Global Cooling Coming Soon?.....

Last edited by a moderator:
Dave H.....I don't get your "Osmium" referrence...


oh by the way.....in answer to your question "When was the term OCD Nutcase first coined?"

It was first coined in Campbell River in 1907 in regard to a recent settler there named Evin Rood, who could be seen at all hours of the day in any season rowing around the waters off Tyee Spit with a crudely shaped Cedar plug trailing from a fishing pole.

He would often yell incoherently " za big fish are heeah...I know zis and I vill catch vone..you see if I don't...yah...zey are here all right..."
Although he never caught a single fish in the entire 13 years he did it.

Mimickers and followers of Rood are also known by this term nowadays........as well as out-of-control-tacklehoarders and anyone who spends more than 25% of their income on their boat.....
 
E/man and Seadna....well you can spin Creation/Evolution any way you like....but the fact remains (to the best of my knowledge) that there has never been found a fossil that was in the "Inter-mutation "stage.

Not arguing for Creation
Not arguing for Evolution

just looking at what they find over and over again.........

You don't just wave the magic wand and get a T-Rex complete

Does it take 5 million years to develop the EYE?.....yes even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile....but not that long.

If you crawled out of the Primordial Soup and needed eyes.........it wasn't going to come obviously in your lifetime...so you would have to pass on the "evolving mutation" to generation after generation.....for millions of years........even though during that time "offshoot species" of you were evolving also.......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seafever said:
Ignore the Christian reference and the title......just read what he has to say.....

http://duncanlong.com/christian/evolut.html
Click to expand...
Again an essay that conflates evolution with creation and then decides that evolution can't happen. As I said above, creation and evolution are two different matters. Also it is not "spin" to state clearly and simply that there's a VAST, VAST, VAST amount of data in biology that cannot be explained without evolution. Clearly there is no "winning" here with you and you will have the last word even if that word is collection of rambling absurdity or links to similar. So this will be my last post in this thread. As I plainly stated, I know evolution has occurred because at the molecular level I can "witness" it in real time. I also know I can make it occur and I can observe the results of selective pressure.

Again, which antibiotic do you want when you're infected with a drug resistant bacterium?
 
Seafever said:
E/man and Seadna....well you can spin Creation/Evolution any way you like....but the fact remains (to the best of my knowledge) that there has never been found a fossil that was in the "Inter-mutation "stage.

Not arguing for Creation
Not arguing for Evolution

just looking at what they find over and over again.........

You don't just wave the magic wand and get a T-Rex complete

Does it take 5 million years to develop the EYE?.....yes even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile....but not that long.

If you crawled out of the Primordial Soup and needed eyes.........it wasn't going to come obviously in your lifetime...so you would have to pass on the "evolving mutation" to generation after generation.....for millions of years........even though during that time "offshoot species" of you were evolving also.......
Click to expand...

That old chestnut about the development of the eye! Where are you getting the figure of 5 million years from? What scientific papers have you read or can you quote about the evolution of the eye? You are just regurgitating the creationist argument with no thought or examination on your part. Once again your naïve argument is rebutted here:

http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html

And by the way the evolution of the eye can clearly go much faster the other way. There are many kinds of blind fish, amphibians and other creatures living in cave systems around the world and often these caves are only thousands, not millions of years old!!
These creatures are often very closely related to their sighted cousins, but because there is no selective pressure to maintain sightedness in the dark, the eyes have regressed to vestigial spots or lumps. It’s called evolution!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seafever said:
Ignore the Christian reference and the title......just read what he has to say.....

http://duncanlong.com/christian/evolut.html
Click to expand...

This is so ignorant and naive it is unbelievable. Just like all creationists, he includes lies, falsehoods, misunderstanding, sheer ignorance and wild conspiracy theories all mixed up together to try and discredit the science of evolution. And what is worse he tries to vilify the scientists who work in the fields with those stupid attempts to links to dictators in history. You can almost hear him in background gathering the firewood so he can burn the heretics at the stake!

Every single one of his so-called arguments are refuted by the science and by the published literature here!

http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Take any one of his silly points and search for it in the above link. You might learn something.

I will say the ignorant Mr. Long is right about one thing and one thing only. The science of evolution blasts huge holes in the bible stories of adam and eve etc, and shows it up to be pack of myths populated by ignorant desert dwellers. That is why he and his kind hate evolution so. They cannot accept the bible is wrong about anything. It is a “holy book” to them and they will defend it to the end and condemn all unbelievers to a fiery hell if he could (or to the fires on this earth!). They are so indoctrinated, so brainwashed, so numbed in the intellect by their religious based ideas they refuse to see or even to countenance existence of the huge amount of evidence for evolution. They are intellectually blind and deaf, and I repeat that quote again.

