U.S. Lags World in Grasp of Genetics and Acceptance of Evolution

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You've made the claim that Biblical creation is not consistent with observed facts, but you have no facts you can give as examples? How do you define Biblical Creation? I've stated already that I find nothing inconstant between the Big Bang and Genesis 1:1, so what else in the Biblical account do you find inconsistent with observed facts?

Evolution is the main sticking point for me - there is significant archaeological and scientific evidence that life adapts according to environmental factors. There is never 'proof' but there are mountains of evidence.

Laboratory fruit flies to develop in such a way that they can no longer breed with each other. There was this article the other day about a species of mussels physically adapting itself against the introduction of predatory crab species.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/...60811091251.htm

Certain species of whale still have atrophied limbs from the days when they crawled on land, not to mention that the human body contains a number of redundant parts (appendix, tail-bone etc).

Edited August 15, 2006 by erekose

[Melo 1]

You've made the claim that Biblical creation is not consistent with observed facts, but you have no facts you can give as examples? How do you define Biblical Creation? I've stated already that I find nothing inconstant between the Big Bang and Genesis 1:1, so what else in the Biblical account do you find inconsistent with observed facts?

Evolution is the main sticking point for me - there is significant archaeological and scientific evidence that life adapts according to environmental factors. There is never 'proof' but there are mountains of evidence.

Laboratory fruit flies to develop in such a way that they can no longer breed with each other. There was this article the other day about a species of mussels physically adapting itself against the introduction of predatory crab species.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/...60811091251.htm

Certain species of whale still have atrophied limbs from the days when they crawled on land, not to mention that the human body contains a number of redundant parts (appendix, tail-bone etc).

[derekkj 0]

I know this is just a small small answer to what you are asking, but some examples would be in the new testament, the leaders of Israel and Rome at that time are accurate, and the Roman rule of that area, which aligns with history. Many people named in the leadership really existed in history books during the same time period listed in the bible. Maybe that is not what you were asking for (I know it wasn't directed towards me but just trying to answer a little). Sorry if it's not what you are asking about.

I also took a biblical archaeology class in college (Univ of South Florida) and many cities listed in the old testament have been discovered buried in the Isreali/Mideast area by archaeologists. The bible has actually helped some archaeologists find buried cities by the location descriptions mentioned in the bible.

Of course I could never prove the spiritual aspects of the bible to make anyone suddenly believe it's all true if they don't believe it. But in archaeological digs they have found relics and evidence to support the type of temple/synagogue history in Judaism, in locations mentioned in the bible. There is evidence of towns and then there are leaders mentioned in the bible who really did rule. So there definitely are real people named in the bible and real locations, that agree with history.

Saw this previewed this morning and thought it was timely. Looks interesting too!

From the History Channel Website

The Exodus Decoded

Premieres:

Sunday, August 20 @ 8pm ET/PT

The story of the Exodus invokes an epic tale--Pharaohs and Israelites, plagues and miracles, splitting of the sea and drowning of an army, and Moses. It's at the heart of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. After much research--working with archaeologists, Egyptologists, geologists, and theologians--filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici concluded that the Exodus took place hundreds of years earlier than thought. With a new timetable, Jacobovici reexamined artifacts and discovered that the traditional consensus on the date was reached without reference to Judaic texts that record the oral traditions. When Jacobovici consulted these texts, they revealed names of people and places unknown to researchers until recently when extensive excavations in the Nile Delta took place. Teaming up with special effects designers, he created a unique digital experience of the Exodus. Blending archaeological findings with eye-catching effects, Jacobovici creates a virtual museum to showcase his discoveries.

http://www.historychannel.com/global/listi...mp;NetwCode=THC

[incanada1234 0]

and still noone has answered this.. what if by just mere probability.. the big bang is a true theory.. and humans and the universe come from it? would creationists still believe the Good Book? why believing something that is wrong? ( in case the Big Bang were proved right, creationism would be false)...

That's the thing though - the big bang will NEVER be proven to be true. Never.

and.. about leviticus and stuff.. does it mean the Bible is written correctly in some parts, and wrong in others? so we have to take some parts of it as they are and the others 'no no, they don't mean that.. it means etc etc'.. I thought the Bible was all written right.. so.. I guess having slaves again is right for a creationist..

What do you mean? Lev. was written a looooooooong time ago. Times were different then you know, and the word "slave" didn't necessarily mean "shackled with chains and beated daily by the white man". Slaves were free after 7 years of service. Here's a good link on Old Testament slavery (it's long): http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslave.html

This is the ideal situation that God wanted among his people (which of course, most likely didn't happen since the Israelites were always naughty): " "If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. 8 Rather be openhanded and freely lend him whatever he needs. … There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land." (Deut 15.7ff) "

As for the other laws of the OT, they were for salvation. When Jesus came, He did away with all that stuff so that in order to gain salvation, one must simply just BELIEVE and ACCEPT Jesus as Savior. The Ten Commandments are good guidelines to live by, but salvation is only gained through Jesus Christ.

well.. so why don't we chop the bible and just use the new testament.. since the old one is obsolete?

Don't you think it's important to know the history of your religion? And more importantly, it's CHOCK FULL of prophecies of the birth of Jesus (all of which came true).

and again.. noone has answered that.. what if the big bang is true? would you still believe a scientifically false theory as creationism?

The question doesn't really require a yes or no answer since, as I just said, it will never be proven to be true.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

and still noone has answered this.. what if by just mere probability.. the big bang is a true theory.. and humans and the universe come from it? would creationists still believe the Good Book? why believing something that is wrong? ( in case the Big Bang were proved right, creationism would be false)...

That's the thing though - the big bang will NEVER be proven to be true. Never.

and.. about leviticus and stuff.. does it mean the Bible is written correctly in some parts, and wrong in others? so we have to take some parts of it as they are and the others 'no no, they don't mean that.. it means etc etc'.. I thought the Bible was all written right.. so.. I guess having slaves again is right for a creationist..

What do you mean? Lev. was written a looooooooong time ago. Times were different then you know, and the word "slave" didn't necessarily mean "shackled with chains and beated daily by the white man". Slaves were free after 7 years of service. Here's a good link on Old Testament slavery (it's long): http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslave.html

This is the ideal situation that God wanted among his people (which of course, most likely didn't happen since the Israelites were always naughty): " "If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. 8 Rather be openhanded and freely lend him whatever he needs. … There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land." (Deut 15.7ff) "

As for the other laws of the OT, they were for salvation. When Jesus came, He did away with all that stuff so that in order to gain salvation, one must simply just BELIEVE and ACCEPT Jesus as Savior. The Ten Commandments are good guidelines to live by, but salvation is only gained through Jesus Christ.

well.. so why don't we chop the bible and just use the new testament.. since the old one is obsolete?

