OLAADEGBU:
Where is the evolution? The original design was perfect.

https://www.facebook.com/1mill.creationist/

"The chain of evidence that purports to support the theory of evolution is a chain indeed, but its links are formed of sand and mist. Analyze the evidence and it melts away; turn the light of true investigation upon its demonstrations and they fade like fog before the freshening breeze. The theory stands today positively disproved, and we will venture the prophecy that in another two decades, when younger men, free from the blind prejudices of a passing generation are allowed to investigate the new evidence, examine the facts, and form their own conclusions, the theory will take its place in the limbo of disproved tidings. In that day the world of science will be forced to come back to the unshakable foundation of fact that is the basis of the true philosophy of the origin of life."

------------ Harry Rimmer, The Theory of Evolution and the Facts of Science

Butterflyleo:





There was none.

Duck billed platypus 63 million years yet no evolution

[img]https://3.bp..com/-TQwQF2dnLxo/Vyj_PWZhATI/AAAAAAAAHIw/3gKI_tNzIsYRzjgAZpN4GzgX3L5yuqB9gCLcB/s1600/platypus.jpg[/img]

OLAADEGBU:
Where is the evolution? The original design was perfect.

https://www.facebook.com/1mill.creationist/

DeSepiero:


...there were cameras 433 million years ago which was used to capture the image of the ancient scorpion?

DeSepiero:


...there were cameras 433 million years ago which was used to capture the image of the ancient scorpion?

OLAADEGBU:


There were no cameras but what we have are fossils as seen in the picture in the OP.

DeSepiero:


One single fossil shouldn't disprove evolution. Should it?

Butterflyleo:


Not one! Several!

And why wouldn't it disprove evolution? Afterall the claim is that EVERY LIVING THING evolved to its present state. So why didn't some evolve? Why have they remained the same after 433milliom years? Were they an exception? If they were, why?

Did they arrive on the scene already fully evolved or in full form while others evolved from single cells?

You need to ask yourselves those pertinent questions.

DeSepiero:


Well, inability to observe evolution in one species doesn't dismiss the possibility of evolution in other species.
If there isn't evolution in such a species as you claim, a picture of no credible scientific source isn't evidence enough. Are there published peer reviewed scientific articles / researches supporting that claim?

Well, inability to observe evolution in one species doesn't dismiss the possibility of evolution in other species.
If there isn't evolution in such a species as you claim, a picture of no credible scientific source isn't evidence enough

Butterflyleo:


That's the problem with insincere Scientists and science minded folks like you. They say well as long as some evolved then those that didn't evolve do not matter.

If you need a source for proof of such then look no further than google. IT IS LOADED!

Also there is no such thing as a peer research article for creatures that did not evolve because it is an embarrassment to science whenever any of such pops up so why would evolutionary scientists discredit their own theory of evolution?

Such articles are left for liberals to do but are never accepted into main stream science as its a keg of gun powder. So they say exactly what you said right here and I quote:



Yet at the bolded pictures of fossils have been "credible" sources for evolution (when in support) but when against it no longer is "credible".

By the way, those fossils are not pictures. They are actual fossils and like I said, google is LOADED with all you need from CREDIBLE sources.

DeSepiero:


It's simple, my question is: 'why should I trust that picture you posted as authentic? Is it truly 433 million years old? How did 'they' come about that?
At this level of enlightenment, I don't just accept any published scientific finding as truth, worst of it is a picture of questionable source.

Butterflyleo:


You cannot trust that picture becaude it puts a dent on evolutionary science but you can trust other pictures which support evolutionary science right?

You ask how the picture came to be 433 million years old? Do you now doubt the carbon dating methods applied by same science to date other fossils which support evolution?

Why not to yourself a favour. Google is available to you and not restricted from you. Look it up and stop claiming a certain level of "enlightenment" when you are clearly in the dark about so so so much.

Get some real enlightenment via google which is a huge resource.

http://studylib.net/doc/7500332/outcome-2-c--platypus-fossil-comparison-answers

DeSepiero:


I'm not questioning scientific methods of inquiry like carbon dating, I'm questioning the conclusion implied from a picture which has no credible source.

I may be the last man to totally accept that a scorpions fossil is 433 million years old simply because I saw it on a picture.

DeSepiero:


I'm not questioning scientific methods of inquiry like carbon dating, I'm questioning the conclusion implied from a picture which has no credible source.

I may be the last man to totally accept that a scorpions fossil is 433 million years old simply because I saw it on a random picture.

DeSepiero:


One single fossil shouldn't disprove evolution. Should it?

sonofthunder:
Who has popcorn please? muttleylaff? goodmuyis? anyone...

Butterflyleo:


There were scientists 433 million years ago who documented other evolutionary processes right?

OLAADEGBU:


That's the evidence that disproves the lie of evolution.

"Now evolution is the substance of fossils hoped for, the evidence of links not seen." - Duane Gish

Butterflyleo:



Also there is no such thing as a peer research article for creatures that did not evolve because it is an embarrassment to science whenever any of such pops up so why would evolutionary scientists discredit their own theory of evolution?

Such articles are left for liberals to do but are never accepted into main stream science as its a keg of gun powder. So they say exactly what you said right here and .

Slikbae:


Watch them say it takes 10 trillion years and we should wait. Fools.