Evolution is Fact

[scooter]

1st thing on the internet that made me really lol.. I have to print that out and put it on the desk at work thanks guys

[Nordic Superman]

what do you mean by different places?

The mutated gene that is responsible for red hair in Neanderthals is not the same as the one causing red hair in humans. If red hair was a trait picked up from Neanderthals then the mutated gene itself would have to be the same.

I'm not saying Neanderthals didn't interbreed or that the inheritance of red hair was once thought to have been acquired by interbreeding between the two. But it's now known that red hair mutated separately between us and Neanderthals.

[Colossus_500]

New Insight into the Ecology of the Cambrian Fauna: Evidence for Creation Mounts
By Fuz Rana, Ph.D.

A recent report by one of the world’s leading paleontologists, Richard Fortey, provides compelling evidence that chemoautotrophic symbiosis, a complex ecological relationship between sulfur-oxidizing bacteria and advanced, multicellular marine animals, first appeared close to the time of the Cambrian Explosion.1 This discovery adds to the growing weight of evidence for the supernatural introduction of complex animal life on earth.

The Cambrian “Explosion” is a dramatic event in life’s history taking place around 540 million years ago. Over the course of perhaps less than 2-3 million years, nearly every animal phylum (over 70) ever to exist on earth appeared. Since that time no new animal phyla have been introduced.2,3 Phyla are the categories in the biological classification hierarchy that refer to an organism’s body plan, or architectural design.

In 1986, Simon Conway Morris identified an additional feature of the Cambrian Explosion that has remained troubling for the naturalistic paradigm; namely, that the ecology of the Cambrian fauna resembled that of a modern marine ecology. It includes identifiable predator-prey relationships.4,5 This finding runs counter to what would be expected if the Cambrian “Explosion” were the result of natural processes. Instead of observing a haphazard, loosely-woven ecology, as predicted by the evolutionary paradigm, the Cambrian fauna appear suddenly in the fossil record as a tight-knit ecological community, consistent with a Creation Model for the origin of complex multicellular animals. The new discovery by Richard Fortey of the Natural History Museum in London adds additional support for a fine-tuned, modern Cambrian ecology.

Chemoautotrophic symbiosis is a complex interdependence between advanced marine animals and sulfur-oxidizing bacteria. These bacteria use hydrogen sulfide and other sulfur compounds as an energy source and often employ carbon dioxide as their sole carbon source, converting it into organic nutrients. Sulfur-oxidizing bacteria are found in environments that are low in oxygen and rich in hydrogen sulfide.

A number of multicellular, complex animals also exist in this toxic low oxygen, high sulfur environment through their interactions with sulfur-oxidizing bacteria. These animals feed on the bacteria directly or have modified body-and mouth-parts that allow the cultivation of the bacteria. Also, many of these animals have brood pouches to sequester their young from the toxic milieu until they can establish a symbiotic relationship with the sulfur-oxidizing bacteria.

Based on an understanding of modern-day chemoautotrophic symbiosis, Richard Fortey was able to recognize this type of relationship in the fossil record of Olenids (a family of trilobites) as far back as 505 million years ago, just after the Cambrian “Explosion.”6 These trilobite fossils share morphological features with modern arthropods that rely on chemoautotrophic symbioses and are recovered from deposits low in oxygen and high in sulfide content.

The appearance of this type of complex interrelationship shortly after the Cambrian event is surprising to evolutionists. Substantial anatomical changes (modified mouthparts, gills, body surfaces, reproductive anatomy) must take place all at once for the organism to survive in this toxic environment. Natural processes do not allow for the sudden and highly orchestrated changes necessary for an organism to transition into an environment that demands complex symbiotic relationships for survival. From an evolutionary perspective, this type of transition must happen over exceedingly long periods of time. Reasons to Believe’s Creation Model readily accommodates the discovery of chemoautotrophic symbiosis as far back as 505 million years ago.

[Deicide]

New Insight into the Ecology of the Cambrian Fauna: Evidence for Creation Mounts
By Fuz Rana, Ph.D.

A recent report by one of the world’s leading paleontologists, Richard Fortey, provides compelling evidence that chemoautotrophic symbiosis, a complex ecological relationship between sulfur-oxidizing bacteria and advanced, multicellular marine animals, first appeared close to the time of the Cambrian Explosion.1 This discovery adds to the growing weight of evidence for the supernatural introduction of complex animal life on earth.

The Cambrian “Explosion” is a dramatic event in life’s history taking place around 540 million years ago. Over the course of perhaps less than 2-3 million years, nearly every animal phylum (over 70) ever to exist on earth appeared. Since that time no new animal phyla have been introduced.2,3 Phyla are the categories in the biological classification hierarchy that refer to an organism’s body plan, or architectural design.