Don't you think it's important to know the history of your religion? And more importantly, it's CHOCK FULL of prophecies of the birth of Jesus (all of which came true).

and again.. noone has answered that.. what if the big bang is true? would you still believe a scientifically false theory as creationism?

The question doesn't really require a yes or no answer since, as I just said, it will never be proven to be true.

But do you deny the basic principles of scientific reason?

[incanada1234 0]

you told me you wanted to prove that ANY of the people or events in the bible were true. I'll give you a break here. Pick one and prove to me that this person or event was true.

EDIT: Not all christians are intolerant. The majority of christians that I know are actually very tolerant.

No, I said "are you saying NONE of the blah blah blah can be proven?" That's quite different from "ALL of the blah blah blah in the Bible can be proven."

Anyway, I'll choose the most obvious one: the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. (and keep in mind, because I know you'll probably be thinking 'well anyone could've written those down after they happened' - that 400-1000 year old manuscripts of these prophecies have been found)

The Messianic Prophecy [MP] (paraphrased): The Messiah will be the offspring (descendant) of the woman (Eve)

Where the prophecy appears in the Old Testament [OT] (written between 1450 BC and 430BC): Genesis 3:15

Jesus’ fulfillment of the prophecy in the New Testament [NT] (written between 45 and 95 AD): Galatians 4:4

MP: The Messiah will be a descendant of Abraham, through whom everyone on earth will be blessed

OT: Genesis 12:3; 18:18

NT: Acts 3:25,26

MP: The Messiah will be a descendant of Judah

OT: Genesis 49:10

NT: Matthew 1:2 and Luke 3:33

MP: The Messiah will be a prophet like Moses

OT: Deuteronomy 18:15-19

NT: Acts 3:22,23

MP: The Messiah will be the Son of God

OT: Psalm 2:7

NT: Matthew 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22

MP: The Messiah will be raised from the dead (resurrected)

OT: Psalm 16:10,11 and 49:15

NT: Matthew 28:5-9; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:4-7; John 20:11-16; Acts 1:3 and 2:32

MP: The Messiah crucifixion experience

OT: Psalm 22 (contains 11 prophecies)

NT: Matthew 27:34-50 and John 19:17-30

MP: The Messiah will be sneered at and mocked

OT: Psalm 22:7

NT: Luke 23:11,35-39

MP: The Messiah will be pierced through hands and feet

OT: Psalm 22:16

NT: Luke 23:33 and 24:36-39;

John 19:18 and 20:19-20,24-27

MP: The Messiah’s bones will not be broken (a person’s legs were usually broken after being crucified to speed up their death)

OT: Psalm 22:17 and 34:20

NT: John 19:31-33,36

MP: Men Will Gamble for the Messiah’s clothing

OT: Psalm 22:18

NT: Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:23,24

MP: The Messiah will accused by false witnesses

OT: Psalm 35:11

NT: Matthew 26:59,60 and Mark 14:56,57

MP: The Messiah will be hated without a cause

OT: Psalm 35:19 and 69:4

NT: John 15:23-25

MP: The Messiah will be betrayed by a friend

OT: Psalm 41:9

NT: John 13:18,21

MP: The Messiah will ascend to heaven (at the right hand of God)

OT: Psalm 68:18

NT: Luke 24:51; Acts 1:9; 2:33-35; 3:20-21; 5:31,32; 7:55-56; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20,21; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Pet 3:22 . . .

MP: The Messiah will be given vinegar and gall to drink

OT: Psalm 69:21

NT: Matthew 27:34; Mark 15:23; John 19:29,30

MP: Great kings will pay homage and tribute to the Messiah

OT: Psalm 72:10,11

NT: Matthew 2:1-11

MP: The Messiah is a “stone the builders rejected” who will become the “head cornerstone”

OT: Psalm 118:22,23 and Isaiah 28:16

NT: Matthew 21:42,43; Acts 4:11; Ephesians 2:20; 1 Peter 2:6-8

MP: The Messiah will be a descendant of David

OT: Psalm 132:11 and Jeremiah 23:5,6; 33:15,16

NT: Luke 1:32,33

MP: The Messiah will be a born of a virgin

OT: Isaiah 7:14

NT: Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-35

MP: The Messiah’s first spiritual work will be in Galilee

OT: Isaiah 9:1-7

NT: Matthew 4:12-16

MP: The Messiah will make the blind see, the deaf hear, etc

OT: Isaiah 35:5-6

NT: Many places. Also see Matthew 11:3-6 and John 11:47

MP: The Messiah will be beaten, mocked, and spat upon

OT: Isaiah 50:6

NT: Matthew 26:67 and 27:26-31

MP: People will hear and not believe the “arm of the LORD” (Messiah)

OT: Isaiah 53:1

NT: John 12:37,38

MP: The Messiah will be rejected

OT: Isaiah 53:3

NT: Matthew 27:20-25; Mark 15:8-14; Luke 23:18-23; John 19:14,15

MP: The Messiah will be killed

OT: Isaiah 53:5-9

NT: Matthew 27:50; Mark 15:37-39; Luke 23:46; John 19:30

MP: The Messiah will be silent in front of his accusers

OT: Isaiah 53:7

NT: Matthew 26:62,63 and 27:12-14

MP: The Messiah will be buried with the rich

OT: Isaiah 53:9

NT: Matthew 27:59,60; Mark 15:46; Luke 23:52,53; John 19:38-42

MP: The Messiah will be crucified with criminals

OT: Isaiah 53:12

NT: Matthew 27:38; Mark 15:27; Luke 23:32,33

MP: The Messiah is part of the new and everlasting covenant

OT: Isaiah 55:3-4 and Jeremiah 31:31-34

NT: Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; Hebrews 8:6-13

MP: The Messiah will be our intercessor (intervene for us and plead on our behalf)

OT: Isaiah 59:16

NT: Hebrews 9:15

MP: The Messiah has two missions

OT: Isaiah 61:1-3 (first mission ends at “. . . year of the LORD’s favor”)

NT: First mission: Luke 4:16-21; Second mission: to be fulfilled at the end of the world

MP: The Messiah will come at a specific time

OT: Daniel 9:25-26

NT: Galatians 4:4 and Ephesians 1:10

MP: The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem

OT: Micah 5:2

NT: Matthew 2:1 and Luke 2:4-7

MP: The Messiah will enter Jerusalem riding a donkey

OT: Zechariah 9:9

NT: Matthew 21:1-11

MP: The Messiah will be sold for 30 pieces of silver

OT: Zechariah 11:12,13

NT: Matthew 26:15 with Matthew 27:3-10

MP: The Messiah will forsaken by His disciples

OT: Zechariah 13:7

NT: Matthew 26:31,56

MP: The Messiah will enter the Temple with authority

OT: Malachi 3:1

NT: Matthew 21:12 and Luke 19:45

Here's more.

