OUG,

Every line of your posts confirms that you have not studied evolution in the slightest, outside creationist material.

<<...please educate yourself with phenotype/versis genotype>>

Please educate yourself on stratum. The distribution of fossils throughout the stratum (and over the continents for that matter) consistently supports evolution.

As for the archaeopteryx, nine others have been found under well documented conditions and six of them have feathers. Then there are the other transitional fossils between reptiles and birds such as Deinonychosaurs, Sinosauropteryx prima and Protarchaeopteryx - among others. So like Peking, Nebraska and Java man, it turns out this is instead just another fraud of creationism.

<<huge gaps..that critter that walked from the seas.. didnt have shoulderblades..nor hips so couldnt have walked>>

Your comment about hips and shoulder blades only further reveals your ignorance of evolution.

Considering how rare fossilization is, it's surprising that we have any transitional fossils let alone thousands. That you only ever found ten just confirms my suspicion that all your in-depth study of evolution was restricted to creationist material.

The whole "missing link" bit is just another dishonest little tactic of creationists, because if the gap is filled, creationists then just point to the two smaller gaps that are now on either side of the new discovery.

<<...in your mind you see a cat evolve into a dog even if their closest genetic link diverged away from eacxh other long ago[according to your own theory]>>

I liked this comment of yours. It contains its own refutation because the common ancestor you refer to wouldn’t have been a dog or a cat.

Thanks for the link, but unfortunately I can’t view it without logging in. No matter, I read all about the Dover trial and those creationists suffered such a thumping defeat that they didn’t even bother appealing. Yours should be no different.

So there we have it, OUG, you’ve failed to show why any of my falsifiables aren’t actually falisifiables and after all those posts to Stezza, haven’t been able to point to a mechanism that would prevent a genus from separating off into multiple genera.

dear aj...im moving your question here
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12018&p=91819#p91819

its in the public part of the forum
so you dont need to join..nor log in

so reply YOUR words there
where i will be quoting them..line by line

im over trying to do this under 350 word limit
plus 4 post limit...[heck i done the other one
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2305&page=0

under a 2 post limit....[but noted in re reading it..many of the full conversations...[i posted to the nz forum..have simply disappeared]
http://www.civilrights.org.nz/forum/index.php?topic=334.0

but i posted them there..to give a full reply
which i couldnt do..here..with 700 word limit as it was then

im finding much the same here now
with 4 post limit

and am now working backwards
from your post...over there
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12018&p=91819#p91819

where i can explain in full
not have to play word tricks with a word count

for egsample your delusion that the evolution trial
was judging evolution..that case ol son..was re teaching creation[god]..in a scuiernce class was kosha...[and of course religeon isnt science]

nor is evolution
but the case asked
is teaching god science

and the reply is no it isnt

it never judged evolution
which is a theory

i note yopu think stratification to be some sort of proof
well mate look up erosion..tell me old boy..what happens when fosil beds get eroded?

say an old one's//dinosaws
mixes in the flood water..with new homo ones

they accumulate in a layer on the flood plain ..[stratification]
and a fossil layer is made..[thus fossil fragments..but never full fossils]

thus add in no dna to join phenotype with genotype
[well i sttatted explaining it at the link

let me know if you can read it
i will post it anywhere you can acces

its time you got educated
go the link

ask here..or there
im sure you allready looked last time
i linked you to there..[but cant be botherd finding..where i told you of it]

anyhow now im cutting your previous words
will reply them at the first link page
soon

OUG,

Thanks for the offer to take this to a different forum, but I’m not enthusiastic about doing so when you have repeated your arguments there about falsifiables and referring to evolution as “just a theory” yet again. When you are not capable of even beginning to demonstrate a basic understanding of what evolution is in four 350 word posts every 24 hours, then I don’t see how removing those restrictions is going to make any difference.

<<for egsample your delusion that the evolution trial was judging evolution..that case ol son..was re teaching creation[god]..in a scuiernce class was kosha>>

I realise the Dover trial was about teaching creationism in schools, but the creationists’ defence was to try to place a question mark over evolution and in doing so, were crushed under the shear weight of the evidence for evolution.

I can't make sense of what you're saying in regards to stratification, but this part did catch my attention…

<<thus fossil fragments..but never full fossils>>

Never full fossils? There are thousands of them and when you include the fossils that are only fragments, then we’re talking tens of thousands.

And you propose to educate me?

aj you first claim..you cant acces the evolution topic

then when i open..a new one refuse to click on it

""Thanks for the offer..to take this to a different forum,
but I’m not enthusiastic..about doing so..

when you have repeated
your arguments there about falsifiables"""

mate you got none
thats clear..you got a fossil theory
i fully demolished..it at the link
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12018

your ignorances re phenotype/genotype etc as well
though why prophessor stazza..didnt
is a shame...he knows the genetics

you..tried to redirect into fossils
then lol deney the validity of your own word

lol...""I can't make sense
of what you're saying in regards to *stratification,""'

lol..you bought it up
its explained better at the wfs link

<<thus fossil fragments..but never full fossils>>

""..Never full fossils? There are thousands of them""'

not in the gaps ol mate
i refuted that theorty at the link too

'"and when you include the fossils
that are only fragments,..then we’re talking tens of thousands""'

simple ol boy
PRESENT THEM HERE.