"An idea is something the mind holds. Religion is an idea that holds the mind."
 
TalkOrigins"...thanks for that E/man...lots of reading to do there....

Claim CC200.1:

Question:- "Given all the species that exist, there should be billions of transitional fossils in the fossil record. We should have found tens of thousands at least"

Their answers:-

(a) "Fossilization is not a particularly common event" (Bullcrap.....fossils are found everyday everywhere by all sorts of people)

(b) "the evolution of new species PROBABLY (note that word) is fairly rapid.........so transition between species will be uncommon.... (I thought we were talking millions of years of evolution here according to science of that field)

(c)"As rare as fossils are...fossil discovery is still rarer ...(100% bullcrap)

(d) "Only Europe and North America have been well explored for fossils because that is where most of the paleontologists lived"...... (this statement is bullcrap in and of itself....but were it true then why is the evolution of entire mankind based only on what they found in Europe and North America.....??.....)
 
is there actually a debate about if evolution is real or not going on?



grandpa-simpson-gif.gif
 
Seafever said:
TalkOrigins"...thanks for that E/man...lots of reading to do there....

Claim CC200.1:

Question:- "Given all the species that exist, there should be billions of transitional fossils in the fossil record. We should have found tens of thousands at least"

Their answers:-

(a) "Fossilization is not a particularly common event" (Bullcrap.....fossils are found everyday everywhere by all sorts of people)
Click to expand...
You are arguing semantics. It goes on to say:-
“It requires conditions that preserve the fossil before it becomes scavenged or decayed. Such conditions are common only in a very few habitats, such as river deltas, peat bogs, and tar pits. Organisms that do not live in or near these habitats will be preserved only rarely.”
This is all true. It is explaining that of all the billions of creatures that have ever lived, only a relatively small number get fossilised. It may still be a very large number of fossils, but the number is small compared to the billions of creatures that have walked the earth.

Seafever said:
(b) "the evolution of new species PROBABLY (note that word) is fairly rapid.........so transition between species will be uncommon.... (I thought we were talking millions of years of evolution here according to science of that field)
Click to expand...
What it says is:
“The evolution of new species probably is fairly rapid in geological terms.”
There you go wanting certainty again. Science is always cautious and never dogmatic. But the key point you left out is the last part “IN GEOLOGICAL TERMS”. If evolution between species takes place over thousands, or hundreds of thousands of years, this is still a small window of time compared with the four thousand million years of geologic history.

Seafever said:
(c)"As rare as fossils are...fossil discovery is still rarer ...(100% bullcrap)
Click to expand...
Again this is a true statement but you are deliberately misunderstanding. Fossils are rare and we do not find them everywhere we look or lying exposed in every single rocky cliff. Yes thousands upon thousands of fossils have been found. But there are millions not found because they are buried under tons of rock strata hundreds of feet down. As the article says most fossils are usually found in recently (in geologic terms!) eroded areas.

Seafever said:
(d) "Only Europe and North America have been well explored for fossils because that is where most of the paleontologists lived"...... (this statement is bullcrap in and of itself....but were it true then why is the evolution of entire mankind based only on what they found in Europe and North America.....??.....)
Click to expand...
This point is talking about the whole history of paleontological discovery and you have leapt from there to the entire history of mankind! A total non sequitur on your part.
Yes fossils have been found in Asia and elsewhere especially recently, but the vast majority to date have come from the regions the article states for he reasons it states. And BTW the Asian fossils have merely added to the evidence for, and our understanding of evolution.
As for mankind himself, while fossil hominids have been found all over the world, a huge number have come from Africa, especially the Great Rift Valley region. The evidence is now almost incontrovertible that mankind originated in Africa so where you get that leap of logic from about N.America and Europe I don’t know.
And this fact is another reason why the bible thumping (mostly white) anti-evolutionists get so hot under the collar. Surely, they say, we cannot have descended from an original African species. It challenges their nasty prejudices big time!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hmmm...so although thousands and thousands of fossils have been found ( and you can go the Trent River right here on Van Isle and find all kinds........like the other day they found what they consider to be a major marine apex predator find) TalkOrigins goes something like this (considering the answers in their entirety)

"We haven't found all the fossils yet because the transitional ones disintegrated early on and the ones we are left with are just not indicative of the entire picture. We also haven't found all the fossils yet because some countrie's naughty little governments won't let us in to dig. And many fossils are just to deep for us to get currently....so all the ones we found so far are but a pittance in terms of the ones we haven't found yet"

Ad you can see THEY said only Europe and North America have been well explored for fossils......but we know that isn't true.