"The now famous House of Peter in Capernaum, which was found in 1906, but was only properly excavated between 1968 and 1998, has provided us certainly with very early evidence of a house church in which Christians met after the time of Christ, and it is not impossible it was a house where one of the original Twelve may have lived, at least for a time."

"... there is the James ossuary which Hershel Shanks and I have dealt with in some detail in The Brother of Jesus (Harper, 2003). It is my belief that this ossuary, having passed several batteries of scientific tests, is indeed the burial box of James the brother of Jesus. As such it is the oldest physical evidence of any kind that Jesus and his family existed. Remember that the manuscripts we have of the New Testament date no earlier than the second century A.D. Here finally we have an artifact that has a direct connection to various central figures of the New Testament dating to within 30 or so years of Jesus' death (in A.D. 30) Here we have what I like to call the Word made visible.

What really is the significance of this find? First, it reminds us that James and Jesus and the holy family were all Jews, indeed thoroughly Jewish.

Second, it underscores that they spoke Aramaic, the language Jews spoke to each other in the Holy Land. This was not the language of the Jews of the Greco-Roman world west of Jerusalem. The inscription is not in Hebrew, the sacred language of the Old Testament; not in Greek, the lingua franca of the Greco-Roman world; not in Latin, the language of the Romans. No, this is Jews talking to Jews.

Third, the ossuary itself reminds us that early Christians like James believed in resurrection. James is in the box because of a belief in the resurrection. But there is more to be said. The inscription on the box is unusual, almost unique. Most ossuaries do not have inscriptions on them, and of the 250 or so that do have inscriptions only one other mentions a brother. What we can say with some assurance is that when someone adds something to the ossuary inscription beyond the usual X son/daughter of Y, it is honorific in character. In the one other ossuary that mentions a brother, it appears he is mentioned because he is more famous than the deceased, and the deceased will be identifiable through mention of the name of the brother. The same seems to apply to the James ossuary.

But let us think about this for a minute. James lived in an honor and shame culture, and crucifixion was the most shameful way to die in that culture.

If crucifixion had been the final event in Jesus' earthly life, then it is hard to believe that 30 years later someone would be bragging on an ossuary about being related to him. The last part of the inscription reads, almost emphatically, "his brother [is] Jesus!" or "He's the brother of Jesus!" What had happened that redeemed the honor of the crucified Jesus? It was his resurrection. So, I like to say, James is in the box, and Jesus is on the box, because of the resurrection. And perhaps, if we are able to test the bone fragments of the box soon, and compare the DNA evidence to the evidence produced in the '80s about the gene string and DNA derived from the blood samples on the Shroud, we may just have a double confirmation of the artifacts I have discussed at the beginning and end of this essay. Stay tuned.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/138/21.0.html

[Fuzzness 2]

Quotes from the bible are not proof to a person who doesn't believe in the bible. try again.

[incanada1234 0]

More -

Bible Archaeology: Cities of Abraham's Time

Bible Archaeology often begins with the early cities of Abraham and the Patriarchs. Abraham's ancestral home of Ur, a powerful city-state of southern Mesopotamia, is mentioned four times in the Old Testament. Located in modern Iraq, Ur has been excavated on and off since the 1800s and has revealed a wealth of information about the pagan culture of Abraham's time. In Genesis 11:31, Abraham's father, Terah, moved his family north to Haran, an ancient city that exists in modern-day Turkey. Also found in that same area of Turkey are villages that still have the names of Abraham's grandfather and great grandfather, Nahor and Serug (Genesis 11:22).

Bible Archaeology: Cities of Ancient Empires

Bible Archaeology includes the capital cities of the major ancient empires. For instance, the Hittite civilization is mentioned throughout the Old Testament as ruling the area of present-day Turkey, Syria and Lebanon, yet nothing was known of these people outside of the Bible. About 100 years ago, ancient Boghazkoy was discovered east of Ankara, Turkey, which revealed itself as the expansive capital city of the Hittite Empire. Since then, archaeologists have uncovered a wealth of information about the history, language and culture of a people considered "imaginary" to many scholars prior to that time. Babylon, the ancient capital of the Babylonian Empire, covers nearly 3,000 acres about 55 miles south of current-day Baghdad in Iraq. The ruins include the famous ziggurat structures (ex., the Tower of Babel), the Palace of King Nebuchadnezzar, and the enormous walls that measured 80 feet thick (wide enough to allow a four-horse chariot to turn). The Bible tells us that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem in 586 BC and exiled the Jews to Babylon for 70 years. The Philistines were known as one of the "Sea Peoples" that constantly warred against the Israelites for control of early Canaan. Mentioned over 200 times in the Old Testament, the Philistines had a major fortified seaport at Ashkelon on the Mediterranean Sea, which was discovered just north of present-day Gaza. Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Ashkelon in 604 BC, as predicted by Jeremiah and other prophets.

Bible Archaeology: Cities of Ancient Israel

Bible archaeology finds its ultimate significance in the cities of ancient Israel. Mentioned more than 50 times in the Bible, Jericho was the initial entry point into the Promised Land for the Israelite people (Joshua 6). Archaeology has now confirmed the location of this fortified city of walls and towers that guarded entry to the land of Canaan from the east. Shechem was an important city throughout the Old Testament. In fact, Jeroboam made it the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel in the 10th century BC (1 Kings 12:25). Excavations have uncovered huge walls and a fortified gate system containing such important finds as the temple of Baal from the story of Abimelech (Judges 9:46). Excavations in the north have also revealed the city of Dan, which was a Canaanite stronghold conquered by Israel (specifically, the tribe of Dan) around 1150 BC (Judges 18). The rebuilt city, which became the northern boundary of Israel, has delivered a wealth of artifacts with biblical importance. The southern boundary of Israel was Beersheba, which became a fortified city during the period of King Solomon (1 Kings 4:25). Excavations between 1969 and 1976 have revealed massive walls, gates, wells and storehouses consistent with biblical accounts. The ancient city of Jerusalem, dating to the time of King David's initial conquest, was discovered and excavated between 1978 and 1985. Prior to this time, nothing apart from the Bible was known about King David's Jerusalem, which has now revealed a palace, towers and the famous Siloam spring (2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles). The ancient ruins of Gibeah were discovered about three miles north of Jerusalem. Gibeah was the home to Saul and the tribe of Benjamin, and later became King Saul's capital city (Judges 19 and 1 Samuel 10-15). Excavations have revealed Saul's fortress palace dated to about 1100 BC. Megiddo was a Canaanite city conquered by Israel in the north. It was a walled fortress that sat on a hill near an expansive plain that witnessed many battles of historical significance. In the 900s BC, King Solomon fortified the city (1 Kings 4:12), and later in the 600s BC, King Josiah lost a battle to the Egyptians there. According to Revelation 16:16, Megiddo (also known as Armageddon) is the location for the final world battle, where Jesus Christ will defeat the forces of Satan and establish His glorious kingdom for all time.

http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/bible-archaeology.htm

This is cool:

Biblical Archaeology: The House of David and Solomon's Temple

Biblical archaeology covering ancient Israeli kings and culture received a huge lift in 1994 when archaeologists discovered a stone inscription at the ancient city of Dan, which refers to the "House of David." The House of David Inscription (Tel Dan Inscription) is important because it's the first ancient reference to King David outside the Bible. Specifically, the stone is a victory pillar of a King in Damascus dated about 250 years after David's reign, which mentions a "king of Israel" (probably Joram, son of Ahab) and a king of the "House of David" (probably Ahaziah of Judah). Another important find is the House of Yahweh Ostracon, which is a pottery shard dated to about 800 BC that contains a written receipt for a donation of silver shekels to Solomon's Temple. Written approximately 130 years after the completion of the Temple, this appears to be the earliest mention of Solomon's Temple outside the Bible.

