholesale from an earliest religion.

Better than that mystery comet bombardment theory we think.

You mean apart from the evidence that exists to a scientific standard to support comet's striking the planet and the total lack of evidence for a global flood.

Please do explain how the option with no evidence is 'better' than the one with the evidence (apart from 'I want my book of borrowed, man made, edited and contradictory stories to be true')?

 

[GBO Possum]

http://klfy.com/2015/04/09/nasa-predicts-alien-life-could-be-found-by-2025/

I reckon that is too long. Perhaps in 2-4 years you will see the fallen. No doubt. You will see all kinds of hideous creatures that even hollywood would be proud of. I truly hope you don't though.

Whether you believe extra terrestrial life forms to be made by a god, or understand that they emerged via the normal evolutionary process, there is no reason to reach for the adjective "hideous".

I think most of us would agree that most of the obvious life forms on this planet are attractive to our eyes. I see no reason to assume ugliness.

Now, as for us actually being able to "see" them, well, that's a more difficult proposition. Having sufficient evidence of their existence doesn't necessarily mean we will have images of their bodies.

EDIT:-

@DCP, I'm not sure you understand the scale of these things and the distances involved. Based on your other limitations of scientific understanding, I think not.

The next interesting intellectual step is to consider the likelihood that some evolved extra-terrestrial species may also consider themselves to be the reason why this universe was created by their god or gods. Right now they might just be angrily watching our blasphemous Sunday evangelical TV shows and be planning to wipe us out. It could be that while we can't ever hope to be able to travel the enormous distances required to wipe them out, their god(s) may provide them with the capability to do it to us.

 

[Dotini]

Perhaps in 2-4 years you will see the fallen. No doubt. You will see all kinds of hideous creatures that even hollywood would be proud of. I truly hope you don't though.

Rumors of the apocalypse, return of the ancient aliens, Annunaki or the fallen angels are often heard but never seen.

"Prophecy is like a half-trained mule.... It looks as though it might be useful, but the moment you trust in it, it kicks you in the head." - Tyrion Lannister, A Dance with Dragons

If there actually were fallen angels, or aliens, here on earth, what would they want? Nothing, because they are so superior and see us like ants? To harvest our immortal souls, or material resources? To instruct and guide us? Io interbreed and produce giants? What?

 

[squadops]

We've gone and evolved ourselves right into targets for an ugly invasion by ugly aliens

 

[Bo]

I was raised a Christian, I still have a number of Christian beliefs.

Creation theory is nonsensical. I know completely devout, abiding Christians who don't, have never and never will believe in it.

That is all I have to say on the matter.

 

[Famine]

Like most prisons of the world that condemn crime, the criminals are judged and sentenced according to their crimes. Some even to the point of death.
Likewise, it's the same judgment all criminals before a Holy Judge will face.

Unfortunately unlike most courts of the world that condemn crime, we're apparently assumed guilty until proven innocent.

Have a crack at a better metaphor. Alternatively we could just pretend that you're talking about a ludicrously overblown dictatorship where everyone is guilty of some sort of crime at birth (often for the sins of their fathers) at the whim of a power hungry tyrant. Interesting how your particular take on Christianity sounds when put up against North Korea...

 

[jimipitbull]

If if's and buts....

Waiting for proof will be too late I'm afraid. Way too late.

I definitely know little. Why must I know much about something so painful? I've got everything in life that makes it convenient for me and my family in the natural, yet countless much more in Spirit. How is learning more science going to better that? If it helps the meek, weak, poor, old, hungry and sick, then bring it on. Until then, I'll stick to what is powerful. Prayer

What if you were praying for proof?

Science is powerful. For real.

 

[DCP]

As I think I've said before... when I took two tablets and went into the hills I wrote nearly two full albums. Moses managed ten commandments. Lightweight.



You should have continued, it gets sillier;





Who are we? And you know that less than 0.3% of the Earth is water, right? And we know where it all is... not because science is hunkum-bunkum story telling but because even simple individuals can learn to observe and calculate. Admittedly it takes cleverer ones to build better survey equipment, but look at their sandals. You'd love them.



