The biogeographic evidence for evolution

[dad]

Do you have any evidence that the past was totally different from today? Anything at all?

Scripture and history. Got any science saying it was not?

 

[dad]

Sure...

How can one disprove a silly tall tale for which there is no actual corroborating evidence in the first place?

See?

I believe in little winged fairies.

Prove they do not exist.

The thing you need to prove is that the nature you use in models of the past existed. No ifs ands or buts.

 

[tas8831]

Do you have any evidence that the past was totally different from today? Anything at all?

Scripture and history. Got any science saying it was not?

Scripture's authenticity and historicity itself is not generally accepted as accurate, so that fails.

What history?

Provide documented, corroborated examples from history showing that radioactive decay rates were different 5000 years ago.

 

[tas8831]

The thing you need to prove is that the nature you use in models of the past existed. No ifs ands or buts.

So you accept the existence of my winged fairies.

No ifs ands or buts.

By the way - I already used an example of volcanic action for you earlier, not going to waste my time writing more for a person nobody takes seriously on any topic.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Great, and why would there be now?

Evolution provides an unambigous explanation for why you'll only find kangaroo's and koala's (or fossils thereof) in Australia.

To the point in fact, that if you WOULD find natural populations of these species outside of australia, you would have just found something that evolution is unable to explain - that would be a problem.

But we don't find such populations outside of australia off course.
We never find anything that couldn't exist according to evolution.
We only ever find things that fit the evolutionary narrative.

We don't find mammals with feathers.
We don't find birds with inner earbones.
We don't find reptiles with mammary glands.
We don't find rabbits in pre-cambrian rock.
We don't find kangaroo's outside of australia.

On the flip side, we DO find fossils of creatures that were previously unknown, and we find these by prediction based on the evolutionary narrative.

Like with Tiktaalik. Paleontologists predicted the location, the rock it would be found in, the age as well as the distinguishable anatomical traits of this creature BEFORE IT WAS EVEN KNOWN TO EXIST.

Yet, they knew exactly where to find, how deep to dig and what to expect.
And they went ahead and found it.


See, if you look for stuff from the perspective of evolutionary history, you actually find shizzle.

From a creationist perspective, there is absolutely NO reason why kangaroo's would only ever be found in australia, INCLUDING fossil remains of this species.

In fact, what with the whole "the world was flooded and all animals on a magical boat" story, finding these species ONLY in australia, makes no sense at all.

Once again, the data matches the scientific theory and not the religious fantasy.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Why do you insist on straw manning everyone's points?

Mostly just yours, since you have no interest in being open to anyone's claims but yours.

 

[BilliardsBall]

For the sake of argument, let's grant that Darwin was a racist. Can you answer the following?

Charles Darwin was a racist, therefore ________________?

Those who adore his theories are likely, but not always, racists--or at least hypocrites with double standards.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The thing is, how can anyone address something you cannot post or debate or address? Have you any evidence for evolution that does not involve using a past nature you cannot prove? Anything at all?

It is your fault that you cannot address the evidence given to you. You need to prove a different past nature. There is no evidence for it. You have been given evidence that nature was the same in the past. It is not our fault that you cannot understand it.It

If you want to address the nature of this Earth you need to get an education.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Mostly just yours, since you have no interest in being open to anyone's claims but yours.

That is not correct. He is only open to claims supported by evidence.

Do you understand the difference?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Those who adore his theories are likely, but not always, racists--or at least hypocrites with double standards.

Actually it tends to be the other way around. Darwin was born into a very racist time, but he was less racist than most, not more. Please, remember the Ninth Commandment.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How did you post a video you hadn't watched as evidence?

Do you have any evidence that the past was totally different from today? Anything at all?

His evidence amounts to 'My myth is false without a different state past, and my myth cannot be false.'

Extraordinarily weak, but that is all he has.

 

[dad]

Scripture's authenticity and historicity itself is not generally accepted as accurate, so that fails.

What history?

Provide documented, corroborated examples from history showing that radioactive decay rates were different 5000 years ago.

Not accepted by your religion. Ho hum

 

[dad]

So you accept the existence of my winged fairies.

No ifs ands or buts.

By the way - I already used an example of volcanic action for you earlier, not going to waste my time writing more for a person nobody takes seriously on any topic.

Yes there are volcanoes. Not sure how mentioning them helps your belief set? For one thing, as the continental move came to the aprox present locations, I assume we had entered this nature. That means a lot of heat.

 

[tas8831]

Those who adore his theories are likely, but not always, racists--or at least hypocrites with double standards.

So short (or selective) your memory:

So let us compare this:

“It may be doubted whether any character can be named which is distinctive of a race and is constant.”