[incanada1234 0]

You've made the claim that Biblical creation is not consistent with observed facts, but you have no facts you can give as examples? How do you define Biblical Creation? I've stated already that I find nothing inconstant between the Big Bang and Genesis 1:1, so what else in the Biblical account do you find inconsistent with observed facts?

Evolution is the main sticking point for me - there is significant archaeological and scientific evidence that life adapts according to environmental factors. There is never 'proof' but there are mountains of evidence.

Laboratory fruit flies to develop in such a way that they can no longer breed with each other. There was this article the other day about a species of mussels physically adapting itself against the introduction of predatory crab species.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/...60811091251.htm

Certain species of whale still have atrophied limbs from the days when they crawled on land, not to mention that the human body contains a number of redundant parts (appendix, tail-bone etc).

Have you heard of the Cambrian Explosion? I'm actually reading up on it and it's quite interesting.

"One of the most remarkable pieces of evidence disproving evolution is the “Cambrian Explosion” Most textbooks never mention it, and the ones that do relegate it to a short phrase or paragraph as if it is some insignificant detail. This phenomenon is so pronounced in the fossil record that Scientific American called it “life’s big bang.” It is considered one of the biggest challenges to evolutionary theory. Many reputable and highly accomplished scientists at major accredited universities worldwide say it is an insurmountable challenge. Moreover, I believe it is proof that evolution is merely a widely held myth of popular culture.

Cambrian Explosion

“Cambrian explosion” refers to the great quantity and diversity of life found in what is called the Cambrian layer of the geologic column. The Cambrian age in the geologic time scale is dated by scientists as being about 530 million years old. What is really interesting is not just what is found in this layer, but what is found in the layers above it, and what is not found in layers under it. The Cambrian layer has virtually every species known to man. Yes, dinosaurs, birds, reptiles, and enormous varieties of each all coexist in this layer. No evolutionary sequence here, they are all coexistent simultaneously."

Layers Above and Below

Remarkably the layers below the Cambrian have practically nothing with regard to fossilized specimens. The few creatures that are found in pre-Cambrian strata are all soft-bodied organisms like worms. So essentially you have nothing along the lines of organic complexity and diversity pre-Cambrian, and then suddenly everything. But wait, it gets even more interesting. To compound this huge problem the number of species fossilized in the layers above the Cambrian period gradually decrease with each successive layer. Once you reach the most recent layers approximately 98% of every thing that has ever lived is extinct. Have you ever heard that 98% of everything that has ever lived is extinct? This is where that saying came from—hard scientific fact. A reasonable and honest person must conclude from the evidence that the fossil record is diametrically opposite what would be predicted by evolutionary theory. It is noteworthy that these conclusions are derived from a geologic time framework that is put forth by scientists own interpretation of geologic evidence. In fact, the belief that the strata represent different geologic ages is just that, a belief. Nevertheless, it is a belief held among scientists world-wide.

Darwin Knew

Darwin and his contemporaries were aware of this problem with the fossil record some 150 years ago, but they believed that the fossil record had been insufficiently sampled up to that time. Their “belief” was that paleontological research in the future would more adequately sample the fossil record and show it to be more in line with evolutionary theory. They were wrong! Exactly the opposite happened. After a century and half of excavating fossils from the strata we have found the problem to be worse, not better. Contrary to the tree of life depicted in the school books, the fossil record depicts exactly the opposite story. The tree of life is an inverted cone, and not a tree at all.

No Correlation

Remember, evolutionary theory states that everything evolved from a common ancestor that climbed out of the primordial soup. This ancient ancestor gradually evolved. Its evolutionary progress branched out into different paths and these different paths led to the creation of increasingly complex and divergent organic forms. The paths continued to branch out resulting in the great diversity of life we have today. Now, if this is true, what would you expect to see in the fossil record? Of course you would expect to see simple organisms in the lowest layers and a gradual increase in diversity and complexity of life as you progress to more recent layers in the geologic time scale. But what do we really find in the fossil record? We find the exact opposite. Not something ambiguous like everything found in each layer. No, you find the exact opposite of what is predicted by evolution. From a correlation perspective you do not find a factor of 1, meaning perfect correlation, or a 0, meaning no correlation, you find a -1, meaning perfectly uncorrelated to the prediction. Now I don’t know about you, but I find this compelling proof that evolution did not happen. This begs the question, how much proof do evolutionary scientists need anyway?

Belief In Spite of Evidence

You must be saying to yourself at this point, “How could that be? How could they speak about this theory with such surety with such strong evidence to the contrary?” The answer is simple. They believe the theory in spite of the evidence. That is why many leading creation scientists keep referring to evolution as a philosophy of science or even a religion. This belief is so strong in academic circles that scientists are chided if they even question evolution publicly. Why are they ridiculed? They are ridiculed because the only alternative to evolution is creation. Some like to pretend there are a variety of options in explaining origins. This is simply not so. The options often presented are merely shades of the two primary options, and scientists know this.

Conclusion

If evolution did not take place, if the natural forces at work today did not create the diversity of life we see on our little blue world, then something supernatural must be responsible. True science seeks to understand, no matter what the philosophical or metaphysical ramifications may be. That is why evolution is not science, but rather a philosophy, for it seeks to explain things within only one possible framework, whether or not this framework is true. The facts are that the scientists' own interpretation of the fossil record clearly demonstrates that every species appeared at once suddenly and then gradually died off with the passage of time. The significance of this great body of evidence against evolutionary theory in the fossil record cannot be stressed enough. It is utterly devastating to evolutionary theory completely by itself. But in the final analysis, it is but one of a plethora of scientific facts that refute the 19th century fable that is evolution.

In closing I would like to share with you some of my favorite quotes on the subject by leading evolutionary scientists, and even Darwin himself. By their own words they admit this very important piece of the evolutionary puzzle does not fit, and never will. Enjoy.