Humans, that's who.

Ten8ty, Moses had cloud cover and 2 tablets 3000 years ago.
You only have that now...
Oh, humans, you talking about the ones God created right...

Except that source says that water (and other complex molecules) are abundant in the universe, not that the universe is covered in water.

Here is a quick hint, if you have to cherry pick the information and exaggerate one part of it to fit your 'good ol book' then its not science, its wish fulfillment.




That would be the demons then would it?

So should we ever encounter alien life you would automatically be hostile towards it because it will be 'of satan'?



Except that not one bit of evidence exists to indicate that these waters suddenly rushed up from 700km down, flooded the entire planet and then rushed back down. It managed it without leaving a trace?

That is of course ignoring that the whole biblical flood myth was stolen wholesale from an earliest religion.



You mean apart from the evidence that exists to a scientific standard to support comet's striking the planet and the total lack of evidence for a global flood.

Please do explain how the option with no evidence is 'better' than the one with the evidence (apart from 'I want my book of borrowed, man made, edited and contradictory stories to be true')?

Fact of the matter is, it was written before man discovered it. Why should the book fit mans discovery, when clearly it's the other way around.

Aliens. Should've would've could've. You've found nothing for centuries. Searched the stars for centuries yet found no other life. Only false promises. I understand people will die trying, but that's their free choice to do so.
Aliens on planet earth are demons. They have the wisdom and strength and knowledge to make things that seem impossible for man. Angels are higher than man. These are fallen angels. Revelations tells you when you can expect to see them. There is still hope in that period though. Jesus can save anyone from these things to come, only if those really want to be saved.

If comets hitting earth is your evidence, then mine is the grand canyon, and the disturbance of the plates.
We were not there to see it pan out, so both of our evidence "could" be something.

The bible is and always will be evidence. It's what chases the demons away. Even demons bow before Christ.
The flood legends was a proper story told after it happened. I mean it spread like wild fire from Noah and his sons till even Isaac and Jacob. Did it ever occur to you that Noahs grandson lived long enough to tell Jacob about the flood?
There are plenty cultures that heard about the flood, including the earliest finds. Think about it, if all living things of land and air died in the flood, who could possibly know of the flood, other than Noah and his sons? Who's the father of lies, deceit, death and destruction again?

Whether you believe extra terrestrial life forms to be made by a god, or understand that they emerged via the normal evolutionary process, there is no reason to reach for the adjective "hideous".

I think most of us would agree that most of the obvious life forms on this planet are attractive to our eyes. I see no reason to assume ugliness.

Now, as for us actually being able to "see" them, well, that's a more difficult proposition. Having sufficient evidence of their existence doesn't necessarily mean we will have images of their bodies.

Hideous doesn't mean ugly. I just meant something that mankind has never seen.
All you've seen on you tube, or read on the net is sightings of UFO's. How they appear and zoom off into the clouds.
These fallen angels are fully capable of this. As far as people being abducted. I can't really say I truly believe it, but I've seen demons cast of out people as a youngster. You tube it if you have no fear.

The bible says God is Truth and Just. His word says nothing about life out there in the universe.



@dylansan

I see you possessed with the fossils. Hope this keeps you a little busy.
http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/fossils/missing-links/gaps/


One thing you already know is, Light moves, and darkness is stagnant.
Jesus is the Light of the world. Are you moving with the Light?

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Oh, humans, you talking about the ones God created right...

[citation required]

Fact of the matter is, it was written before man discovered it.

[citation required]

Aliens. Should've would've could've. You've found nothing for centuries.

And nothing has been found to support a great many of the stories of the Bible.

Searched the stars for centuries yet found no other life. Only false promises. I understand people will die trying, but that's their free choice to do so.

Funny you use the term false promises...

Aliens on planet earth are demons.

[citation required]

In addition, you went from saying no other life, to saying we'll see some in a few years. Which is it?