In 1986, Simon Conway Morris identified an additional feature of the Cambrian Explosion that has remained troubling for the naturalistic paradigm; namely, that the ecology of the Cambrian fauna resembled that of a modern marine ecology. It includes identifiable predator-prey relationships.4,5 This finding runs counter to what would be expected if the Cambrian “Explosion” were the result of natural processes. Instead of observing a haphazard, loosely-woven ecology, as predicted by the evolutionary paradigm, the Cambrian fauna appear suddenly in the fossil record as a tight-knit ecological community, consistent with a Creation Model for the origin of complex multicellular animals. The new discovery by Richard Fortey of the Natural History Museum in London adds additional support for a fine-tuned, modern Cambrian ecology.

Chemoautotrophic symbiosis is a complex interdependence between advanced marine animals and sulfur-oxidizing bacteria. These bacteria use hydrogen sulfide and other sulfur compounds as an energy source and often employ carbon dioxide as their sole carbon source, converting it into organic nutrients. Sulfur-oxidizing bacteria are found in environments that are low in oxygen and rich in hydrogen sulfide.

A number of multicellular, complex animals also exist in this toxic low oxygen, high sulfur environment through their interactions with sulfur-oxidizing bacteria. These animals feed on the bacteria directly or have modified body-and mouth-parts that allow the cultivation of the bacteria. Also, many of these animals have brood pouches to sequester their young from the toxic milieu until they can establish a symbiotic relationship with the sulfur-oxidizing bacteria.

Based on an understanding of modern-day chemoautotrophic symbiosis, Richard Fortey was able to recognize this type of relationship in the fossil record of Olenids (a family of trilobites) as far back as 505 million years ago, just after the Cambrian “Explosion.”6 These trilobite fossils share morphological features with modern arthropods that rely on chemoautotrophic symbioses and are recovered from deposits low in oxygen and high in sulfide content.

The appearance of this type of complex interrelationship shortly after the Cambrian event is surprising to evolutionists. Substantial anatomical changes (modified mouthparts, gills, body surfaces, reproductive anatomy) must take place all at once for the organism to survive in this toxic environment. Natural processes do not allow for the sudden and highly orchestrated changes necessary for an organism to transition into an environment that demands complex symbiotic relationships for survival. From an evolutionary perspective, this type of transition must happen over exceedingly long periods of time. Reasons to Believe’s Creation Model readily accommodates the discovery of chemoautotrophic symbiosis as far back as 505 million years ago.

Aren't you a Jebus Freak Young Earth Creationist?

[NeoSeminole]

Colossus_500, nice try.

source of the article: http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2000issue03/index.shtml#cambrian_fauna

"international and interdenominational science-faith think tank providing powerful new reasons from science to believe in Jesus Christ."

let's take a look at this Fazale "Fuz" Rana guy:

http://www.reasons.org/about/biographies.shtml#fazale_rana

"Research in biochemistry provided Fuz with the initial evidence that life must have been created. Although he recognized the work of a designer, he did not know the designer's identity. A personal challenge daring him to read the Bible revealed the scriptural evidence that the God of the Bible is the Creator."

[Deicide]

Colossus_500, nice try.

source of the article: http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2000issue03/index.shtml#cambrian_fauna

"international and interdenominational science-faith think tank providing powerful new reasons from science to believe in Jesus Christ."

let's take a look at this Fazale "Fuz" Rana guy:

http://www.reasons.org/about/biographies.shtml#fazale_rana

"Research in biochemistry provided Fuz with the initial evidence that life must have been created. Although he recognized the work of a designer, he did not know the designer's identity. A personal challenge daring him to read the Bible revealed the scriptural evidence that the God of the Bible is the Creator."

Muhahahhahahaha.......

[loco]

Colossus_500, nice try.

source of the article: http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2000issue03/index.shtml#cambrian_fauna

"international and interdenominational science-faith think tank providing powerful new reasons from science to believe in Jesus Christ."

let's take a look at this Fazale "Fuz" Rana guy:

http://www.reasons.org/about/biographies.shtml#fazale_rana

"Research in biochemistry provided Fuz with the initial evidence that life must have been created. Although he recognized the work of a designer, he did not know the designer's identity. A personal challenge daring him to read the Bible revealed the scriptural evidence that the God of the Bible is the Creator."

What's wrong with this?

[Deicide]

What's wrong with this?

As usual Jebus, the 'wrong' about this is the fact that these are non-scientific reasons for believing Bible Bullshit. None of the evidence suggests that the biblical feces is true; he got there by 'faith'.

[NeoSeminole]

What's wrong with this?

the article that Colossus_500 posted has a religious agenda. It would never be published in a peer-reviewed journal or science magazine.

[Deicide]

the article that Colossus_500 posted has a religious agenda. It would never be published in a peer-reviewed journal or science magazine.

Your avatar is awesome and you are the fucking man.