“There is another and allied difficulty, which is much more serious. I allude to the manner in which species belonging to several of the main divisions of the animal kingdom suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rocks.” (Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 348),

“The abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palaeontologists—for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick—as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species. If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution through natural selection.” (Ibid., p. 344),

“To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.” (Ibid., p. 350),

“The case at present must remain inexplicable, and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.” (Ibid., p. 351),

“The most famous such burst, the Cambrian explosion, marks the inception of modern multicellular life. Within just a few million years, nearly every major kind of animal anatomy appears in the fossil record for the first time ... The Precambrian record is now sufficiently good that the old rationale about undiscovered sequences of smoothly transitional forms will no longer wash.” (Stephen Jay Gould, “An Asteroid to Die For,” Discover, October 1989, p. 65),

“And we find many of them [Cambrian fossils] already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists.” (Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1987, p. 229),

“One of the major unsolved problems of geology and evolution is the occurrence of diversified, multicellular marine invertebrates in Lower Cambrian rocks on all the continents and their absence in rocks of greater age.” (I. Axelrod, “Early Cambrian Marine Fauna,” Science, Vol. 128, 4 July 1958, p. 7),

“Evolutionary biology’s deepest paradox concerns this strange discontinuity. Why haven’t new animal body plans continued to crawl out of the evolutionary cauldron during the past hundreds of millions of years? Why are the ancient body plans so stable?” (Jeffrey S. Levinton, “The Big Bang of Animal Evolution,” Scientific American, Vol. 267, November 1992, p. 84),

“Granted an evolutionary origin of the main groups of animals, and not an act of special creation, the absence of any record whatsoever of a single member of any of the phyla in the Pre-Cambrian rocks remains as inexplicable on orthodox grounds as it was to Darwin.” (T. Neville George Professor of Geology at the University of Glasgow, “Fossils in Evolutionary Perspective,” Science Progress, Vol. 48, No. 189, January 1960, p. 5).

link

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

You've made the claim that Biblical creation is not consistent with observed facts, but you have no facts you can give as examples? How do you define Biblical Creation? I've stated already that I find nothing inconstant between the Big Bang and Genesis 1:1, so what else in the Biblical account do you find inconsistent with observed facts?

Evolution is the main sticking point for me - there is significant archaeological and scientific evidence that life adapts according to environmental factors. There is never 'proof' but there are mountains of evidence.

Laboratory fruit flies to develop in such a way that they can no longer breed with each other. There was this article the other day about a species of mussels physically adapting itself against the introduction of predatory crab species.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/...60811091251.htm

Certain species of whale still have atrophied limbs from the days when they crawled on land, not to mention that the human body contains a number of redundant parts (appendix, tail-bone etc).

Electric Fish on Verge of Evolutionary Split

http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/060...ctric_fish.html

[incanada1234 0]

More for fuzzness:

The discovery of the Ebla archive in northern Syria in the 1970s has shown the Biblical writings concerning the Patriarchs to be viable. Documents written on clay tablets from around 2300 B.C. demonstrate that personal and place names in the Patriarchal accounts are genuine. The name "Canaan" was in use in Ebla, a name critics once said was not used at that time and was used incorrectly in the early chapters of the Bible. The word "tehom" ("the deep") in Genesis 1:2 was said to be a late word demonstrating the late writing of the creation story. "Tehom" was part of the vocabulary at Ebla, in use some 800 years before Moses. Ancient customs reflected in the stories of the Patriarchs have also been found in clay tablets from Nuzi and Mari.

The Hittites were once thought to be a Biblical legend, until their capital and records were discovered at Bogazkoy, Turkey. Many thought the Biblical references to Solomon's wealth were greatly exaggerated. Recovered records from the past show that wealth in antiquity was concentrated with the king and Solomon's prosperity was entirely feasible. It was once claimed there was no Assyrian king named Sargon as recorded in Isaiah 20:1, because this name was not known in any other record. Then, Sargon's palace was discovered in Khorsabad, Iraq. The very event mentioned in Isaiah 20, his capture of Ashdod, was recorded on the palace walls. What is more, fragments of a stela memorializing the victory were found at Ashdod itself.

Another king who was in doubt was Belshazzar, king of Babylon, named in Daniel 5. The last king of Babylon was Nabonidus according to recorded history. Tablets were found showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son who served as coregent in Babylon. Thus, Belshazzar could offer to make Daniel "third highest ruler in the kingdom" (Dan. 5:16) for reading the handwriting on the wall, the highest available position. Here we see the "eye-witness" nature of the Biblical record, as is so often brought out by the discoveries of archaeology.

And yet more:

Burial sites of people in the Bible

Caiaphas the High Priest

Ossuary of Caiaphas the High Priest

Caiaphas was high priest for 18 years, A.D. 18-36. He most likely gained the position by marrying the daughter of Annas, head of a powerful high-priestly clan (John 18:13). Caiaphas is infamous as the leader of the conspiracy to crucify Jesus.

At a meeting of the religious leaders, Caiaphas said, "It is better for you that one man die for the people than the whole nation perish" (John 11:50). He was referring to the possible intervention of the Roman authorities, if Jesus' teaching should cause unrest. His words were prophetic in that Jesus did die for the people, all the people of the earth, as a sacrifice for sin.

Read the story of Christ's death

After He was arrested, Jesus was taken to Caiaphas' house and detained overnight. The guards mocked and beat Him (Luke 22:63-65). In the morning He was interrogated and further beaten. Caiaphas asked Him, "Are you the Christ (Messiah), the Son of the Blessed One?" "I am," Jesus replied (Mark 14:61-62). Caiaphas then handed Jesus over to Pilate to be tried.

Following Jesus' crucifixion, Caiaphas continued to persecute the early church. He brought the apostles before the religious leaders and said to them, "We gave you strict orders not to teach in this Name. Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's (Jesus') blood." Peter and the other apostles replied, "We must obey God rather then men" (Acts 5:28-29).

The Caiaphas family tomb was accidentally discovered by workers constructing a road in a park just south of the Old City of Jerusalem. Archaeologists were hastily called to the scene. When they examined the tomb they found 12 ossuaries (limestone bone boxes) containing the remains of 63 individuals. The most beautifully decorated of the ossuaries was inscribed with the name "Joseph son of (or, of the family of) Caiaphas." That was the full name of the high priest who arrested Jesus, as documented by Josephus (Antiquities 18: 2, 2; 4, 3). Inside were the remains of a 60-year-old male, almost certainly those of the Caiaphas of the New Testament. This remarkable discovery has, for the first time, provided us with the physical remains of an individual named in the Bible.

[More about Caiaphas]

James, brother of Jesus Christ

Have archaeologists discovered his ossuary (burial box)? Answer...