They have the wisdom and strength and knowledge to make things that seem impossible for man. Angels are higher than man. These are fallen angels.

[citation required]

If comets hitting earth is your evidence, then mine is the grand canyon, and the disturbance of the plates.
We were not there to see it pan out, so both of our evidence "could" be something.

Well, except the bundles of testable evidence to support scientific theory. Your "evidence" amounts to pointing at anything, then plugging your ears as you shout "God did it".

The bible is and always will be evidence.

Er, no. You're using that word wrong.

It's what chases the demons away. Even demons bow before Christ.

[citation required]

The flood legends was a proper story told after it happened. I mean it spread like wild fire from Noah and his sons till even Isaac and Jacob. Did it ever occur to you that Noahs grandson lived long enough to tell Jacob about the flood?

Oh, did they live a few hundred years as well?

Who's the father of lies, deceit, death and destruction again?

If this were an answer on a quiz, "religion" would be an appropriate answer.

Hideous doesn't mean ugly. I just meant something that mankind has never seen.
All you've seen on you tube, or read on the net is sightings of UFO's. How they appear and zoom off into the clouds.
These fallen angels are fully capable of this.

[citation required]

I can't really say I truly believe it, but I've seen demons cast of out people as a youngster. You tube it if you have no fear.

What a coincidence, The Exorcist is one of my favourite movies too!

The bible says God is Truth and Just. His word says nothing about life out there in the universe.

A book simply stating that everything contained within it is true, does not make it true. This really should not have to be explained to an adult capable of thinking on their own. Which is apparently giving you too much credit.

One thing you already know is, Light moves, and darkness is stagnant.
Jesus is the Light of the world. Are you moving with the Light?

Take your proselytizing to the appropriate thread. You can start answering the many issues you've brought up about Creation vs Evolution here, though.

 

[dylansan]

Ugh.

If if's and buts....


@dylansan
The inbetweeners is just that, the tasty part of the sandwich. The fact is, you and your gods are still searching for truth that you will never find, only because the God of Wonders knows this.
Clues lead to more clues and more clues. If your hearts desire continues looking for these clues, that's just it. Your hearts desires, or your willingness to prove christians and their bible wrong. We have the Great I AM. Nothing changes that.

Let's get something straight. You came to this thread spouting all sorts of nonsense about birds turning into llamas, people coming from apes, and theories being just guesses. That was your idea of evolution which you disagreed with. In response, several of us tried very hard to correct your misinformation so you could discuss the actual theory of evolution, and not the one you made up. You chose to ignore that information. Over and over. You don't want to read it, you don't want to answer simple questions about it. And yet you want to continue talking about it, somehow. And you have the gall to suggest it has something to do with out hearts and our desires.

I couldn't give a flying crocoduck whether you believe in God or pray or read the Bible. What I care about is your misrepresentation of evolution. All I've done to this point is tell you about the theory and ask what you thought. And apparently those questions are too tough for you.

So then why are you still here?

@dylansan

I see you possessed with the fossils. Hope this keeps you a little busy.
http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/fossils/missing-links/gaps/

What makes you think I need more busy work? I already spend a large amount of time explaining the process at which we arrived at the conclusion of evidence, and asked you several questions which you have continued to ignore.

We're not talking about gaps in the fossil record. We're talking about what is there. It's your job to explain how Evolution was able to PREDICT the existence of many many fossils. According to you, prophecy is supposed to be the biggest "proof" that the Bible is true. Evolution made many more prophecies, and much more specific ones. Tell me how. Really tell me how. And can you please do it without using the word "sandwich." That analogy hasn't made sense from the start.

 

[Scaff]

Fact of the matter is, it was written before man discovered it. Why should the book fit mans discovery, when clearly it's the other way around.

The issue we have with this is that the book doesn't fit it. I pointed this out and you have simply ignored it.

Why?

