Creationism was dealt a blow today after the release of a fossil disvoverd more than 7 months ago destroys the creationists main arguement against ID.
One of the main arguements "against" evolution was:
Absolutely no transitional forms either in the fossil record or in modern animal and plant life have been found. All appear fully formed and complete. The fossil record amply supplies us with representation of almost all species of animals and plants but none of the supposed links of plant to animal, fish to amphibian, amphibian to reptile, or reptile to birds and mammals are represented nor any transitional forms at all. There are essentially the same gaps between all the basic kinds in the fossil record as exists in plant and animal life today. There are literally a host of missing links in the fossil record and the modern world.
Scientists have discovered fossils of a 375 million-year-old fish, a large scaly creature not seen before, that they say is a long-sought "missing link" in the evolution of some fishes from water to a life walking on four limbs on land.
In addition to confirming elements of a major transition in evolution, the fossils are widely seen by scientists as a powerful rebuttal to religious creationists, who hold a literal biblical view on the origins and development of life.
Several well-preserved skeletons of the fossil fish were uncovered in sediments of former stream beds in the Canadian Arctic, 600 miles from the North Pole, it is being reported on Thursday in the journal Nature. The skeletons have the fins and scales and other attributes of a giant fish, four to nine feet long.
But on closer examination, scientists found telling anatomical traits of a transitional creature, a fish that is still a fish but exhibiting changes that anticipate the emergence of land animals — a predecessor thus of amphibians, reptiles and dinosaurs, mammals and eventually humans.
The scientists described evidence in the forward fins of limbs in the making. There are the beginnings of digits, proto-wrists, elbows and shoulders. The fish also had a flat skull resembling a crocodile's, a neck, ribs and other parts that were similar to four-legged land animals known as tetrapods.
The discovering scientists called the fossils the most compelling examples yet of an animal that was at the cusp of the fish-tetrapod transition. The fish has been named Tiktaalik roseae, at the suggestion of elders of Canada's Nunavut Territory. Tiktaalik (pronounced tic-TAH-lick) means "large shallow water fish."
I really don't like the use of the term "Intermediate" species however, it looks like the creationists are going to have to remove a very large piece of thier accusations leveled at Evolution. As of now the creationist statement as noted above is (as we all suspected) utter BS.
This is a major find that fills in the gap
Other scientists said that in addition to confirming elements of a major transition in evolution, the fossils were a powerful rebuttal to religious creationists, who have long argued that the absence of such transitional creatures are a serious weakness in Darwin's theory.
Embedded in the pectoral fins were bones that compare to the upper arm, forearm and primitive parts of the hand of land-living animals. The joints of the fins appeared to be capable of functioning for movement on land, a case of a fish improvising with its evolved anatomy. In all likelihood, the scientists said, Tiktaalik flexed its proto-limbs mainly on the floor of streams and might have pulled itself up on the shore for brief stretches.
So what you are the types of people that believe a rock blew up all of a sudden world came and some how humans are the only smart one. Man can you even see how stupid that sounds. Besides fossils can be misleading at times.. Also if you were to reject God then answer this howcome Prophet Muhammed S.A.W knew what will happen in the future. Howcome An illiterate person can tell us the world is round and all the science that sciencetist have just found out ?
believe in a old dusty rock but not trillions of people who say god exists and creatd everything? LOL
man i think i'll go believe bush ova my mum next LOL LLOL
-
My tears testify that i have a heart
yet i feel me and shaytan never part
-
Hey, when was that pundlished. Is that the Fish claim they made, where they found a fossil saying it is intermediar, but it happened that someone caught their intermediary species in the sea, it just a fish!!!
Yes that sounds really stupid, probably why your ignorance has led you to not even understand what evolution represents and what it does not......
Think about it next time b4 u rush in again and spout your nonsense.......
Root I did take my time to learn about evolution. Those who follow evolution are racist because they believe blacks are not fully developed meaning whites are superior. Those who reject god tend to do evil as good came from god without gods rule which rule do we have????? Where did all these human rights, freedom of speech, jailing a person who commits a crime. Humans would not come up with these rules why should they care about others after death they got nothing. As we go into a world where atheist are taking over American and many western countries we can see the affects it’s having on the society. Homosexuals are being accepted as if its ok to be homosexual, at war times soldiers are cold hearted they will rape women also kill them even kids. I live in Canada and a man use to live couple of streets away from mine he raped his 6 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER I can see he does not believe in god. Of course because in gods rule its clearly forbidden. So before you reject God take your time to realize why whenever a person rejects god he tends to do evil acts which were not introduced to the society before. Clearly when the evolutionist came they destroyed the society as they came along Astagfurillaah May Allaah Protect us from this evil ideology And May Allaah Guide these lost people Ameen!
Creationism was dealt a blow today after the release of a fossil disvoverd more than 7 months ago destroys the creationists main arguement against ID.
Root, you should at least try to maintain some consistency. If we accept your claim that creationism is not a scientific theory, then no amount of evidence will ever deal a blow to creationism; no amount of 'transitional forms' will ever weaken creationism. It only would if creationism was a falsifiable scientific theory.
As for the discovery itself, this is nothing new and hardly differs from other species such as Eusthenopteron, Osteolepis, Panderichthys, etc. - evidence which 'creationists' have already examined (eg.).
