Evolution takes a hit by fossil named "Darwinopterus"
"It would be difficult to find a better way to describe God’s creative activity as revealed in a plain reading of Genesis..."
New Pterosaur Fossil Forces Re-think of Standard Evolution
by Brian Thomas, M.S.*
10-21-2009
Charles Darwin admitted that the sudden appearance of fully formed creatures in fossil deposits was one of the biggest problems with his hypothesis that nature generated living creatures through natural selection. His vision of organisms gradually morphing from one kind to another over vast time spans predicted that most fossils should reflect that steady grading from one basic body plan to another.
Some scientists believe they have found a creature that bridges one of the many gaps in the fossil record, although it requires a significant reworking of evolutionary theory. The crow-sized pterosaur fossil from China has been named Darwinopterus in honor of the “year of Darwin.” This is certainly ironic, considering the fact that the creature had none of the partially graded features that would show transition from one to the other of the two major pterosaur types. Instead, it demonstrated a unique mosaic of fully functional body parts.
Until now, all pterosaurs were thought to be either Rhamphorhynchoid, which had long slender tails, or Pterodactyloid, which had very short tails, among other differences. Evolutionists have therefore long been searching for forms that showed transitional change between these two pterosaur body plans. In particular, there ought to be fossil forms showing gradually shortening tails as pterosaurs are sampled from lower to higher rock layers.
David Unwin, professor at the University of Leicester, said in a university press release, “We had always expected a gap-filler with typically intermediate features.”1 But this expectation has gone unfilled for 150 years. The report of Unwin and his team published online in Proceedings of the Royal Society B stated:
"Frustratingly, relevant fossils are still comparatively rare, most transitions have yet to be documented in detail and the mechanisms that underpin such events, typified by rapid large scale changes and for which microevolutionary processes seem insufficient, are still unclear."2
More including references:
the money motive was brought
the money motive was brought up below so if this seems off topic its not . im curious what people think about all the money being dumped into flu and swine flu vaccine advertising. what percentage of the population would have to get the shot for them to make the advertising money back. they are now doing subliminal advertising in sitcoms! its a story on the local news every day.
"The revolutionary forces have to take civil society before they take the state, and therefore have to build a coalition of oppositional groups united under a hegemonic banner which usurps the dominant or prevailing hegemony." -Strinati, Dominic.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
Why Either/Or?
...when it could be both/and?
As an Orthodox Christian, I don't find evolution threatening. The Nicene Creed, the "Symbol of Faith" of the Orthodox Church, calls God the Father "Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible." Within this framework, He could have chosen to create through evolution.
Genesis was written to convey magnificent truths which far transcend any crassly literal reading of the two creation accounts. Arguing over whether evolution is true or not distracts us from these. I would even go as far as to say that the greater threat to Christianity is not Darwin or evolution, but the reaction of Christians who find these things threatening.
If you want to believe the world is in the mess that it is because a naked woman ate an apple over coffee one morning with a talking snake, I suppose you're entitled to do so, and as a believer in freedom of religion I wouldn't try to deny you your right. But in my opinion, you're setting up a conflict where none exists, or need exist.
All Austrian
funny "sudden evolutionary change" surprises them
Biology is the output of DNA. DNA is a code. Any programmer knows changing a single character can vastly alter the code's functionality.
This fossil's creature may have just been subject to a mutation of its tail-length variable. A smooth, gradient transition is not at all necessary.
For example: some people are born with more than 5 fingers per hand. This did not require their ancestors to evolve tiny proto-finger-nubs first; the "make finger" function in its DNA evolved long ago, then one organism's code accidentally passed it 6 instead of the usual 5.
The "part swapping" might be evidence some functions develop in an ancestor but do not exhibit themselves until later genetic mutations occur. (the difference between genotype and phenotype)
A more surprising argument concerning "random system development" to me would be the profoundly precise proportions between our Earth and Moon.
LibertyDefined.org | If | Not Perfect
excellent response
A couple of searchable keywords to toss out for anyone wondering, "What the heck is he talking about?"
punctuated equilibrium
Hox genes (homeobox genes)
hopeful monsters
Evolutionary science is good science.