[Learn more more about James]

Caesar Augustus

A great politician and administrator, Augustus ruled the Roman empire from 27 B.C.-A.D. 14. It was Augustus who issued the census decree that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born (Luke 2:1-7). Augustus erected for himself a grand mausoleum in Rome, on the east bank of the Tiber River, one quarter mile northwest of the Roman Forum. The remains exist today in the middle of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore.

It was 285 feet in diameter and 143 feet high, surmounted by a statue of the emperor. His ashes were placed in an urn in the center, while those of other members of the dynasty were place in urns in a corridor around a central cylinder. Although some of the urns were found in place by excavators, the ashes had long since disappeared.

[More about Ceasar Augustus / Read the story of Christ's birth ]

Tomb of the Patriarchs

The Bible says that Sarah, Abraham, Isaac, Rebekah, Leah and Jacob were buried in Hebron, in a cave called the Cave of Machpelah, purchased by Abraham (Gen. 23).

Traditionally, this cave has been located below the Haram el-Khalil ("sacred precinct of the friend of the merciful One, God") in Hebron, today a Muslim mosque. References as early as the Hellenistic period (2nd century B.C.) testify that this is the authentic location of the burial place of the Patriarchs. The cave was explored by the Augustine Canons in 1119, at which time they claim to have found the bones of the Patriarchs.

Joseph, son of Jacob (grandson of Abraham)

Has Joseph's original tomb been found? Answer...

[Learn more more about Joseph]

Tombs of David and Solomon

Tunnel tumbs

Throughout the kingdom period, the kings of Judah were buried within the city of David. At the southern end of the City of David, south of the Old City of Jerusalem, there are two monumental tunnel tombs which many scholars believe are the tombs of David and Solomon. Unfortunately, they were damaged by later quarrying, so no identifying inscriptions have survived. In the same area are many Iron Age tombs, possibly those of other kings of Judah.

One exception to the normal custom was the burial of Uzziah. Since he was a leper, he was not buried with the other kings, but "near them in a field for burial that belonged to the kings, for people said, 'he had leprosy'" (2 Chr 26:23).

Interestingly, an inscription was found on the Mount of Olives in 1931 dating to the first century A.D. which reads, "Here were brought the bones of Uzziah, King of Judah – do not open." Evidently, because of his leprosy, Uzziah's bones were removed from the field belonging to the kings and transferred to yet a more remote location.

Cyrus the Great

Cyrus ruled the Persian empire from 559-530 B.C. He is best known for his capture of Babylon in 539 B.C. Already in the 8th century B.C. Isaiah predicted this defeat (Isaiah 45:1-3), and went on to say that Cyrus would "set my exiles free' (Isaiah 45:13). That Cyrus released the Jewish exiles from Babylon is not only documented in the Bible (2 Chronicles 36:22-23; Ezra 1:2-4), but also implied in the contemporary Cyrus Cylinder. This ancient record states, "I (Cyrus) gathered all their former inhabitants and returned to them their habitations."

Cyrus was buried in a simple gabled stone tomb outside his capital of Pasargadae in modern Iran. According to the historian Strabo, this inscription once graced the structure, "Oh man, I am Cyrus, the son of Cambyses, who founded the empire of Persia, and was king of Asia. Grudge me not therefore this monument" (Geography xv.3.7).

Darius-I the Great

Darius I was king of the Persian empire from 522-486 B.C. He gave permission to renew the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezra 6:1-12), which had been discontinued for some 10 years.

His is the first of three monumental tombs cut into a cliff near the Persian capital of Persepolis, Iran. The inscription on his tomb reads,

King Darius states: King, whoever you are, who may arise after me, protect yourself well from lies. Do not trust the man who lies. … Believe what I did and tell the truth to the people. Do not conceal (it). If you do not conceal these matters, but you do tell the people, may Ahura Mayda protect you. …

There are three other tombs at the site, thought to be those of the Persian kings Xerxes (485-465 B.C.), Artaxerxes I (465-424 B.C.), and Darius II (423-405 B.C.). There are no accompanying inscriptions, however, to be certain of these identifications. Xerxes is the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther, the king whom Esther married. Ezra was a scribe (Ezra 7:6) and Nehemiah a cupbearer (Nehemiah 2:1) under Artaxerxes I. He authorized both Ezra and Nehemiah to return to Jerusalem, Ezra to carry out religious and judicial duties (Ezra 7:12-26), and Nehemiah to rebuild the city walls (Nehemiah 2:1-9). Darius II may be the Darius mentioned in Nehemiah 12:22, but this is not certain.

Man-made structures in the Bible unearthed by archaeologists:

Old Testament

New Testament

The palace at Jericho where Eglon, king of Moab, was assassinated by Ehud (Judges 3:15-30).

The east gate of Shechem where Gaal and Zebul watched the forces of Abimelech approach the city (Judges 9:34-38).

The Temple of Baal/El-Berith in Shechem, where funds were obtained to finance Abimelech's kingship and where the citizens of Shechem took refuge when Abimelech attacked the city (Judges 9:4, 46-49).

The pool of Gibeon where the forces of David and Ishbosheth fought during the struggle for the kingship of Israel (2 Samuel 2:12-32).

The Pool of Heshbon, likened to the eyes of the Shulammite woman (Song of Songs 7:4).

The royal palace at Samaria where the kings of Israel lived (1 Kings 20:43; 21:1, 2; 22:39; 2 Kings 1:2; 15:25).

The Pool of Samaria where King Ahab's chariot was washed after his death (1 Kings 22:29-38).

The water tunnel beneath Jerusalem dug by King Hezekiah to provide water during the Assyrian siege (2 Kings 20:20; 2 Chronicles 32:30).

The royal palace in Babylon where King Belshazzar held the feast and Daniel interpreted the handwriting on the wall (Daniel 5).

The royal palace in Susa where Esther was queen of the Persian king Xerxes (Esther 1:2; 2:3, 5, 9, 16).

The royal gate at Susa where Mordecai, Esther's cousin, sat (Esther 2:19, 21; 3:2, 3; 4:2; 5:9, 13; 6:10, 12).

The Square in front of the royal gate at Susa where Mordecai met with Halthach, Xerxes' eunuch (Esther 4:6).

The foundation of the synagogue at Capernaum where Jesus cured a man with an unclean spirit (Mark 1:21-28) and delivered the sermon on the bread of life (John 6:25-59).

The house of Peter at Capernaum where Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law and others (Matthew 8:14-16).

Jacob's well where Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman (John 4).

The Pool of Bethesda in Jerusalem, where Jesus healed a crippled man (John 5:1-14).

The Pool of Siloam in Jerusalem, where Jesus healed a blind man (John 9:1-4).

The tribunal at Corinth where Paul was tried (Acts 18:12-17).

The theater at Ephesus where the riot of silversmiths occurred (Acts 19:29).

