Who Is Your Creator message forum

 

Index > General > Who Is Your Creator message forum > Darwin's Standard v. Unclear Thinking
Forum: Who Is Your Creator message forum
This forum is locked and posting is not allowed
Author
Comment
Darwin's Standard v. Unclear Thinking

I will repeat what I stated before: Darwin was honest about the strengths and weaknesses of his theory, and he was respectful enough of the fact that he could be wrong to say:

"The geological record is extremely imperfect and this fact will to a large extent explain why we do not find INTERMINABLE VARIETIES, connecting together all the extinct and existing forms of life BY THE FINEST GRADUATED STEPS. He who rejects these views ON THE NATURE OF THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD will rightly reject my whole theory."

-Quoted from "The Panda's Thumb," page 181, by S.J. Gould. Caps mine.

Yes, Gould later stated that transitional forms are abundant between larger groups (a DIFFERENT STANDARD then the one Darwin laid out, please note), which is where we are now. That skinny little twig is all evolutionists have to hold into, and the reason it is so specious is because similarities in certain anatomical structures does NOT necessarily dictate common descent. Period. Going beyond that is going beyond the evidence.

Darwin's standard required that "interminable varieties" of fossils clearly showing "the finest graduated steps" were to be found for his theory to hold up. Words mean things--he said it and he meant it. Nothing like that exists, even after all the multiplied millions and millions of fossils that have been found and catalogued.

All the evolutionists have are fully-formed animals with a few similar anatomical structures, but any small, gradual changes leading up to the supposed "evolved creatures" are completely lacking.

In other words, the "missing links" are all still missing. In fact, the only links evolutionists have, are the sausage links they may have had for breakfast.

Think of it. Millions and millions and millions of missing links, all nowhere to be found. Nowhere to be found, because they don't exist. And they don't exist because evolution of the macro kind is simply not true.

This is where you people engage in fantastic leaps of logic, and up to now, you have been somewhat successful. But in this information age, as more and more people see the actual evidence that you do not have, they will doubt you more and more, as they should.

And they will bow out of your very, very odd little religion.

By that statement, Darwin seems to have retained the integrity of his soul, and that is a prize beyond any price.

And THAT is the burning truth.

Email  
Arneson Unable to Understand or Respond - by John - Aug 29, 2007 1:16am
Here is What Darwin Said - by John - Aug 29, 2007 12:25pm
We are not lacking in transitionals. - by Arneson - Aug 28, 2007 10:37pm
Why They are NOT Transitional - by John - Aug 29, 2007 3:05am
Stahl's work is outdated on feathers. - by Arneson - Aug 29, 2007 8:23am
Do you know what goes in the ellispes? - by Arneson - Aug 29, 2007 8:32am
Bird origin fantasy - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 29, 2007 12:18pm
Would you like to play? - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 30, 2007 1:13pm
Both. - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 9:50pm
Not in your wildest dreams. - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 9:54pm
We have fossil whales. - by Arneson - Aug 29, 2007 8:46am
Sherwin seems a bit shady on dates here. - by Arneson - Aug 29, 2007 8:51am
Whale evolution fantasy - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 29, 2007 12:24pm
Sorry to hear about your dad. - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 3:32pm
Be specific - No drama necessary - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 30, 2007 3:21pm
Re: Be specific - No drama necessary - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 3:31pm
Is there something new? - by whoisyourcreator - Aug 30, 2007 4:22pm
One example from today - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 10:24pm
You could try something new? - by Arneson - Aug 30, 2007 10:28pm