The question is, "Why is your faith so threatened by evolutionary science?"
If you are a believer, I suggest you find a way to live with both God and Evolution. If you are a believer, please know there are dozens of evolutionary scientists who believe in God, a supra natural "one", but they don't think much of 2000 year old notions of how the universe works or is. This is to say, they have no problem with evolution and they have no problem believing in God. They do have a problem with notions of God get in the way of explaining natural selection and the universe. If you are a believer, be happy with the fact that you feel it, know it in your heart, and feel comforted by your belief in God. If you are a believer, just marvel at the human mind as it discovers how the world/universe is built and operates and functions. If you are a believer, allow the story of science to illuminate your faith FURTHER, not challenge your faith. Time travel? Well maybe so. Life sprung from the sea? Well maybe so. Dinosaurs roamed the earth 60,000,000 years ago? Well maybe so. Apes and Man share a common ancestor some 6 million years ago? Well maybe so. The universe started with a really explosive Big Bang? Well maybe so. DNA is the building blocks of Life? Well maybe so. To all that the believer should marvel and say, "Gee, isn't God Grand?" Since all and everything is God's Creation, then studying that creation and the ways it came about is totally within our design and function as the "Thinking Animal" ie, Man. For "heads-in-the-clouds" believers to fight the best of what "Thinking Man" has figured out is like having a battle between your Left & Right hand. As the "trusting-in-God" Left hand, its foolish to fight with your "feel-the-soil" Right hand. Don't get duped, like a dog chasing its tail, into a battle that need NOT be fought.
In peace & liberty,
Treg
I believe as you do.
In contrast to the great clarity with which you have discussed this issue, I don't believe that this same even handed approach to explaining our origins is reflected in what is being taught or presented to the public. I only hear about the evolution side of things.
For example, I would be very surprised if this "Darwinopterus" publication is ever cited/heard from again. It will be cast aside.
Well put Treg.
--------
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
Evolution theory is about
Evolution theory is about Jurisdiction...No God , no jurisdiction ..
Man reigns supreme over himself.. But ; there is "another", anyway...
Man would still be left to another force...
Good people do Good deeds
Good people make it happen
Steven: are you familiar with this evolution link?:
http://keylonticdictionary.org/Words/E/Evolution.htm
"Be wary of those who know the truth. Align yourself with those who are questing for the truth." L. Gardner
"Be wary of those who know the truth. Align yourself with those who are questing for the truth." L. Gardner
someguy: Thanks for the link.
This is some pretty heady stuff that will take me a while to assimilate.
I found some more information about this, and I am buying what I'm reading. I believe in a God-directed evolution. God is a great biochemist. This seems to say the same thing.
The Sacred Mechanics of Creation:
When one observes the intrinsic order of creation, there is the growing realization that not only is God or Source spiritual, but It is also highly scientific and ordered. If we are to reclaim our true heritage as expressions of Source, we may need to become fluent in the language of Source, which includes science. In fact, Sacred Science is as spiritual as what is commonly considered to be metaphysical. It is the integration and application of what appear to be the polarities of spirituality and science which reawaken within us our true creative power and autonomy.
http://www.azuritepress.co.za/understanding_keylontic_scienc...
lindsey williams just said
lindsey williams just said his elite source told him they promoted evolution to get rid of the idea of God. They didnt care if transistional folssils were found or not. 150 years its been subsidised not because of evidence but because they want to remove any foundation that society has in order to overthrow it.
"The revolutionary forces have to take civil society before they take the state, and therefore have to build a coalition of oppositional groups united under a hegemonic banner which usurps the dominant or prevailing hegemony." -Strinati, Dominic.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
Agree. The truth is hard enough to find without external...
forces stacking the deck.
Some evidence fits evolution. Yet some evidence, like this report, does not.
What external forces are you talking about?
--------
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
The elites promoting evolution ....
as a done deal with no other possible explanations concerning man's origins.
"Elites promoting evolution"?
Where do you get this stuff? What "elite" gives a poo about evolution?