Aliens. Should've would've could've. You've found nothing for centuries. Searched the stars for centuries yet found no other life. Only false promises. I understand people will die trying, but that's their free choice to do so.
Aliens on planet earth are demons. They have the wisdom and strength and knowledge to make things that seem impossible for man. Angels are higher than man. These are fallen angels. Revelations tells you when you can expect to see them. There is still hope in that period though. Jesus can save anyone from these things to come, only if those really want to be saved.

You really have no idea how big the universe is do you?

If comets hitting earth is your evidence, then mine is the grand canyon, and the disturbance of the plates.
We were not there to see it pan out, so both of our evidence "could" be something.

Excellent, I've been waiting for you to pull this one out to support a global flood.

Citation Required. Sources that the Grand Canyon is proof of a young earth please, see if you can do it from a peer reviewed paper rather than Answers in Genesis or one of its sister sites.

The bible is and always will be evidence. It's what chases the demons away. Even demons bow before Christ.
The flood legends was a proper story told after it happened. I mean it spread like wild fire from Noah and his sons till even Isaac and Jacob. Did it ever occur to you that Noahs grandson lived long enough to tell Jacob about the flood?

Why are you continuing to ignore the fact (and it is one) that the flood myth in the Bible has been directly lifted from an earlier religion?

There are plenty cultures that heard about the flood, including the earliest finds. Think about it, if all living things of land and air died in the flood, who could possibly know of the flood, other than Noah and his sons? Who's the father of lies, deceit, death and destruction again?

Yes because a) rivers flood and people write about them and b) religions older than yours have the exact same myth (a point you are now willfully ignoring, why is that?).

I see you possessed with the fossils. Hope this keeps you a little busy.
http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/fossils/missing-links/gaps/

Answer me this. Why do you think the person who put the information together in that link did so in a deliberately misleading manner?

Lets take the second quote on that page (as its one I have seen this done with before):

“Given the fact of evolution, one would expect the fossils to document a gradual steady change from ancestral forms to the descendants. But this is not what the paleontologist finds. Instead, he or she finds gaps in just about every phyletic series.” (Ernst Mayr-Professor Emeritus, Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University, What Evolution Is, 2001, p.14.)

It would seem that the author in this case is writing in support of Creationism, the problem is that the quote is incomplete, lets look at it in full now:

Given the fact of evolution, one would expect the fossils to document a gradual steady change from ancestral forms to the descendants.But this is not what the paleontologist finds. Instead, he or she finds gaps in just about every phyletic series. New types often appear quite suddenly, and their immediate ancestors are absent in the earlier geological strata. The discovery of unbroken series of species changing gradually into descending species is very rare. Indeed the fossil record is one of discontinuities, seemingly documenting jumps(saltations) from one type of organism to a different type. This raises a puzzling question: Why does the fossil record fail to reflect the gradual change one would expect from evolution?

All of his life Darwin insisted that this is simply due to the unimaginable incompleteness of the fossil record. Only an incredibly small fraction of organisms that had once lived are preserved as fossils. Often the fossil-bearing strata were on plates that were sub sequently subducted and destroyed in the process of plate tectonics. Others were strongly folded, compressed, and metamorphosed, obliterating the fossils. Only a fraction of the fossil-bearing strata is presently exposed at the Earth's surface.But it is even highly improbable that any organism ever becomes fossilized at all, since most dead animals and plants are either eaten by scavengers or decay. They become fossilized only when, immediately after death, they are buried by sediment or volcanic ash. Fortunately, occasionally a rare fossil is found that fills the gap between ancestors and modern descendants.Archaeopteryx, for instance, a primitive fossil bird of the upper Jurassic (145 million years ago), still had teeth, a long tail, and other characteristics of his reptilian ancestors. However, in other respects, for instance in its brain, large eyes, feathers, and wings, it is rather similar to living birds. Fossils that fill a large gap are referred to as missing links. The discovery ofArchaeopteryx in1861was particularly gratifying because anatomists had already concluded that birds must have descended from reptilian ancestors.Archaeopteryx confirmed their prediction.

A few fossil lineages are remarkably complete. (...)