Herod's palace at Caesarea where Paul was kept under guard (Acts 23:33-35).

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You've made the claim that Biblical creation is not consistent with observed facts, but you have no facts you can give as examples? How do you define Biblical Creation? I've stated already that I find nothing inconstant between the Big Bang and Genesis 1:1, so what else in the Biblical account do you find inconsistent with observed facts?

Evolution is the main sticking point for me - there is significant archaeological and scientific evidence that life adapts according to environmental factors. There is never 'proof' but there are mountains of evidence.

Laboratory fruit flies to develop in such a way that they can no longer breed with each other. There was this article the other day about a species of mussels physically adapting itself against the introduction of predatory crab species.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/...60811091251.htm

Certain species of whale still have atrophied limbs from the days when they crawled on land, not to mention that the human body contains a number of redundant parts (appendix, tail-bone etc).

Have you heard of the Cambrian Explosion? I'm actually reading up on it and it's quite interesting.

"One of the most remarkable pieces of evidence disproving evolution is the “Cambrian Explosion” Most textbooks never mention it, and the ones that do relegate it to a short phrase or paragraph as if it is some insignificant detail. This phenomenon is so pronounced in the fossil record that Scientific American called it “life’s big bang.” It is considered one of the biggest challenges to evolutionary theory. Many reputable and highly accomplished scientists at major accredited universities worldwide say it is an insurmountable challenge. Moreover, I believe it is proof that evolution is merely a widely held myth of popular culture.

Cambrian Explosion

“Cambrian explosion” refers to the great quantity and diversity of life found in what is called the Cambrian layer of the geologic column. The Cambrian age in the geologic time scale is dated by scientists as being about 530 million years old. What is really interesting is not just what is found in this layer, but what is found in the layers above it, and what is not found in layers under it. The Cambrian layer has virtually every species known to man. Yes, dinosaurs, birds, reptiles, and enormous varieties of each all coexist in this layer. No evolutionary sequence here, they are all coexistent simultaneously."

Layers Above and Below

Remarkably the layers below the Cambrian have practically nothing with regard to fossilized specimens. The few creatures that are found in pre-Cambrian strata are all soft-bodied organisms like worms. So essentially you have nothing along the lines of organic complexity and diversity pre-Cambrian, and then suddenly everything. But wait, it gets even more interesting. To compound this huge problem the number of species fossilized in the layers above the Cambrian period gradually decrease with each successive layer. Once you reach the most recent layers approximately 98% of every thing that has ever lived is extinct. Have you ever heard that 98% of everything that has ever lived is extinct? This is where that saying came from—hard scientific fact. A reasonable and honest person must conclude from the evidence that the fossil record is diametrically opposite what would be predicted by evolutionary theory. It is noteworthy that these conclusions are derived from a geologic time framework that is put forth by scientists own interpretation of geologic evidence. In fact, the belief that the strata represent different geologic ages is just that, a belief. Nevertheless, it is a belief held among scientists world-wide.

Darwin Knew

Darwin and his contemporaries were aware of this problem with the fossil record some 150 years ago, but they believed that the fossil record had been insufficiently sampled up to that time. Their “belief” was that paleontological research in the future would more adequately sample the fossil record and show it to be more in line with evolutionary theory. They were wrong! Exactly the opposite happened. After a century and half of excavating fossils from the strata we have found the problem to be worse, not better. Contrary to the tree of life depicted in the school books, the fossil record depicts exactly the opposite story. The tree of life is an inverted cone, and not a tree at all.

No Correlation

Remember, evolutionary theory states that everything evolved from a common ancestor that climbed out of the primordial soup. This ancient ancestor gradually evolved. Its evolutionary progress branched out into different paths and these different paths led to the creation of increasingly complex and divergent organic forms. The paths continued to branch out resulting in the great diversity of life we have today. Now, if this is true, what would you expect to see in the fossil record? Of course you would expect to see simple organisms in the lowest layers and a gradual increase in diversity and complexity of life as you progress to more recent layers in the geologic time scale. But what do we really find in the fossil record? We find the exact opposite. Not something ambiguous like everything found in each layer. No, you find the exact opposite of what is predicted by evolution. From a correlation perspective you do not find a factor of 1, meaning perfect correlation, or a 0, meaning no correlation, you find a -1, meaning perfectly uncorrelated to the prediction. Now I don’t know about you, but I find this compelling proof that evolution did not happen. This begs the question, how much proof do evolutionary scientists need anyway?

Belief In Spite of Evidence

You must be saying to yourself at this point, “How could that be? How could they speak about this theory with such surety with such strong evidence to the contrary?” The answer is simple. They believe the theory in spite of the evidence. That is why many leading creation scientists keep referring to evolution as a philosophy of science or even a religion. This belief is so strong in academic circles that scientists are chided if they even question evolution publicly. Why are they ridiculed? They are ridiculed because the only alternative to evolution is creation. Some like to pretend there are a variety of options in explaining origins. This is simply not so. The options often presented are merely shades of the two primary options, and scientists know this.

Conclusion

If evolution did not take place, if the natural forces at work today did not create the diversity of life we see on our little blue world, then something supernatural must be responsible. True science seeks to understand, no matter what the philosophical or metaphysical ramifications may be. That is why evolution is not science, but rather a philosophy, for it seeks to explain things within only one possible framework, whether or not this framework is true. The facts are that the scientists' own interpretation of the fossil record clearly demonstrates that every species appeared at once suddenly and then gradually died off with the passage of time. The significance of this great body of evidence against evolutionary theory in the fossil record cannot be stressed enough. It is utterly devastating to evolutionary theory completely by itself. But in the final analysis, it is but one of a plethora of scientific facts that refute the 19th century fable that is evolution.

In closing I would like to share with you some of my favorite quotes on the subject by leading evolutionary scientists, and even Darwin himself. By their own words they admit this very important piece of the evolutionary puzzle does not fit, and never will. Enjoy.