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
from the guy that predicted
from the guy that predicted 35$ a barrel oil last year. the elite are the people who are promoting flu vaccines, global warming, etc again with no evidence. you may remember rothschild promoting the danger of global warming on infowars and promoting the new 'scientific' finding that saturn is closer to the sun than we are. those elite, they care so much about 'science'.
"The revolutionary forces have to take civil society before they take the state, and therefore have to build a coalition of oppositional groups united under a hegemonic banner which usurps the dominant or prevailing hegemony." -Strinati, Dominic.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
I didn't get your example of the "elite" promoting evolution...
What motive would they have? Other than putting God out of business, of course.
Global warming scientists do have an agenda, and stand to profit from the hysteria. But how where's the big, profit in evolution?
I missed that one about Saturn, interesting! Do you have a link?
--------
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
The motive for getting rid
the money motive is a good question but consider this. when Ted"95% of the people in the world should just die" turner donated 1 billion to the u.n. for vaccination and contraceptive programs in africa he probably did not get a very good return on his money. what he got was a bunch of dead and dying people. sometimes people spend money when they dont intend to make a profit. like rockefeller said i want to own nothing and control everythingThe only money i see being made off evolution is being made by the people who own the prisons rehab centers child protective services police state in general. more laws on the books and stiffer penalties + hightech surveillance watching bad guys means more people in the system paying fines. of course plenty of money will be made when the n.w.o. weakens society to the point it can take over. its a long term venture. The motive for getting rid of God by promoting evolution is the same motive thats behind getting rid of the family by promoting womens lib alternative lifestyles drugs immorality promiscuity. aside from making money they funded research into birth control pills and day after pills for the same reason, to get rid of the family. The family is a support to a free healthy society and so is belief in a creator especially if he is obeyed. man left to himself is ...a failure. Either the Bible or the strong arm of the bayonet. the only thing that comes close to controlling an immoral people is a police state. but even a police state cant control it. immoral people run the police state. a communist named gramsci was thrown in an italian jail during the days of mussolini and he said the way to topple a society and bring in communism is not economically but morally. he said let the state issue marriage licenses and grant easy divorces. replace god with the state. that led to promiscuity broken families and you know what kind of kids come from broken homes. so the communists tried it and it worked beyond thier wildest dreams. it worked to good because they realised they had unleashed the biggest weapon of mass destruction known to man:sin. man was now unrestrained. not even the oppresive soviet government could control sin. they were afraid it was going to topple the government so they reversed all the policys that started it. but the damage was done and it took decades to undo. Then they imported the ideas that created that whole mess to america. what do we need to do ? defeat the new world order by going back to the 'oldfashioned' world order.
do a google video search on Alex Jones Interviews David Mayer de Rothschild Part 1 of 5
"The revolutionary forces have to take civil society before they take the state, and therefore have to build a coalition of oppositional groups united under a hegemonic banner which usurps the dominant or prevailing hegemony." -Strinati, Dominic.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
The motive is to undermine the moral system.
It is true that the entire God system/organized religion may be from elitists to keep us subjugated by the blessed hope of a better hereafter. However, they are systematically undermining particular religions while leaving others untouched.
"Lindsey's elite source"
was Mr. Ed. And when Lindsey left the room, he laughed his ass off. Pun intended. Is ALL paleontology subsidized Ruck? Is there any practical application for paleontology that doesn't get government subsidy?
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
studying fossils is fine but
studying fossils is fine but the overemphasis on evolutionary philosophy is not warranted given the lack of evidence. the chain of evidence to prove the evolutionary family tree have not been found. why all the hysteria by not only scientific publications but all msm publications? Allll those journalists believe evolution? evolution gets all the publicity. why? maybe 50% of the public dont believe it until they become journalists, i quess . sounds like msm policy is the reason not evidence. whats the reason for the policy?
"The revolutionary forces have to take civil society before they take the state, and therefore have to build a coalition of oppositional groups united under a hegemonic banner which usurps the dominant or prevailing hegemony." -Strinati, Dominic.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
"lack of evidence" for evolution
There are none so blind as those who will not see. No need to argue the evidence yet again. And who gets their science from journalists?? What the Sam T. Hell are you talking about?? MSM??
