promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 8 years ago

Do creationists really think it's reasonable to expect there to be a fossil of every generation?

And do some not only expect there to be a fossil for every generation but also a fossil of every individual to have ever existed?

5 Answers

Relevance
  • Favorite Answer

    They have been told that even a single hair out of place invalidates the whole kit'n'kaboodle.

    This is just wrong and downright retarded but what one expects from sheeple that have no understanding of the scientific method.

    They are also just flat out ignoring the advances in Genetics that have been able to trace humans and chimps back to when we stopped being able to produce viable offspring with one another.

    It just flat out boils down to refusing to learn... Refusing to take the time to research the topic.

    "But who has the time? I'm busy!"

    Yeah... You people have time to go to church, read creationist propaganda, watch mindless TV, masturbate, read popular nonsense... If people took just 10 mintues a day and read a SINGLE article from a science website or medical website (Such as ScientificAmerican.com, LiveScience.com, Space.com, nejm.org, jama.ama-assn.org, NationalGeographic.com, or Historychannel.com or discovery.com) they could get the basics down in a few weeks... But they don't... So they remain ignorant.

    "The problem is that your scientist do not know how fossils are formed."

    "New creatures appear fully developed for the first time in the fossil record and then remain unchanged for millions, even hundreds of millions, of years then disappear. There are fossil beds that contain billions of fossils that cover hundreds of millions of years, and there is not a single case of small-change by small-change linkage."

    WOW... Just WOW... To claim that humanity doesn't know how fossils are formed is not just wrong but downright retarded. How much of a mind-raped fool must one be to make a claim that no one knows how fossils are formed? To claim that there are no transitional fossils is just sickening in its ignorance.

    The science teachers of that person should be dragged to the street and beaten for allowing a student to leave his or her classroom without even a basic knowledge of what they teach.

    ► NOVA | Fossil Evidence

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/fossil-evid...

    ► BBC Horizon – The Missing Link: How Animals Got Legs & 5 Fingered "Hands"

    (NOT Uncovering Our Earliest Ancestor)

    Part 1 of 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUXbDQaZMMY

    Youtube thumbnail

    Part 2 of 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yc8L9_tH_o

    Youtube thumbnail

    &feature=related

    Part 3 of 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4cTm06uvPg

    Youtube thumbnail

    &feature=related

    Part 4 of 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps_ASDwspEY

    Youtube thumbnail

    &feature=related

    Part 5 of 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcDpQz5n3z0

    Youtube thumbnail

    &feature=related

    ► Uncovering Our Earliest Ancestor - The Link

    http://biomanvids.blogspot.com/2009/06/uncovering-...

    ► (A few) Transitional Fossils

    http://www.transitionalfossils.com/

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Jim V
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    Maybe a few - but very few.

    What evolution proposes is a gradual change over time from one form to another. What we see is types of animals come on the scene suddenly, endure for long periods with adaptive change, then go extinct.

    THIS was the reason Stephen J. Gould and Niles Eldridge came up with "punctuated equilibrium."

    What "non-evolutionists" want to see is a clear mechanism that can explain changes beyond speciation. For example, the Long Term Evolution Experiment (LTEE) shows that /e coli/ can now transport citrate across a membrane - after ~30,000 generations and many millions, if not billions of individual cells. The ability to transport citrate required changes at three specific points in the genome (which not be replicated before ~25k generations, demonstrating historical contingency).

    The point is that it took ~30k generations of bacteria which represents a /huge/ population number in order to get a moderate evolutionary advance. Apply that to Homo Sapiens Sapians and we should expect very little change over millions of years (much smaller populations). And we do see what we expect, things like lactose tolerance and sickle cell, which also happen to be 3 point changes.

    After ~50k generations /e coli/ has demonstrated a wide variety of changes at almost every point through its genome and it is still /e coli/.

    While adaptively and flexibility (evolution) of life is evident, what is presented as "proof" that evolution has the type of creative power required to generate even a different genus (let alone a family or higher) appears to be more based on "just-so" explanations than anything that is demonstrated in the fossil record (or micro-biology), even where the fossil record is reasonably intact - as with the fishes.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 8 years ago

    Only if there were a world wide flood in each generation.

    The problem is that your scientist do not know how fossils are formed.

    Or they reject the quiet obvious.

    Why would they do that and then teach you a lie???

    Read the KJV holy Bible. And visit:

    www.answersingenesis.org

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 8 years ago

    If the world is millions of years old then we would expect to see millions of human fossils, but we don't.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    No- dont care either. You are wrong. I will leave it at that. Thats how simple it is. Romans 1:28 God Bless

    Source(s): Jesus saves
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.