I have no problem with being descending from Africa...if that is the actual case.


"As rare as fossils are.....fossil discovery is still rarer".........that is patently untrue.

The entire history evolution-wise of mankind IS based significantly on the finds of bones,fossils and the like. Louis and Richard Leakey would have/will be glad to assist you.

I know of several places that I could get fossils within 48 hours from where I live.


Though according to TalkOrigins, they can't get in to alot of countires to dig, there are 187 countries whose own scientists report data on Climate Change and have scientists doing work in paleolontogical
fields as well.
 
....yet still......all the fossils they have found, none of them, whether they are from a peat bog or a river or sediment or any other place they have ever been found are "partials...
 
Charles Darwin went to quite a few places on The Beagle besides North America and Europe.

So did Luis Alverez (a top modern paleontologist).
 
Their argument basically:-

" The Holy Grail of fossils is buried too deep for us to extract"

How about the Grand Canyon or any one of a thousand other deep erroded gorges,ravines, ex-mining open-pits, land upheavals where the geologic strata can be accessed (they're called "mountains'), abandoned deep mining shafts, holes, ridges, etc etc etc.?

Oh......right ...they are already doing that in many places....still haven't found any transitional fossils....
 
Not to get in to this debate but have any of you watched the movie "Chasing Ice"
SYNOPSIS
In the spring of 2005, acclaimed environmental photographer James Balog headed to the Arctic on a tricky assignment for National Geographic: to capture images to help tell the story of the Earth’s changing climate. Even with a scientific upbringing, Balog had been a skeptic about climate change. But that first trip north opened his eyes to the biggest story in human history and sparked a challenge within him that would put his career and his very well-being at risk.
Chasing Ice is the story of one man’s mission to change the tide of history by gathering undeniable evidence of our changing planet. Within months of that first trip to Iceland, the photographer conceived the boldest expedition of his life: The Extreme Ice Survey. With a band of young adventurers in tow, Balog began deploying revolutionary time-lapse cameras across the brutal Arctic to capture a multi-year record of the world’s changing glaciers.
As the debate polarizes America and the intensity of natural disasters ramps up globally, Balog finds himself at the end of his tether. Battling untested technology in subzero conditions, he comes face to face with his own mortality. It takes years for Balog to see the fruits of his labor. His hauntingly beautiful videos compress years into seconds and capture ancient mountains of ice in motion as they disappear at a breathtaking rate. Chasing Ice depicts a photographer trying to deliver evidence and hope to our carbon-powered planet.
- See more at: http://www.chasingice.com/about-the-film/synopsis/#sthash.yShfbTSs.dpuf
 
Seafever said:
hmmm...so although thousands and thousands of fossils have been found ( and you can go the Trent River right here on Van Isle and find all kinds........like the other day they found what they consider to be a major marine apex predator find) TalkOrigins goes something like this (considering the answers in their entirety)

"We haven't found all the fossils yet because the transitional ones disintegrated early on and the ones we are left with are just not indicative of the entire picture. We also haven't found all the fossils yet because some countrie's naughty little governments won't let us in to dig. And many fossils are just to deep for us to get currently....so all the ones we found so far are but a pittance in terms of the ones we haven't found yet"
Click to expand...
Nowhere does it say transitional fossils have disintegrated (as though they were somehow singled out!). You are putting a spin on it that it does not say. It merely points out that with tectonic movements and erosion many fossils are destroyed of every kind. Period!
And it is perfectly true there are many more fossils to be found and they are still being found as we speak. You quoted an example yourself!

Seafever said:
"Ad you can see THEY said only Europe and North America have been well explored for fossils......but we know that isn't true.
Click to expand...
NO, we know this statement IS true. In N. America and Europe professional paleontologists have been exploring for fossils since the early-mid 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century. That is patently not true of most of the rest of the world. Talk Origins does say “Some fabulous fossils have been found in China only recently because before then the politics prevented most paleontology there”. And that again is completely true. Published finds in China have all been in the last 50 years or less.

Seafever said:
I have no problem with being descending from Africa...if that is the actual case.
Click to expand...
Well that is something at least…..


Seafever said:
"As rare as fossils are.....fossil discovery is still rarer".........that is patently untrue.

The entire history evolution-wise of mankind IS based significantly on the finds of bones,fossils and the like. Louis and Richard Leakey would have/will be glad to assist you.
Click to expand...
Well I am pleased to see you have heard of the work of the Leakeys. That is great. But we obviously have a different definition of rare. In many cases the Leakeys (and others) have searched and carefully excavated for many years and only uncovered the bones of one or two individuals at each site. And then often partial, not necessarily complete skeletons. I would call that rare.