put up your links

you just spout off illinformed opinion
then acuse me of

""And you propose to educate me?""'

wouldnt dream of it boy
one dont waste time on fools
one correctsd them..then allows them to chose to ignore or learn

you clearly cant learn
you cant even evolve your own mind
let alone hope to validate the frauds of evolution ..by throwing fossils at the messager

your posts here
reveal without fossils you got nuthin
and even re them are in denial of terminology

wish the bacteria breeder
had the guts to tell the truth

but heck it is what it is

and evolution is a theory
opinion..masked as science

please note that no evolutions have been faulsified..ever
thats why they didnt name names or give proof

this is what you dimminishe the living loving good for
materialists fables..evolving theories..revolving opnion

OUG,

I never said I refused to look at your link. I read it all. In fact, that’s exactly why I was able to make the judgment call I made earlier when I said, “but I’m not enthusiastic about doing so when you have repeated your arguments there about falsifiables and [are still] referring to evolution as “just a theory” yet again.”

And you continue to do this even now in your most recent post. You have not “demolished” my argument that the fossil record is a falsifiable at all. A static fossil record would falsify evolution as would finding complex creatures in the lower stratum. Then there’s DNA (that you haven’t addressed), which would falsify evolution if the DNA of each genus bore no resemblance to any other genera.

The reason we don’t see any of the above, is because evolution is a fact. As even you later go on to say, “please note that no evolutions have been faulsified..ever”.

<<your ignorances re phenotype/genotype etc as well though why prophessor stazza..didnt is a shame...he knows the genetics>>

My “ignorances”? You’re the one who doesn’t appear to realise that when we can’t get DNA from fossil, then a smooth transition throughout the stratum indicates more than just phenotype. Or is your God out to deceive?

<<you..tried to redirect into fossils>>

Um… no, the topic of fossils is exactly what brought us to the whole phenotype/genotype bit.

<<lol...""I can't make sense of what you're saying in regards to *stratification,""' lol..you bought it up>>

Yes, and what little sense I could make of what you were saying seemed to bear no resemblance to what I was talking about.

<<[No fossils] in the gaps ol mate>>

What part of, “We’re lucky to have any fossils at all” don’t you understand?

<<PRESENT THEM HERE.>>

Here’s a short list to keep you busy for now… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

<<your posts here reveal without fossils you got nuthin>>

Err... yeah, despite my mentioning earlier that the fossils are just an added bonus.

Real bright, OUG. Real bright.

please note 810 word..[full reply]
is here
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12018&p=91859#p91859

this is the first
and last..ie one 350 word page..

to read..full post
read..link
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12018&p=91859#p91859

aj..
*from
..your own link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

[quote],,""Ideally,..this list
would only..recursively..include *'true' transitionals,""

[what the heck?
read on]

BUT...!..
""fossils..*representing ancestral specie
from which later groups evolved,""

IS THEORISED
to have..'evolved'

""but*..*most""..lol

""*if not all""...lol

"",,..of the fossils..shown here
represent...*extinct side/branches,""

lol...side branches..that dead-ended
thus..*cant be 'transitiionals

but mearly...""more or less..lol..closely related
to the true ancestor.[2]""'

lol
the true..non linked ancestor?
linked only..*in theory..via dead ended..dead ends...lol

these dead ends..""They will..all include details
unique..to...lol..their own line..as well.""'

ie looks like..the same
but geneticly..very dubious

""Fossils having relatively few..such traits are termed "transitional",..

while those..with a host of traits
found....[NOTE!}..*neither in*..the ancestral...
n*or derived group..are called "intermediate".""

get it clever boy?

""Since all species...*will always be subject
to natural selection,..the..very term "transitional fossil"..is essentially...*a misconception.""

from the mouths..lol..of your peers

you said..""A static fossil record
would falsify evolution""

but the fossil record..is far from static
things change..they are dead ends..extinct side branches

bits and fragments..WITH NO MEANS..TO VERIFY GENETICLLY WHO 'evolved'..into what..no direct linkage/cause affect..to anything[get it?]

your 'far from static..faulsity[evolution]
..''as would finding complex creatures..in the lower stratum."""

hey here..is an idea
NAME NAMES

lets go facts

your last link
refutes itself...

[noting]the HUGE//GAPS...look AT..the Nautiloids..&..Ammonoids Evolutionary Series...lol./..a pointy shell..into a spiral shell...[their are both shells..get it?]

look at..Evolution of insects...lol
insect into insect...*into..lol insect,,,ha ha

lets look at evolution..of spider
into [lol]..spider

or lets go..the invertibrate..lol into fish
LOOK AT THE actual..drawings/PICTURES..ol mate..

you being conned..!

where the transitionals
from the shark..to the swordfish..or the swordfish
to a..lol ray..?

look at the bony 'fish'
note the lack of transitionals
between Adreolepis..and flatfish..into flatfish..lol
into telios[fish]..into eeel..into sea horse

NOT ONE TRANSITIONAL..!

but the fishy evolution/fairy tale..goes on...lol

eel/seahorse..lol..evolves into lamp-prat..that
revolves into sun fish..lol.that catfish/rabbit-fish/perch/promfit fish/blowfish

to wit half/wit
fish..into fish

BUT EVEN THEN..NO TRANSITIONALS...!

lol..on a transitionals link...

you get scammed..when you dont read DETAILS..*mate