[NeoSeminole]

Your avatar is awesome and you are the fucking man.

thank you

[Necrosis]

New Insight into the Ecology of the Cambrian Fauna: Evidence for Creation Mounts


The appearance of this type of complex interrelationship shortly after the Cambrian event is surprising to evolutionists. Substantial anatomical changes (modified mouthparts, gills, body surfaces, reproductive anatomy) must take place all at once for the organism to survive in this toxic environment. Natural processes do not allow for the sudden and highly orchestrated changes necessary for an organism to transition into an environment that demands complex symbiotic relationships for survival. From an evolutionary perspective, this type of transition must happen over exceedingly long periods of time. Reasons to Believe’s Creation Model readily accommodates the discovery of chemoautotrophic symbiosis as far back as 505 million years ago.

prove that this has to occur. Untrue drivel.

the cambrian explosion is a lengthy event i often think the religious mistake it for a spontaneous eruption, millions of years is quite a while.

[OTHstrong]

prove that this has to occur. Untrue drivel.

the cambrian explosion is a lengthy event i often think the religious mistake it for a spontaneous eruption, millions of years is quite a while.

Man you guys make laugh, the so called scientest, smart evolutionist obviously because anyone that believes in creation is autromatically dumb, always believe something to take place evry so many thousans or millions of years until something comes along and makes them look stupid, for example mount st helens erupted in the fifties and the main guy studying it wrote a report saying "This valcano erupsts evry 1500 years and not even 50 years later it eruptet again, lol

[big L dawg]

Man you guys make laugh, the so called scientest, smart evolutionist obviously because anyone that believes in creation is autromatically dumb, always believe something to take place evry so many thousans or millions of years until something comes along and makes them look stupid, for example mount st helens erupted in the fifties and the main guy studying it wrote a report saying "This valcano erupsts evry 1500 years and not even 50 years later it eruptet again, lol

if that dont prove god is real I dont know what does

[Deicide]

Man you guys make laugh, the so called scientest, smart evolutionist obviously because anyone that believes in creation is autromatically dumb, always believe something to take place evry so many thousans or millions of years until something comes along and makes them look stupid, for example mount st helens erupted in the fifties and the main guy studying it wrote a report saying "This valcano erupsts evry 1500 years and not even 50 years later it eruptet again, lol

This is some of the most unintelligible gibberish you have produced to date Onetime. I have difficulty evincing the slightest content from it.

[OTHstrong]

This is some of the most unintelligible gibberish you have produced to date Onetime. I have difficulty evincing the slightest content from it.

lol,  , Ya but the funny thing is no matter what any creationist say we will always be made fun of right decide.

[Necrosis]

lol,  , Ya but the funny thing is no matter what any creationist say we will always be made fun of right decide.

yes because you are patently false

[Naked4Jesus]

prove it- that's how i handle it.  I have a book from the God who says he created us.  But i guess that's not good enough for some people.

I've never heard the term The "fact" of evolution.
There never has, no will there ever be, a overall consensus from science on evolution.

Evolution is both theory and fact. This statement, or something similar, is frequently seen in biological literature.  The point of this statement is to differentiate the concept of the "fact of evolution", namely the observed changes in populations of organisms over time, from the "theory of evolution", namely the current scientific explanation of how those changes came about.


References:

^ a b Moran, Laurence (1993-01-22). "Evolution is a Fact and a Theory" (html) (in english). Talk.origins. Retrieved on 2007-10-18.
^ a b c d Gould, Stephen Jay (1981-05-01). "Evolution as Fact and Theory". Discover 2 (5): 34–37.  Reprinted in:
Vetter, Herbert F. (ed.) (1982). Speak Out Against The New Right. Beacon Press. ISBN 0807004863. 
Gould, Stephen Jay (1994-04-01). Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes. ISBN 0393017168. 
^ a b c Muller, H. J. (1959). "One hundred years without Darwin are enough". School Science and Mathematics 59: 304–305.  Reprinted in:
Zetterberg, Peter (ed.) (1983-05-01). Evolution Versus Creationism: The Public Education Controversy. Phoenix AZ: ORYX Press. ISBN 0897740610. 
^ a b c Campbell, Neil A.; Reece, Jane B. (2002-02-05). Biology 6th ed.. Benjamin Cummings, 1175. ISBN 0805366245. 
^ Dobzhansky, Theodosius (1973-03-01). "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution". American Biology Teacher 35.  Reprinted in:
Zetterberg, Peter (ed.) (1983-05-01). Evolution Versus Creationism: The Public Education Controversy. Phoenix AZ: ORYX Press. ISBN 0897740610. 
^ a b Lenski, Richard E. (2000). "Evolution: Fact and Theory" (html) (in english). American Institute of Biological Sciences. Retrieved on 2007-10-18.
^ a b Mayr, Ernst. Toward a New Philosophy of Biology: Observations of an Evolutionist. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-89666-1.