And on this topic again we need to start talking about different kinds of fossils. Fossil bones, shells, and exoskeletons are much more common than those of soft bodied creatures or parts. And fossils are still only found in certain rocks or strata, when conditions for formation were right. They are not everywhere. We have a different definition of rare and will never get any further with this semantic argument.

Seafever said:
I know of several places that I could get fossils within 48 hours from where I live.
Click to expand...
That is great. What kind are they?


Seafever said:
Though according to TalkOrigins, they can't get in to alot of countires to dig, there are 187 countries whose own scientists report data on Climate Change and have scientists doing work in paleolontogical fields as well.
Click to expand...
Yes, now. But that was not true of a century or more ago. That is all that point on Talk Origins was trying to say. You keep attacking away at it as though this statement is false and if you can demonstrate it is false (and you can’t) then the entire demolition of the remaining 200 or more creationist so-called arguments on this site must be false also and so you think you have proven evolutionists wrong. How facile! The evolutionary fact does not stand or fall on one single item of evidence or argument. It rests on thousands of pieces of self consistent and mutually confirming pieces of evidence and observation by thousands of scientists in paleontology, geology, biology and physics. For you to thrust all that aside and say all these qualified experts are wrong and you are right is unbelievable arrogance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seafever said:
Their argument basically:-

" The Holy Grail of fossils is buried too deep for us to extract"

How about the Grand Canyon or any one of a thousand other deep erroded gorges,ravines, ex-mining open-pits, land upheavals where the geologic strata can be accessed (they're called "mountains'), abandoned deep mining shafts, holes, ridges, etc etc etc.?

Oh......right ...they are already doing that in many places....still haven't found any transitional fossils....
Click to expand...

NOWHERE does Talk Origins say the transitionals are buried too deep to find. I said there must be many millions of fossils buried of all kinds that have not been found yet.

As to transitionals you keep ignoring the link I put up time and time again.

http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html

There are dozens of transitional fossils listed there (of many types) with references to all the original scientific papers. Oh, but I forgot, all these scientists are wrong and you are right because you have more knowledge and insight (obtained without even studying in the field!!)
 
casper5280 said:
Not to get in to this debate but have any of you watched the movie "Chasing Ice"
SYNOPSIS
In the spring of 2005, acclaimed environmental photographer James Balog headed to the Arctic on a tricky assignment for National Geographic: to capture images to help tell the story of the Earth’s changing climate. Even with a scientific upbringing, Balog had been a skeptic about climate change. But that first trip north opened his eyes to the biggest story in human history and sparked a challenge within him that would put his career and his very well-being at risk.
Chasing Ice is the story of one man’s mission to change the tide of history by gathering undeniable evidence of our changing planet. Within months of that first trip to Iceland, the photographer conceived the boldest expedition of his life: The Extreme Ice Survey. With a band of young adventurers in tow, Balog began deploying revolutionary time-lapse cameras across the brutal Arctic to capture a multi-year record of the world’s changing glaciers.
As the debate polarizes America and the intensity of natural disasters ramps up globally, Balog finds himself at the end of his tether. Battling untested technology in subzero conditions, he comes face to face with his own mortality. It takes years for Balog to see the fruits of his labor. His hauntingly beautiful videos compress years into seconds and capture ancient mountains of ice in motion as they disappear at a breathtaking rate. Chasing Ice depicts a photographer trying to deliver evidence and hope to our carbon-powered planet.
- See more at: http://www.chasingice.com/about-the-film/synopsis/#sthash.yShfbTSs.dpuf
Click to expand...

Yes, I have seen this movie footage on Nat Geographic channel. It is truly awe inspiring. The North is where some of the starkest evidence of global warming is happening... at an incredible rate!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

OldBlackDog
New major study, fish will handle global warming just fine.
Replies
11
Views
718
Cuba Libre
Cuba Libre
OldBlackDog
Scientists proven wrong.
Replies
0
Views
369
OldBlackDog
OldBlackDog
Whole in the Water
Emissions of CO2 driving rapid oceans 'acid trip'
Replies
0
Views
560
Whole in the Water
Whole in the Water
Dogbreath
Grey Whales Changing Diet Over The Millenia
Replies
0
Views
598
Dogbreath
Dogbreath
Sushihunter
Global Warming? Bring it On!
Replies
1
Views
656
Little Hawk
Little Hawk
Back
Top