The Case Of The Mysterious Hoatzin

[Guest]

Interesting How "Science" Tends To Rebury Some Bones

And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the LORD shut him in.

And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters.

And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:

All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days. Genesis 7:16-24

Rather Than Give Them An Honest

Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains.

At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away.

They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them.

Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth. Psalms 104:5-9

And Scientific

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Colossians 2:8

Look

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 2 Peter 3:5-6

____________

_________

______

___

The Case of the Mysterious Hoatzin: Biogeography Fails Neo-Darwinism Again

Casey Luskin November 5, 2011 7:00 AM

- - - - - - -

In 2009, the National Center for Science Education's Eugenie Scott suggested that scientists should not admit when the evidence contradicts some evolutionary hypothesis, but should rather say that it "sheds new light on this part of evolution." Since then, I've kept an eye out for that and similar language.

For example, a recent article on Science Daily was titled Across the Atlantic on Flotsam: New Fossil Findings Shed Light on the Origins of the Mysterious Bird Hoatzin." According to the article, hoatzins lacked a known fossil record outside of South America until recently, when "a team consisting of German, Brazilian and French researchers ... not only described the earliest known fossil find of the mysterious bird group, but has also produced the first proof outside of South America." Apparently, the fossil bones from Namibia, Africa are about 17 million years old and have the right characteristics to identify them as belonging to hoatzins. However, finding extinct hoatzin-like birds in Africa poses a problem for Darwinian biogeography. I'll let the article explain:.......

.... OK, I get it: when common descent cannot explain observed biogeographical data, just assert that your organism rode on rafts across vast of kilometers of ocean, and presto -- your problem is solved. And of course you can't have just one rafting hoatzin -- there must be at least two (or perhaps one brought its clutch of eggs along on the raft for the voyage?) -- or your rafting hoatzin will become an evolutionary dead end.

The authors don't think the rafting hypothesis is a problem since, supposedly, we've already seen that "primates, rodents, and lizards" did the same thing. But what's the evidence that primates, rodents, and lizards crossed oceans on rafts? As I Explained Here or Johnathan M. explains here, the evidence again is biogeographical data that refutes common descent.

With primates, for example, new world monkeys are said to be descended from African monkeys. But new world monkeys appear in South America at a time when the continent was separated from Africa by 1000+ kilometers of ocean. Proponents of common descent aren't worried: they can just create myths about seafaring monkeys to solve the problem. Never mind that monkeys have high metabolisms and it's hard to imagine how they could possibly survive such a trip....

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/11/the_case_of_the_mysterious_hoa052571.html

____________

_________

______

___

lol

And As I See It

The Problem "Scientifically" Unrepentant Sinners Have

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20-21

With The Holy Revelation Of God... Is God

In the beginning God Genesis 1:1(a)

And His Holy Son

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16

Believe And Be Blessed Beloved

Love, Joe

[Guest]

.... Because hardly anything we come up with is going to completely revolutionize our view of the core ideas of science.... An insight into the early ape-men of East and South Africa is not going to completely change our understanding of Neanderthals....

I Would Think The NFL Did A Fair Job Of Proving Just How Smart (And Rich) The Neanderthals Really Are

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. Genesis 1:26-28

And Just How Biased Some French Men Turned Out To Be

Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Isaiah 45:9

But There You Go

Just How Many Monkeys Did It Take To Crew The Transoceanic Vessel?

[Isaiah 6:8]

It's plainly evident that Eugenie is not talking about a situation where evidence CONTRADICTS current evolutionary theory, he's talking about scientists potentially overstating the significance of a find and claiming it'll "revolutionize" things. We tend to find new data that "sheds light" not changes the whole picture. When you read the article he's talking about how you say things not what you're saying. I think Casey Luskin is taking advantage of his audience, assuming they're not going to pay attention or double check his/her claims.

Having read both links, it's obvious that Luskin was misrepresenting what Scott wrote. The more I read of creationist writings, the more I come across what appears to be intentional misrepresentation of science and scientists.

And I have seen evolutionists do the same thing about both each other and creationists. So please do not call pots black when you yourself are a kettle.