New fossil Discoveries Worldwide Showing A Pattern

Considering to be one of the strongest evidences for evolving species but new fossils that are currently turning up all over the world have a unique common theme, they all look similar to modern species of today!  It creates an ever growing part of complexity in Darwinism as they try to explain not more evolution but the lack of it found in the fossils.

Let’s start off by the most ancient pelican discovered so far, evolutionists deem it’s age to be 30 million years old.  The BBC reports, “What has surprised them most about this ancient pelican is that it is almost identical to modern species…Another added…”It is so similar to modern pelicans, despite its 30 million years,” Dr Antoine Louchart of the University of Lyon, France told the BBC.

Cretaceous bones with gnawing marks were found and claimed to be 75 million years old, these marks found on the bones was said to resemble, “The marks stood out for me because I remember seeing the gnaw marks on the antlers of a deer my father brought home when I was young” said Nicholas Longrich of Yale. Interesting, rodent tooth marks that have not changed much over a course of  the evolutionary time frame, 75 million years.

PNAS believes our ancestors from a million years ago have the same teeth we do today. This indicates the youth had a prolonged childhood , just like modern children have before the evolutionary story has Cro-Magnon man overtaking the Neanderthals in Europe! This adds more complexity to Darwinism which gauges intelligence and language by the size of their brains which brings up the question, why didn’t culture and civilization originate sooner?  What was going on for almost 995,000 years?

More discoveries on human cultural remains shows that we humans haven’t changed much either. In a story in physorg a new set of cave paintings in Romania dated in the evolutionary time frame of about 35,000 years old that show black-paint drawings of a horse, bear, buffalo and rhinoceros – the human propensity for representational art.

Another was the world’s oldest leather shoe found in a cave in Armenia which was remarkably preserved. Dated to have been made around 3500BCE. It was so amazing and surprising for evolutionists because this very ancient shoe resembled a modern one!

Evolutionists attempt to acclimate these findings in a geological scheme to make it appear that there has been progressive change but what has been observed is abrupt and complex life. Fossils have been discovered in the wrong place at the wrong time for the evolutionary model. Darwinian history is a myth with no foundation.

The reliance on a complex story as a result of so many falsifications then denies what has been observed by making absurd claims that the animals for some unknown reason were just able resist an all-encompassing force of Natural Selection!  Don’t they call this, stuff happens philosophy? While complexity abounds in evolution, these new discoveries are verifying creationism!

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “New fossil Discoveries Worldwide Showing A Pattern

  1. Olorin is back, but the open questions remain … open:

    (1) Blog readership numbers ?

    (2) Your qualifications to discuss any scientific subject, in response to the challenge to Olorin.

    (3) A substantive review of Signature in the Cell, promised for August 2009.

    (4) outstanding question from Upson Downes on mitochondrial Eve

    I’ll drop Olorin’s quiz.

  2. Michael, I issued you my challenge on the reducibility of the flagellum, and I STILL want you to refute it:

    . . . the flagellum IS NOT EVEN IRREDUCIBLE. — In 1988, G. Kuwajima was able to remove ONE-THIRD of the 497 amino acids from the flagellum, AND IT STILL WORKED PERFECTLY!!!!! . . . Also, we know that the L and the P-rings can be taken away from the flagellum, and it will STILL work. . . .

    I’m waiting for a refutation. . .

  3. Considering to be one of the strongest evidences for evolving species but new fossils that are currently turning up all over the world have a unique common theme, they all look similar to modern species of today!

    My stab at puzzling out the grammar of this sentence is that all recently discovered fossils are similar to present species. That’s just plain wrong. Even a cursory reading of the literature reveals many recent fossils that are unlike modern species. Ardi is a stellar example in the human lineage. On May 26, Discover reported discovery of a 500My-old sea creature (Nectocaris pteryx) with a 4cm kite-shaped body with two huge fins, eyes on stalks, two smooth tentacles, and a conical mouth, It looks so unlike anything that exists today that even an approximate classification is a mystery to paleontologists—

    Conway Morris himself had no idea where to place it. Some scientists suggested that it was an early arthropod, a relative of crabs, shrimp and the like. Others placed it within the chordates, the group that includes us and all other back-boned animals. But Smith and Caron think that both of these possibilities are unlikely. Their new specimens reveal a host of features that are distinctly cephalopod-like.

    On June 10, Discovery news reported the recent discovery of two fossils having a type of micro-polygon skin found on no present species.

    A report on May 14 describes a new 390My-old fossil intermediate between a present scorpion and a horseshoe crab Schinderhannes bartelsi.offers insights into the evolution of front claws of present species.

    Then, of course, new species of dinosaur are discovered monthly, and all dinosaurs differ from present species.

    So much for fossils newly reported in the past two months that ALL LOOK SIMILAR TO MODERN SPECIES OF TODAY. Could we perhaps accuse Michael; of cherry-picking the data? “You betcha,” as we say in Minnesota.

