Anti-evolutionists: please explain the fossil record

The Tower of Babel story is about the collapse of a culture and a descent into illiteracy. Who believes these cockamammie OT stories?

 

I don't use the "fossil record" for anything. I believe we could find skulls of humans alive today that might appear to be Neanderthal or whatever you might imagine.

 

Evolution attemps to explain the fossil record. Do you have an alternative explanation? So far it appears that you dismiss the existence of neanderthals and propose that they are indistinguishable from modern humans.

 

I appreciate your response. Though what do you mean about God not being done or me looking in the mirror?

 

That makes sense. I think that's why evolution is continually being looked at, though. I'm agnostic in a sense as well. I just happen to find the theory of evolution, while not confirmed, as a reasonable explaination. But I agree, there are still a lot of gaps.
I never understood the "political agenda" aspect. Plenty of different ideals could be spread regardless of the existence of the theory of evolution.

 

Out of curiosity, if evolution was ever proven as a fact, would it even affect any of your personal lives?

 

There are no gaps of millions of years, we have a very filled in fossil record of hominid evolution with hundreds of fossils. This claim is just not true. These bones are certainly not monkeys because monkeys are too small to ever get mixed up with humans. They are not apes because they were bipedal and were built to walk on two legs, their brain sizes were far too large, and their facial features were far too reduced. We even see tools and weapons with some of them. Some of the later ones are actually more similar to humans than to apes and we even have some of their DNA to prove they are not human or ape. The best evidence is that when you look at different creationists authors some will label some of them as apes and others will label the exact same hominid specimens as humans and if they were obviously ape or human how could that happen?

Guess what, there are billions of mutations every single day because every person has about 100 mutations at birth. According to research the vast majority of mutations are neutral but a few are bad, and a few are good. Natural selection weeds out the bad ones and over time increases to proportion of good ones.

 

We have Neanderthal and other extinct human DNA in our genetic code based on cultural roots my people come from Poland and Scotland so we have Neanderthal DNA which like gave us advantages like superior strength and vitality to survive in Asia a species gave natives a strong ability to survive in elevations where without it breathing would have been harder and oxygen was more limited. And DNA studies showed the many species are in us now as parts of our genes. That means they were not lesser primates but from of our linage or close cousins we could have bred with. We don't need the fossil record with the brilliance of advanced genetic research and the mapping of the DNA of our species.

And we have many other species to study that prove the theory is a sound one, both with the fossil record and genetics.

 

I am a Creationist. It is not my occupation but I have seen enough evidence to convince me.

 

No problem mate, I am just wondering how you reconcile known scientific facts ( like the fossil record) and creationism. I mean there are fairly simple questions.... like when did creation happen. (Approximately)? 6,000 years ago, 100,000 years ago, a million years ago, a billion years ago, or during the Big Bang 14 billion years ago. Did the creator create humans only in Africa, or did he separately create different races on different continents. What’s up with the dinosaurs and creation?
Did men live at the same time as dinosaurs? Were the Neanderthals human? If I have Neanderthal dna, am I human? About how old are humans?

 

Evolution cannot explain creation.

They sort of skip over that part which makes the rest of the theory flawed.

 

Nobody knows how God created life but he certainly could have used evolution as part of the process.

 

Allegories are acceptable attempts at explanations in the context of ancient writings. Whether they fit into some modern conspiracy theory narratives or political agendas or not is what is irrelevant and unimportant.

 

It would for some; I sleep just fine not knowing either way now, so it wouldn't bother me, I don't feel guilty about anything.

 

Speculation is fine, it is in fact necessary; it's the claim of it being 'scientific fact' and lying to school children about it being so that is not fine.

 

DNA has already been shown to be unreliable as some form of dating or determining timelines.

Guess what the vast majority of mutations are not beneficial, period, in fact exponentially so. Get back to us with something besides wishful thinking.

And yes, the gaps between fossil records are indeed huge.

 

Where is the conflict?

 

In your incorrect opinion.

 

How do you know it's true?

 

If you are genuinely curious about these things, I suggest you visit the Creation Museum in Kentucky. They do not present their evidence as "dogma" but actually present both sides of the issue. There are a lot of serious questions about Darwins theory and the existence of man.

One point of interest, did you know they have discovered dinosaur bone with muscle cells still attached? Scientists have agreed that muscle cells could not exist longer than 6-7000 years. Where did legends of Dragons and giant monsters that resemble dinosaurs come from? Cultures from all over the earth relate these stories. Evolution relies on the belief that when a roadblock comes in their way they add billions of years. That, they believe, enhances their belief in "chance" happening.

What really impressed me, is the cataclysmic events that took place in creation. There is strata exposed in the Grand Canyon that is present all over the world. You can easily see layers of strata that have been heaved up and must have had a degree of flexibility because there is no fracture. Modern scientists claim there are millions upon millions of years between that strata, yet they had no time to "dry out" otherwise there would have been serious fractures.

There is a multitude of questions, my friend, that surface when science is questioned by other frames of references. It needs to be examined and when it is, a lot of us return to "faith".

 

Note: we are discredited right out of the chute, because Freedom Seeker says we are "stupid".

 

It is a wise opinion. Mutations, as we all know, are most generally negative in improvement. Your opinion is a fantasy.

 

In your incorrect opinion.

 

Indeed. I'm given to understand there are also web pages and stuff out there, and then there are the notes from his mother verifying his Scienceness.

 

Clearly they are all lies created by Satan and the Illuminati in order to make people not believe that the Flat Earth is 6,000 years old.
.
.
.
.
...okay, I’m done channeling jrr now.