“There is another and allied difficulty, which is much more serious. I allude to the manner in which species belonging to several of the main divisions of the animal kingdom suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rocks.” (Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 348),

“The abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palaeontologists—for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick—as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species. If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution through natural selection.” (Ibid., p. 344),

“To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.” (Ibid., p. 350),

“The case at present must remain inexplicable, and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.” (Ibid., p. 351),

“The most famous such burst, the Cambrian explosion, marks the inception of modern multicellular life. Within just a few million years, nearly every major kind of animal anatomy appears in the fossil record for the first time ... The Precambrian record is now sufficiently good that the old rationale about undiscovered sequences of smoothly transitional forms will no longer wash.” (Stephen Jay Gould, “An Asteroid to Die For,” Discover, October 1989, p. 65),

“And we find many of them [Cambrian fossils] already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists.” (Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1987, p. 229),

“One of the major unsolved problems of geology and evolution is the occurrence of diversified, multicellular marine invertebrates in Lower Cambrian rocks on all the continents and their absence in rocks of greater age.” (I. Axelrod, “Early Cambrian Marine Fauna,” Science, Vol. 128, 4 July 1958, p. 7),

“Evolutionary biology’s deepest paradox concerns this strange discontinuity. Why haven’t new animal body plans continued to crawl out of the evolutionary cauldron during the past hundreds of millions of years? Why are the ancient body plans so stable?” (Jeffrey S. Levinton, “The Big Bang of Animal Evolution,” Scientific American, Vol. 267, November 1992, p. 84),

“Granted an evolutionary origin of the main groups of animals, and not an act of special creation, the absence of any record whatsoever of a single member of any of the phyla in the Pre-Cambrian rocks remains as inexplicable on orthodox grounds as it was to Darwin.” (T. Neville George Professor of Geology at the University of Glasgow, “Fossils in Evolutionary Perspective,” Science Progress, Vol. 48, No. 189, January 1960, p. 5).

link

Nice - but picking holes in gaps in the current scientific understanding does not amount to significant proof of 'supernatural influence'.

Not to mention body plans are not 'perfect', in fact far from it. - why else do humans have recessive characteristics such as a tail bone, appendix, wisdom teeth - what purpose do those things serve? Again why do certain species of whale have vestigial, atrophied limbs that clearly serve no functional purpose.

Try this one for size. Observed Instances of Speciation

Whether you call it evolution or biological modification there is clear evidence that living organisms biologically adapt to a changing environment.

[incanada1234 0]

Nice - but picking holes in gaps in the current scientific understanding does not amount to significant proof of 'supernatural influence'.

No, it doesn't. But it certainly makes one question darwinism. And it makes you wonder juuuust a little bit why the truth about the Cambrian Explosion isn't in student textbooks...

Not to mention body plans are not 'perfect', in fact far from it. - why else do humans have recessive characteristics such as a tail bone, appendix, wisdom teeth - what purpose do those things serve? Again why do certain species of whale have vestigial, atrophied limbs that clearly serve no functional purpose.

Try this one for size. Observed Instances of Speciation

Whether you call it evolution or biological modification there is clear evidence that living organisms biologically adapt to a changing environment.

I'll have to read and reply later, I have lunch to eat. Yay!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Nice - but picking holes in gaps in the current scientific understanding does not amount to significant proof of 'supernatural influence'.

No, it doesn't. But it certainly makes one question darwinism.

Everyone questions Darwinism, which is about representative of the broad scope of modern evolutionary theory as the work of Isaac Newton is to Newtonian Physics.

[danae 0]

InCanada1234 I dont know where you find this stuff....oh yeah learnthebible.com

What you posted regarding the Cambrian Explosion is riddled with bias and falsities.

Most textbooks never mention it? Well every one regarding evolutionary theory I have read has.

The Cambrian Explosion does not 'prove' evolutionary theory is wrong. Remember, evolutionary theory is not one thing. Evolutionary science consists of many researchers, many sub-theories and much evidence. These continue to be pieced together to form a valid, consistent conclusion. The Cambrian Explosion is just one more piece of evidence that researchers are using to help form this bigger picture.

Furthermore, the term 'explosion' can be decieving. The range was around 30 million years. Natural history is filled with numerous periods of slow evolution punctuated by very rapid periods. This is often referred to as punctuated equilibrium.

So what you have shown us is a further demonstation of your narrow-mindedness. You have quoted from a christian source, but have not offered any suggestion why this Cambrian Explosion in any way validates creationism?

Well done, you have attempted to used evolutionary evidence to disprove evolution.

Here is some unbiased information on teh Cambrian Explosion for those interested.

The Cambrian Explosion:

For most of the nearly 4 billion years that life has existed on Earth, evolution produced little beyond bacteria, plankton, and multi-celled algae. But beginning about 600 million years ago in the Precambrian, the fossil record speaks of more rapid change. First, there was the rise and fall of mysterious creatures of the Ediacaran fauna, named for the fossil site in Australia where they were first discovered. Some of these animals may have belonged to groups that survive today, but others don't seem at all related to animals we know.

Then, between about 570 and 530 million years ago, another burst of diversification occurred, with the eventual appearance of the lineages of almost all animals living today. This stunning and unique evolutionary flowering is termed the "Cambrian explosion," taking the name of the geological age in whose early part it occurred. But it was not as rapid as an explosion: the changes seems to have happened in a range of about 30 million years, and some stages took 5 to 10 million years.

It's important to remember that what we call "the fossil record" is only the available fossil record. In order to be available to us, the remains of ancient plants and animals have to be preserved first, and this means that they need to have fossilizable parts and to be buried in an environment that will not destroy them.

It has long been suspected that the sparseness of the pre-Cambrian fossil record reflects these two problems. First, organisms may not have sequestered and secreted much in the way of fossilizable hard parts; and second, the environments in which they lived may have characteristically dissolved those hard parts after death and recycled them. An exception was the mysterious "small shelly fauna" -- minute shelled animals that are hard to categorize -- that left abundant fossils in the early Cambrian. Recently, minute fossil embryos dating to 570 million years ago have also been discovered. Even organisms that hadn't evolved hard parts, and thus didn't leave fossils of their bodies, left fossils of the trails they made as they moved through the Precambrian mud. Life was flourishing long before the Cambrian "explosion".

The best record of the Cambrian diversification is the Burgess Shale in British Columbia. Laid down in the middle-Cambrian, when the "explosion" had already been underway for several million years, this formation contains the first appearance in the fossil record of brachiopods, with clamlike shells, as well as trilobites, mollusks, echinoderms, and many odd animals that probably belong to extinct lineages. They include Opabinia, with five eyes and a nose like a fire hose, and Wiwaxia, an armored slug with two rows of upright scales.

The question of how so many immense changes occurred in such a short time is one that stirs scientists. Why did many fundamentally different body plans evolve so early and in such profusion? Some point to the increase in oxygen that began around 700 million years ago, providing fuel for movement and the evolution of more complex body structures. Others propose that an extinction of life just before the Cambrian opened up ecological roles, or "adaptive space," that the new forms exploited. External, ecological factors like these were undoubtedly important in creating the opportunity for the Cambrian explosion to occur.

Internal, genetic factors were also crucial. Recent research suggests that the period prior to the Cambrian explosion saw the gradual evolution of a "genetic tool kit" of genes that govern developmental processes. Once assembled, this genetic tool kit enabled an unprecedented period of evolutionary experimentation -- and competition. Many forms seen in the fossil record of the Cambrian disappeared without trace. Once the body plans that proved most successful came to dominate the biosphere, evolution never had such a free hand again, and evolutionary change was limited to relatively minor tinkering with the body plans that already existed.

Edited August 15, 2006 by lauraxmarie