    .

    However, let’s look more closely at the four (only 4?) examples Michael cites as evidence that all recent fossils are similar to modern species of today..

    (1) One fossil from 30Mya is “almost identical” to a modern pelican. Hm. First 30My is a relatively short time, except for creationists. Second, Michael entirely fails to note the paleontologists’ hypothesis as to why they would look similar. They give a reason why large beaks arose in the first place. Then they note that, although large beaks remain useful, larger or different beaks would impair the flying ability of these birds. Thus, they remain the same.

    (2) Cretaceous bones with “rodent-like” gnaw marks Hm. Did any creatures then living have teeth like rodents? Well, rodents are the largest and one of the oldest groups of mammals. Rodents, past and present, are characterized by long incisors, even when the rest of the body is very different. In fact, rodents are the largest and one of the oldest groups of mammals. Other early mammals, such as lgomorphs, also had rodent-like incisors that would produce gnaw marks of similar shape and size to those of a modern rat. Despite the dental similarities, ancient rodentia and lagomorpha had bodies different from their modern descendants. Gnawing teeth are highly useful, and thus likely to endure.

    (3) So PNAS says human ancestors of a million years ago had teeth like ours. Not the same, mind you, merely similar. But earlier human ancestors did not. Ar. ramidus had long incisors, like those of a chimpanzee. Homo erectus had large anteriors and moderate postcanines, unlike present humans.[

    The bit about “why didn’t culture and civilization originate sooner? What was going on for almost 995,000 years?” is, of course, a lode of dingoes kidneys, as demonstrated previously. But, since Michael brings the subject up yet again, MICHAEL IS HEREBY OFFERED ANOTHER CHANCE TO ANSWER THE PREVIOUSLY POSED QUESTIONS A-F TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT HE CAN DO ANY BETTER THAN A CAVE MAN IN DEVELOPING A CIVILIZATION FROM SCRATCH IN 955,000 YEARS. How about it? Short memory? Or Just try it again to see if anything sticks this time?

    (4) 35,000 year old cave paintings, and 5,500 year old shoes. These humans were “modern” in all senses of the world. Here, Michael rhapsodizes that such old humans had a few modern-looking artifacts, whereas in (3) just above he wonders why humans took so long to come up with this kind of stuff. It’s a good thing that creationists don’t worry their heads overmuch about consistency.

    ….these new discoveries are verifying creationism!

    First, you’re cheery-picking the data. Second, even the examples are flawed. Third, PLEASE NAME ONE REASON WHY ANYTHING IN YOUR POST, EVEN THE TRUE BITS, CONSTITUTE ANY POSITIVE EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER FOR A SIX-DAY CREATION OF THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE WITHIN THE PAST FEW THOUSAND YEARS.

    Your serve, Michael. You wish for discussion. So discuss.

    ((PS: Socrates Puppette wanted to make a smarmy remark here, but I said stuff a Soc in it.))

  4. Michael,

    You say:

    Evolutionists attempt to acclimate these findings in a geological scheme to make it appear that there has been progressive change but what has been observed is abrupt and complex life. Fossils have been discovered in the wrong place at the wrong time for the evolutionary model.

    Okay, you made this claim, now BACK IT UP. — What fossils have been found out of order in the wrong geological time period? — Put up, or shut up.

    Even if you give any examples, you would have to show why they cannot be easily harmonized with evolutionary theory.

  5. The reliance on a complex story as a result of so many falsifications then denies what has been observed by making absurd claims that the animals for some unknown reason were just able resist an all-encompassing force of Natural Selection

    So your list of four (4) questionable examples to show a pervasive pattern of “recent” fossil discoveries has been met with the same number of examples of solid reports within the past two months that are contrary to this pattern.

    Who has denied what has been observed?
    ==Creationism____ Cognitive dissonance prevents an honest answer___

    Who is making absurd claims?
    ==Creationism___ My brain just overheated again___

    .

    Let’s analogize facts to puzzle pieces, and theories to the picture that the puzzle represents.

    Science fits the pieces to each other without any knowledge of the picture that the pieces represent. As more pieces fit, they begin to look like something. As more pieces go together, the picture gets larger—or perhaps it changes to a greater or lesser degree. Or perhaps we were wrong about the picture. Or perhaps the pieces really didn’t fit together in this way, but in some other way, yielding a different part of the picture. The shapes of the pieces—the evidence—is primary, and the picture is whatever emerges when the pieces fit together.

    Creationism is a puzzle in the which the final picture is already known in all detail. The process of assembling the puzzle is to force the pieces into the known picture. Pieces that do not fit the preconceived picture are discarded or whittled to fit the known result. The pieces—the evidence—is always subject to the theory. This is called apologetics, not science.

    The subtitle of this blog says it all: “True science” is that “which verifies God’s word.” No other theory need apply.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s