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
: jour·nalPronunciation:
m.s.m mainstream media. if you want accurate information on news etc you get it from small low budget publications. same with science . try institute for creation research . thier like us they got a big job to do and not enough money to do it with. and they also have the entire msm writing mocking smearpieces on them.
"Frustratingly, relevant fossils are still comparatively rare, most transitions have yet to be documented in detail and the mechanisms that underpin such events, typified by rapid large scale changes and for which microevolutionary processes seem insufficient, are still unclear."2
They are dismissing 99.999% of the fossil evidence as irrelevant and the mechanism for 'evolution' as unclear. The facts (fossils) are in front of thier face but they are to blind to accept that the evidence says life did not evolve. they dont like the current evidence , they dismiss it as irrelevant because they want new evidence to be found that will get them off the hook with the creator. evolutionists use the same tactics a defense attorney uses scream irrelavant while being sensational and HOPE new evidence surfaces that can be twisted to confuse the jury.
: jour·nal
Pronunciation: \ˈjər-nəl\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, service book containing the day hours, from Anglo-French jurnal, from jurnal, adjective, daily, from Latin diurnalis, from diurnus of the day, from dies day — more at deity
Date: 15th century
1 a : a record of current transactions; especially : a book of original entry in double-entry bookkeeping b : an account of day-to-day events c : a record of experiences, ideas, or reflections kept regularly for private use d : a record of transactions kept by a deliberative or legislative body e : log 3 f : log 4
2 a : a daily newspaper b : a periodical dealing especially with matters of current interest
jour·nal·ist
Pronunciation: \-nə-list\
Function: noun
Date: 1693
1 a : a person engaged in journalism; especially : a writer or editor for a news medium b : a writer who aims at a mass audience
2 : a person who keeps a journal
Thats what websters said check it with mr ed if you prefer bugman.
"The revolutionary forces have to take civil society before they take the state, and therefore have to build a coalition of oppositional groups united under a hegemonic banner which usurps the dominant or prevailing hegemony." -Strinati, Dominic.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
Mr. Ed was a horse, not a
Mr. Ed was a horse, not a donkey. Your pun fails. ;)
Nitpicker! :)
Admittedly, it was weak, but completely fail?? At least they're related.
--------
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
You should write for the
You should write for the Onion.
c'mon Steve!
can't evolution and religion live together in peace? Religion stays out of the science class and science stays out of theology class.
We don't need to get into the flying spaghetti monster, do we?
I don't like it when people force science on the religious, and I don't like it when religion tries to play in the field of science. I'm not saying you are forcing anything on anyone Steve, I am talking about the greater debate.
I have never seen a credible explanation from the scientific community regarding the first cause, so I leave it as that, we can't comprehend how something came out of nothing, the first cause is "God" to me
Religion attempting to use science against science is usually an exercise in futility. I am very familiar with the institute for creation research and some of their "reasons" evolution should be doubted are doubtful at best.
Anyway, seriously, this doesn't need to be debated. God Created the Universe and that is final. If humans can put together a story about how man evolved, how does that interfere with religion? God allows things to change.
Religion was created to explain the world.
Science was created by those who thought the explanations a little too simplistic or even wrong.
They are not mutually exclusive, they have the same goal in mind.
And it takes just as much or more "faith" to believe in evolution as it does any other theory.
This research group was attempting to support the theory of....
evolution by studying transitions forms, but their findings did not support this theory. These people are scientists, not religious zealots. This was the last result that they wanted because it does not support evolutionary thinking.
However, they reported their findings without bias, which is why I brought it here....for your consideration.
A good scientist does not
A good scientist does not want particular results. He finds joy in truth and discovery. Finding something that rules out one of his best guesses is a grand occasion.
Paleontologists do not seek to "support evolution" any more than physicists seek to "support gravity." They seek to extend, refine, and in some cases, redact the theory. The theory of evolution is nothing more or less than the best explanation of evolution, given current knowledge.