“This diversity of judgment does not prove that the races ought not to be ranked as species, but it shews that they graduate into each other, and that it is hardly possible to discover clear distinctive characters between them.”

“He who will read Mr. Tylor's and Sir J. Lubbock's interesting works can hardly fail to be deeply impressed with the close similarity between the men of all races in tastes, dispositions and habits. …and this fact can only be accounted for by the various races having similar inventive or mental powers.”​

-C. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1871

With this:

"The descendants of Ham were marked especially for secular service to mankind. Indeed they were to be 'servants of servants,' that is 'servants extraordinary!' Although only Canaan is mentioned specifically (possibly because the branch of Ham's family through Canaan would later come into most direct contact with Israel), the whole family of Ham is in view. The prophecy is worldwide in scope and, since Shem and Japheth are covered, all Ham's descendants must be also. These include all nations which are neither Semitic nor Japhetic. Thus, all of the earth's 'colored' races,--yellow, red, brown, and black--essentially the Afro-Asian group of peoples, including the American Indians--are possibly Hamitic in origin and included within the scope of the Canaanitic prophecy, as well as the Egyptians, Sumerians, Hittites, and Phoenicians of antiquity.

...Yet the prophecy again has its obverse side. Somehow they have only gone so far and no farther. The Japhethites and Semites have, sooner or later, taken over their territories, and their inventions, and then developed them and utilized them for their own enlargement. Often the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they have eventually been displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.​

THAT^^^^^?

Dr. Henry Morris, YEC - the father of modern creationism
1991
The Beginning Of the World, Second Edition (1991), pp. 147-148



Tell us more about how Scripture is love and morals and ethics, won't you?

 

[tas8831]

Yes there are volcanoes. Not sure how mentioning them helps your belief set? For one thing, as the continental move came to the aprox present locations, I assume we had entered this nature. That means a lot of heat.

So you lack the mental faculties to understand what I was describing.

I had indicated that we can observe volcanic eruptions today, and see the sorts of evidence they leave behind (lava flows, ash deposits, etc.).

We then come across buried lava flows, ash deposits, etc. We discover that there were no witnesses, no writes ups in newspapers, etc., going back as far as such records have been kept.

What shall one conclude?

That a volcano had erupted at some point int the past and left these pieces of evidence?

Or golly, gee - it happened in the past so there is no way to know how this stuff was produced?

Your naive nonsense will have us shrug our shoulders and say Goddidit.

Sane, educated people will realize that we are looking at the results of an ancient volcanic eruption.

Same states past.

 

[tas8831]

Not accepted by your religion. Ho hum

Yes - my religion of common sense, lack of historical corroboration, lack of physical evidence for described miraculous events, etc. makes me not accept ancient middle eastern "morality" tales as evidence.

Imagine that.

Your religion, a sect of one, it seems, commands that you shrug your shoulders when confronted with fact-based material that is contrary to your tales, and dismiss it as a relic of the past in which things were totally different than they are now.

Absurd.

 

[SkepticThinker]

False accusations aside, you don't.

That would be you.

 

[dad]

So you lack the mental faculties to understand what I was describing.

We shall see who lacks what.

I had indicated that we can observe volcanic eruptions today, and see the sorts of evidence they leave behind (lava flows, ash deposits, etc.).

We then come across buried lava flows, ash deposits, etc. We discover that there were no witnesses, no writes ups in newspapers, etc., going back as far as such records have been kept.

What shall one conclude?

That a volcano had erupted at some point int the past and left these pieces of evidence?

That depends. For example, regarding the deccan traps we see this

"Vocanologists are also trying to understand how such great volumes of lava are erupted. Early models proposed that lava flooded across large areas at extremely rapid rates. Recently proposed models suggested that at least some of the flows are emplaced at gradual rates, lasting months to years."
Deccan Traps | Volcano World | Oregon State University

Sane, educated people will realize that we are looking at the results of an ancient volcanic eruption.

Again, that depends on the formation/area. In some cases molten rock from the heat of continental movements may have been spread without volcanic activity also.

Try to remember that not all things have to be viewed through the colored lenses of your religion!

 

[dad]

That would be you.

Let's take an example that science uses the present nature to model the past. I do claim that. But it is easily supported. Let's take your belief in a same state past on earth...that can't be and has not been supported.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Mostly just yours, since you have no interest in being open to anyone's claims but yours.

And now you're doing that thing you do where you think you can read peoples' minds. You are predictable, I'll give you that. Hey, at least you admitted to fallaciously straw manning people's arguments. That's something. Though disappointing that it's a conscious effort, on your part.

I do actually have an interest in other points of view as I've told you many times. It's why I am here. But being interested in other points of view doesn't demand that I accept them all, especially if I have questions, they're lacking in evidential support and/or they don't make sense to me.