Regards
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
well I don't think evolutionist have proven it yet though they boast about it.. I seem to look more to the logical side of the story more than what they seem to want to do which is mislead people.. have they not forgotten that this is a fossil? a bonethat has not been around for awhile.. even snakes had legs where they could walk but the Bible teaches us that God took their legs away.. the evidence for that hip bone is even in the biology books.
God created many types of animals not just 1 or 2 or 3 and then leave.. oh no.. and well they say its a fossil in meaning that this guy was already dead...well it could have been another species of animal that died out.. now even the Bible talks about dinosours in it if you read Job 40-41 it talks about the Behoimoth ( spelling )...
in the Bible
Genesis 1:25
God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Root I did take my time to learn about evolution. Those who follow evolution are racist because they believe blacks are not fully developed meaning whites are superior.
Complete rubbish. Evolutionary theory was distorted and mis-used to justify racism by the Nazis and others in the first half of the last century, but what you say has no relevance whatsoever to current neo-Darwinism.
I could never understand how creationism survived, let alone has something of a comeback. What is described is all major religious works are so obviously just myths, and the evidence from the fossil record indisputable by anyone who looks at it with anything even approaching objectivity.
I think the reason it puzzles me so much is that it doesn't even really effect religion (debunking of those creation stories aside). The Catholic Church doesn't have a problem with evolution at all, they just assume a dualist view of the body and soul and the problem goes away. Surely a God who designed the whole process of evolution is just as impressive (if that's the right word) as the God of Genesis?
Good grief. "Study" involves examining all the evidence objectively and reaching your own view. That site just peddles creationist propaganda that would convince nobody who didn't believe it before.
Oh boy the old "Darwin was a racist" accusation. Virtually all Englishmen in Darwins time viewed blacks as culturally and intellectually different. some men at this time (such as Louis Agassiz, a staunch creationist) went so far as to say they were a different species.
The views of Darwin, or of any person, are irrelevant to the fact of evolution. Evolution is based on evidence, not on people's opinions.
The mention of "favoured races" in the subtitle of Origin of Species merely refers to variations within species which survive to leave more offspring. It does not imply racism. To say your DNA differs from mine does not make me a racist.
Here is a quote from Charles darwin:
"I have watched how steadily the general feeling, as shown at elections, has been rising against Slavery. What a proud thing for England, if she is the first European nation which utterly abolish is it. I was told before leaving England, that after living in slave countries: all my options would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the Negros character. It is impossible to see a negro & not feel kindly toward him; such cheerful, open honest expressions & such fine muscular bodies; I never saw any of the diminutive Portuguese with their murderous countenances, without almost wishing for Brazil to follow the example of Haiti; & considering the enormous healthy looking black population, it will be wonderful if at some future day it does not take place."
Charles Darwin to Catherine Darwin (May 22 - July 14 1833) The Correspondence of Charles Darwin Vol. 1 1821-1836 (1985), pp. 312-313
Does that sound racist to you?
Finally, on racism & evolution. There is nothing inherent in evolutionary theory (which is not a "philosophy") that is racist; in fact, everything we know from evolutionary theory leads to the opposite conclusion, that what we call "races" do not differ biologically in any significant way. And unless you're willing to blame the KKK on Christianity, trying to blame the misuse of evolution to justify racism is hypocritical at best, downright idiotic at worst.
Ansar - Root, you should at least try to maintain some consistency. If we accept your claim that creationism is not a scientific theory
Wrong. It's not "my" claim at all, it's a fact that Creationism/ID is not a theory because it consistently fails to validate itself as such.
Ansar - no amount of 'transitional forms' will ever weaken creationism. It only would if creationism was a falsifiable scientific theory.
Wrong. You keep misusing the word "theory", how can creationism be a falsifiable theory if it is not a theory to begin with.
Ansar - As for the discovery itself, this is nothing new and hardly differs from other species such as Eusthenopteron, Osteolepis, Panderichthys,
Wrong. It differs greatly because it is a fish showing transitional traits to tetrapod and does differ from all other species during this period that we currently know about within this period of time.
However, to extend that to humans, i disagree. One of the main sources of humans evolution was ape, yet the ape is still around last time i watched the discovery channel.
Perhaps, evolution occurs only in certain species?
Someone said to the Prophet, "Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them." The Prophet replied, "I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse." (Muslim)
However, to extend that to humans, i disagree. One of the main sources of humans evolution was ape, yet the ape is still around last time i watched the discovery channel.
Perhaps, evolution occurs only in certain species?
You are thinking of evolution as linear progress. Everything changes all the time. So the apes we see today are the descendents of apes that lived a long time ago. And at some point our family tree joined their family tree and we had a common ancestor. Don't think of the apes as your Grandfather, but as your cousins. We have a common Grandfather, but that does not mean we do not have cousins too.
Darwin's theory rests on three fundamental propositions
1. The Earth and all that is on it have been around for a long time.
2. Children inherit their looks and stuff from their parents.
3. The better adapted any individuals are to their environment the more children they will have.
Do you think that all of the above apply to humans? If so I do not see how you can deny evolution in humans.
Le coeur a ses raisons, que la raison ne connait pas. - Blaise Pascal
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Updated 24/7
Bookmarks