- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: A Scientific dissent from Darwin
Posted on 2/11/19 at 11:03 am to Korkstand
Posted on 2/11/19 at 11:03 am to Korkstand
quote:yeah, they are sequencing fossil DNA? Guess Jurassic Park is just around the corner. Actually, the discrepancy in the fossil record is the reason traditional Darwinism had to be abandoned. The fossil record did not show continual gradations smoothly blending between species, you see a distinct organism pop into existence in the evolutionary blink of an eye, then the next 'step' does the same thing, etc. That's why they came up with the idea of punctuated equilibrium, to explain why the fossils don't show what Darwin predicted. They rely now on the idea of advantageous mutations, despite knowing that like 99.99% of mutations are disastrously disadvantageous or outright fatal, and also ignoring the issues you get with higher order creatures and sexual reproduction, where if you change your DNA too much in one generation it can't be passed on because you suddenly can't breed. And yet over and over in the fossil record you see new, fully evolved, complex creatures explode into existence with no time for all this to happen by the only means available, random chance mutations. And not just once, but dozens of times during the numerous mad extinctions. These limit the time available to million of years, not billions, to recreate complete biospheres
quote:
our fossil records don't show evidence for those kinds of mutations.
The fossil record contains overwhelming evidence of those kinds of mutations.
This post was edited on 2/11/19 at 11:11 am
2
Posted on 2/11/19 at 11:10 am to narddogg81
quote:
Actually, the discrepancy in the fossil record is the reason traditional Darwinism had to be abandoned.
Final response. Darwinism hasn’t been abandoned. It’s been refined.
ID is just masked creationism. It can never compete in the scientific community.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 11:52 am to narddogg81
quote:You say "came up with the idea of punctuated equilibrium" as if it doesn't make sense. Why do you think that a successful collection of mutations wouldn't result in an explosion of the population? They would. They have to. That is the definition of "successful" in the context of evolution. And given the extreme rarity of fossilization, it is not the slightest bit odd that we find fossils of the most successful species.
The fossil record did not show continual gradations smoothly blending between species, you see a distinct organism pop into existence in the evolutionary blink of an eye, then the next 'step' does the same thing, etc. That's why they came up with the idea of punctuated equilibrium, to explain why the fossils don't show what Darwin predicted. They rely now on the idea of advantageous mutations, despite knowing that like 99.99% of mutations are disastrously disadvantageous or outright fatal, and also ignoring the issues you get with higher order creatures and sexual reproduction, where if you change your DNA too much in one generation it can't be passed on because you suddenly can't breed. And yet over and over in the fossil record you see new, fully evolved, complex creatures explode into existence with no time for all this to happen by the only means available, random chance mutations.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News