37 replies to this topic

[Noteaph]

It must be THE most lucky day for all (macro-) evolutionists; take your statements and 'all the evidence' to the bank,
there's a cool 7.5 trillion waiting for you scientific minds out there:

Quote

October 10, 2008 12:11 PM
$7.5 trillion for a 'transitional' fossil?
Palaeontologists: this could be your lucky day. Turkish creationist Adnan Oktar has just offered ten trillion lira - a mouth-watering $7.5 trillion - to "anyone who produces a single intermediate-form fossil demonstrating evolution".

In the years before I joined New Scientist I dabbled in Jurassic sea urchin evolution and I think one of my new genera fits the bill nicely - for those who are interested, it provides an elegant transitional form between the very first so-called "irregular" sea urchins and the cassiduloid urchins that still exist today.
Others have suggested Tiktaalik roseae, a late Devonian lobe-finned fish with unusual appendages that are transitional between fin and leg. Its discovery in 2006 added an important piece to the jigsaw of tetrapod evolution.

So, will Oktar cough up? Unlikely. You might call the problem the Sorcerer's Apprentice syndrome. Poor Mickey Mouse found out that every time he chopped up one of his magic brooms, the problem doubled as each half sprouted new legs and continued its duties.

Palaeontologists everywhere can sympathise with Mickey's plight. When a seemingly large evolutionary gap is plugged with a remarkable new fossil, as happened just the other day with the discovery of a new primitive turtle from the Triassic, it just leaves two smaller gaps on either side. Now, instead of one gap in the fossil record there are two, and creationists argue that the fossil record is, paradoxically, even worse than it was before the new discovery.

Is there any hope of satisfying Oktar? The answer is yes, but perhaps only if you look at the fossil record of tiny plankton.  How about this transitional series in Orbulina forams? There are literally trillions of forams in the oceans. When they die and sink to the sea floor they remain undisturbed for millions of years, offering palaeontologists a complete set of intermediate fossils.

Colin Barras, online technology reporter

Be a good sameritan and give me one or two million would you? Seeing as I brought this ez bundle of cash to your attention.. Copa?

Godspeed

Edited by Noteaph, 14 October 2008 - 09:58 AM.

[CASHACME]

Here we go again with the tired old "irreducible complexity" argument again. Please IDers give us something that can be measured scientifically or else leave it be!!!

[AlexG]

Noteaph on Oct 14 2008, 05:57 AM, said:

It must be THE most lucky day for all (macro-) evolutionists; take your statements and 'all the evidence' to the bank,
there's a cool 7.5 trillion waiting for you scientific minds out there:



Be a good sameritan and give me one or two million would you? Seeing as I brought this ez bundle of cash to your attention.. Copa?

Godspeed

There's a whole thread on this.

[Goblin-5]

Same old tired arguments.

[theQ]

I have seen this argument before used by people who feel a need for a superior being.....well your wrong....i know you humans have a need for a superior imaginary friend but these examples in nature to you seem to skips steps is just another wonder of the magical universe we live in.

[ryan23]

You're misunderstanding the whole concept of Darwinism. There is no macro evolution, it is only micro. What you term, macro evolution is just the result of many successive steps of micro evolution. Oh sorry you said people have wrote books on irreducible complexity, well it must be true then, I mean, The Bible is a book and everything in that is true...
The wing of a bird may be irreducibly complex, its understandable to perceive it this way. However, it was not always a huge mechanism, they started life as flaps of skin (flying squirrels). Even this was advantageous, preventing death from a fall. People in this area of irreducible complexity look at something they cannot hope to understand so they deem it infinite, unreachable, "God did it". Well, who "did" God?
If I mention a man by the name of Richard Dawkins does that send chills down your spine????????

[BaneSilvermoon]

AlexG on Oct 14 2008, 08:44 AM, said:

There's a whole thread on this.

Mostly concerned with how the country this man lives in doesn't have as much money as he is offering  

[Christopher Jones]

I found this entire article astounding and completely compelling. I had never given the topic that much though, I just took the evolution explanation as a given.... After the alternative explanation and the case put forward I was worried the writer may of created a case for the bible crowd and there idea for our existence...but I think this theory has toes in each pond....on one side of the argument, divine intervention and a power from heaven that created everything....and one the other side there is the random complexity of chance creating everything... I believe this explanation encases both belief's.. The primal slurry that seeped and splosh-ed about 100 million years ago contained the blocks, all the parts that make up the complexity's now on earth, they interacted with these morphagenic Fields and began to mold and change...... i read a passage about this study into how certain energy's could change the physical properties of water, even through thought....so These morphagenic fields maybe remote and maybe completely wrong but the universe is full of energy flying around causing all manner of different outcomes.....

Randomness is impossible without matter......