Are Fossils evidence of evolution ....or are the evidence of fossils

[Sparks]

2 hours ago, Desopixi Seilynam said:

Some museums don't actually have many fossils, they have plastic.
Some fossils are suppressed, some fossils are faked.

You're correct.  Those considered to be 'missing links' have all been faked.  

Notice Lucy, below.  Human-like hands and feet added, as an artist rendering.  And a human-like stride.  More human-like head.  Yet the actual bones found reveal little of this.

 

[The Barbarian]

3 hours ago, kingdombrat said:

They've found fish in the process of releasing eggs, they've found multiple species of dinosaurs giving birth, or in other scenarios where it looks as though something happened so fast they just were caught in the process and preserved in time.   It's clearly evidence of a [flash flood] like Noah.   But Science obviously refuses anything with concrete evidence towards the Flood of Noah and the actions of God.

Last person was kinda reluctant to show us links to that kind of thing.   What do you have to show us?

 

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

You're correct.  Those considered to be 'missing links' have all been faked.  

Notice Lucy, below.  Human-like hands and feet added, as an artist rendering.  And a human-like stride.  More human-like head.  Yet the actual bones found reveal little of this.

Well, that's a testable belief.   Let's take a look...

Three examples of pelvis.   One human, on chimpanzee, one Australoptithcine (like Lucy).    Two of them have a wide pelvis, and an angled trochanter  on the femur, permitting a human-like stride.  Can you guess which two they are?

Yep.  Human and  Australopithecine.

Let's look at feet...

Two of these feet have an arch, a large heel, and a sturdy big toe, to permit easy bipedal walking.  Can you figure out which?

Yep.  Human and Australopithecine.

 Let's look at skulls:

Top is human, next is Australopithecine, bottom is chimpanzee.  Notice Australopithecine skulls are more humanlike than chimpanzee skulls.

So how do we know all this with just Lucy?   We don't.   We know it from many, many Australpithecine fossils.  Don't believe everything they tell you.   This was just one of many.

 

 

[The Barbarian]

1 minute ago, Walter Goraj jr said:

Unfortunately I do not know how to post links as of yet. If you look up: " researchers discover a dinosaur preserved sitting on a nest of eggs with fossilized embryos, a first" you should get it. 

Just copy the address,and paste it into your post.    Let us know what you find.  Or if you don't have a link, what makes you think the story is correct?

 

[teddyv]

1 hour ago, Walter Goraj jr said:

BOOM! excactly! Their hearts are so hardened that they will never admit the obvious for fear of giving God ALL the glory for His creation and His universe!

In every story I saw with this fossilized dinosaur bird sitting on the nest of eggs, dead Silence on how that happened not a peep. And they will never be able to explain it never never never unless they admit that there was a flood.

Sometimes weird stuff happens. With the amount of birds and fish that have existed over the millions of years, the odds of something unlikely happening actually become pretty likely. Then there is the odds of uncovering it.

Since these finds seem pretty rare, that would suggest that the Flood is not the culprit. Because the Flood affected everything, everywhere, in an extremely short time span, we should probably be seeing far more examples than we do.

[Sparks]

20 minutes ago, teddyv said:

Sometimes weird stuff happens. With the amount of birds and fish that have existed over the millions of years, the odds of something unlikely happening actually become pretty likely.

Absolutely no evidence of the millions of years claim.  There is evidence of a great flood though.

Do you doubt the great flood?

[Duck]

The rocks will cry out...

[teddyv]

8 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Absolutely no evidence of the millions of years claim.  There is evidence of a great flood though.

Yes, I know what you claim as we discussed it here. I am quite sure you are wrong.

8 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Do you doubt the great flood?

Global Flood, yes. Large, regional scale flood, no.

[Sparks]

Just now, teddyv said:

Yes, I know what you claim as we discussed it here. I am quite sure you are wrong.

Except that I am exactly right.

Just now, teddyv said:

Global Flood, yes. Large, regional scale flood, no.

Good.

[teddyv]

 

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Good.

Just to be clear because somehow I think you did not read it correctly, I don't see compelling evidence of a truly global flood, but I do think that the Flood narrative may be referring to a major flood event coming out of the last ice age.