Now in its full context not only does it explain why the fossil record is not complete, but it finishes with "A few fossil lineages are remarkably complete." so its actually the exact opposite of how it was presented on your link.

Please explain exactly why this (and other quotes on that same page) are presented in a completely dishonest manners, doesn't your 'good ol book' have some rule about lying?

Its a practice called 'quote mining' and AIG and similar sites are well known for doing it (its a polite way of saying they lie about what people actually said), I'm quite frankly amazed you haven't tried pulling the Darwin's supposed (and edited) quote about the eye one out of the bag yet.

 

[dylansan]

Thanks for that Scaff. Turns out the source that he quoted from says exactly what I have been trying to say about evolution making predictions.

Almost ironic if it weren't so frustrating.

 

[JKgo]

.....Before I go, I thought I should share an interesting news piece I read. Dunno if it's 100% accurate, but anyways:

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32236676

Extinction and evolution go hand in hand, doesn't it...

 

[Imari]

To get back on topic - the idea of a subject being compulsory at school - Both Creationism and the biological progress of the cell (Evolution) are subjects that should be a matter of choice - whether treated as Sciences or Arts, the archetypes of mankind are as important as its shifting physical plane. These facets may not be mutually exclusive, either. The choice to 'learn' about these subjects should be no different from wanting to learn math or ballet.
To have either one choked down a pupils throat is to take away a basic freedom . . . that a Nijinsky may not be interested in Calculus.

Certainly, but including Creationism in the scientific curriculum is to give it standing that it does not deserve. It is not science and should be treated as though it is

If people want to teach Creationism in religious classes then that's totally appropriate. It's when they start pushing to have it taught in science classes that there's a problem, or worse, as an alternative to evolution.

Creationism is not an alternative to evolution. It doesn't predict anything, and isn't testable. All it says is "everything you see, God made it that way at an arbitrary date in the past". That's not science, and therefore shouldn't be taught as though it is.

And you're right, they're not mutually exclusive. Even if Creationism is accepted to be true for the sake of argument, we have observations of evolution working on scales smaller than the ~6000 years since the creation event. Humans breed plants and other animals for desirable properties, such as better food sources or companionship. There are experiments where bacteria have evolved to their environments. And we all know that diseases evolve, that's why antibiotic resistance is a thing.

TL;DR: Creationism is not science, and it doesn't refute evolution in any way.

How is learning more science going to better that? If it helps the meek, weak, poor, old, hungry and sick, then bring it on.

You really don't know anything about science.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

How is learning more science going to better that? If it helps the meek, weak, poor, old, hungry and sick, then bring it on. Until then, I'll stick to what is powerful. Prayer.

If you knew anything at all about science you'd know that that's exactly what it does. Modern medicine is one of the great triumphs of science. Using the scientific method we, as a species, have more than doubled our life expectancies as well as eradicating such diseases as smallpox. None of that was done with prayer or religion. It was done by thinking intelligently and logically and being objective and factual.

 

[squadops]

I'd hardly say that was true, to get to where we are now it took society as a whole. You can't discount peoples motivation, inspiration, etc. I'm feeling lazy so I'll just leave a wiki(hate doing that) concerning The Catholic Church and healthcare.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_health_care

 

[Com Fox]

Healing the sick through god is total rubbish from my experiences and knowledge. Parents have let their kids die from sickness thinking that "God will heal them"... and I like they said before, science has made medicine to cure the sickness.

 

[squadops]

I'm not talking about blind prayer though, did you bother with the article?

In modern times, the Catholic Church is the largest non-government provider of health care in the world. Catholic religious have been responsible for founding and running networks of hospitals across the world where medical research continues to be advanced.[30] In 2013, Robert Calderisi wrote that the Catholic Church has around 18,000 clinics, 16,000 homes for the elderly and those with special needs, and 5,500 hospitals - with 65 per cent of them located in developing countries.[2]

 

[Com Fox]

I'm not talking about blind prayer though, did you bother with the article?

Wasn't talking directory at you, more to @DCP