Re: Yet another Budikkka hole: the Reptile/Mammal Colossal Hole

"Zachriel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "jabriol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Zachriel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > "jabriol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> <snip>
> > > > well, that is my point... Budikka and many other's however ignore
> this.
> > > > truth is we can call anything a trasitional.... it a gap or hole,
that
> > > needs
> > > > to be explored. but to teach this as concrete fact is moraly wrong.
> > >
> > > I already posted that you discovery has been refuted. But even if
birds
> > > evolved from a different branch of the reptilian tree than the
> therapods,
> > > how would that change the fact that they evolved?
> > >
> >
> > Evolution as the origin of man is the main thread, but  still what we
see
> > here is layer upon layer of geological animal that existed, which are
> > similar, you must admit, that science might call them related, based on
> > their similiarity. the connecting dots to each is what goes missing.
>
> Nested-hierarchy.
>
>
> > We can use the term evolution to about everything, per today scientific
> > definition. Does this mean that one day Humans will not be humans
anymore?
>
> Perhaps. Or we may just go extinct.
>
>
> > look at the problem of the whale evolution... it was speculated that
they
> > came out of the water and return. then came along certain Mesonychids,
and
> > one fossil in particular found in pakistan, because of this one fossil
ear
> > contruction...
> > Voila!!!! the ancetor of big blue it is..
>
> You are showing your ignorance. There are intermediate forms. Indeed, even
> if we didn't have intermediates for whales, we do for most other forms.


actually it has been determined that they might be intermediate form based
on observations in the fossil records ... with the whale I will explain
why..

>Fact
> is, and it is very clear, that new organisms appear in the fossil record
as
> modifications of existing forms.

bingo modification is a good term to use.. would you say that such
modifcation are enviroment based?
can I modify an existing test fixtures in order to adjust to changing my
goals at whim?

 >You don't get fish until you get chordates.
> You don't get amphibians until you get fish. You don't get reptiles until
> you get amphibians. You don't get mammals until you get reptiles. You
don't
> get hominids until you get the first mammals.

on another thread with in sci.bio.paleontology newsgroup, there exist
certain disagreement here. more so on the ancestor of mamals and reptiles.

>
> The broad overview is clear. The rest is details. In accordance with
theory,
> the more we look, the more intermediate forms we find.
>
>
> > just like that! it is a big leap of faith here. in fact all evolution is
s
> > faith oan the paleontology bible called fossils... no different than
nutty
> > creationist intepretation of the 6 day quickie of genesis...
>
> No. Evolution is observed in the fossil record and in the genetics of
living
> organisms.


all living organsim are basicly the same for the las few millenias, witout
much change within themselves.
the fossil record is based on stone impressions of what might have been.
combing the two, is like saying that we
can gain insight in combining astronomy with astrology.








>
>
>