If evolution happened, where are ALL the transitional fossils?

a reply to: Vector99

From sea to land and back again...food and safety can be a tricky business.

This is pertinent I believe, if proven then it would throw a spanner in the work's for the current model of human evolution though not for evolution as a concept.

This is Graham Hancock's website and is not a post by the Author but of a member of his website community and of course it attract's fringe opinions and speculation, speculation that I find interesting and in some cases share but that should not discredit it out of hand and it deserves more research as a claim.
grahamhancock.com...,94988,94988

Now if proven then they posit a number of potential argument's such as the fact that maybe the Dating methodolgy is wrong or there has been rapid fossilization of the bone's and there surrounding matrix and the dating of the site itself is wrong as a consequence.

Or there were human's or skeletaly identical humanoid's upon the earth at a date exceeding one hundred million years and we know that there are many claim's and artifact's which seem to indicate that this is at least a possibility and for those that claim that is impossible the only question is the same they use, Prove that there were no human's or other humanoid's at that time which given the limited scope of the fossil record and the odd find that then meet's a kind of resistance that a find that they EXPECT to discover in stratafied material believed to be of that date does not encounter.

a reply to: secretboss

Oh look a new account .... out of curiosity, do you know what the odds of finding a fossil of any particular species is? Its low. You need specific conditions, otherwise it just decomposes to nothing. Thus a "transitional fossil" (ALL fossils are transitional, in that you are a transitional Homo sapien from your parents, you are a mutant) in the poorest of conditions, is like finding an ice cube in the Sahara.

I can only assume you are proselytizing or trolling.

That is correct assuming that every species adapts, if we take the principle as correct then the way they explain Rhino's having seeming suddenly appeared about 5 or six time's in the last 65 million years (Assuming that cannon dating technique is correct and that they are dealing with global stratification dating correctly) is to claim that each fossil is a different species that evoloved to fit the same ecological niche, strange if the niche stayed there then why did it seemingly therefore keep going extinct.

I find it fascinating that there are so many other alternative's to the current linear model with random evolutionary jump's.

Now way back when Panspermia was a big and revolutionary idea there was a book written by three astrophysicist's which stated a correlation between some plague event's in history and the earth passing through the coma of cometry debris after earth obit crossing cometry event's may actually exist and they postulated if it was possible that some virus or even bacteria may actually have been in spore form so entered the earth's biosphere from outside.

They also postulated a potential link between these event's and random mutation event's as well as more devestating potential E.L.E's in the past that did not have corresponding geological cataclysm data to match up to them.

I had a long think on it and also though about another idea that had been postulated in another book I read in which it stated that some bacteria and virus both pathogenic and also symbiotic seemed to be able to cross the species barrier and how they in turn may have shaped the adaptation of species and in particular those that formed there ecological niche.

Now that got me thinking, as you know one strain of Cancer has been reverse engineered and found to be a virus which at some point went inert and became part of the host DNA and this opened the possibility that his may have happened very often over the past 650 million years since the cambrian explosion (not an explosion just a period were multiple species enter the geological record for the first time though we now have supposedly even far older evidence of complex multi celled life long predating them which actually throw's the cambrian explosion hypothesis into some disarray) and therefore a great deal of the DNA found in species may therefore actually be little more than Disabled (dormant) viral strand's that have alligned in just such a way as to form modern life form's (even more implausible that standard evolution with it's conservation of energy defying uphill water flowing model of life).

So what happen's when a species is in prolongued non predatory or cohabitationary existance with another species, the virus and bacteria of course both adapt to be able to use these two seperate biological hosts as there ecological niche and perhaps by Viral propegation of genetic material between these species actually homogenise them slowing into a single species (if given enough time) despite there linear origin differences.

How does this happen, a virus infect's a host cell and insinuated itself into the nucleus were it self replicates, of course the host cell's own DNA (A virus is essentially just a strand of DNA or RNA in a protine shell which is enzymatic in nature - the enzymes of it's protien chell help it to infect new host cell's and also to facilitate it's interaction with the native DNA/RNA of the infected cell) therefore must sometime's pass some of the hosts DNA/RNA into the genetic strand of the virus, this may be useless to the virus or it may be a functional property used in the homogenising of the species it infect's by merging DNA/RNA in a natural form of genetic splicing between these disparate host species.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Ok so you don't get "strains of cancer" because, cancer is a genetic flaw in the individual, causing pathogenic cell multiplication. You get strains of pathogens (bacteria, fungus, virus).

You are missing the point, that if you are not a perfect clone of one of your parents, you are different from both of your parents, in that you are a combination of DNA which is not the same. Thus each individual in a species is by definition, a transitional form from the last generation. This has nothing to do with adaption or not.

now you are casting doubt on radio-isotope dating, what is your beef with that? My full disclosure is that I am a scientist by profession, and pagan by faith.

a reply to: Noinden

Really it is only the Virus that has the potential but remember that in symbiosis different structures can work together and even though they may have no direct relationship bacteria and virus can work together to tailor there host species.

Right as you know Radio Isotopic dating relies on a steady decay of isotopic elements and a predictable radioactive decay rate.

But as you I am therefore by your profession definitely aware the current cosmological model of the universe is in debate as it turn's out that our supposedly static law's of physics may actually be at the mercy of fluctuating superspacial and other quantum phenomena which of course have not been included in the equation based analysis of these isotope's.

Evidence is scarce but hypothesis state's that for example the universe explanded FASTER than the speed of light in the instant shortly after the big bang (I could get into another favourite subject of mine there which is wether or not the big bang was an exlosion or an inversion caused by gravity pulling on a tiny point in all direction's - aka was our T.S.C born or an other T.S.C inside a collapsing supergiant star that formed a black hole AND did that faster than light explosion form a Black hole around us anyway with the encumbant argument how large is the universe therefore really and is it practically infinite if this is the case), now that mean's the fixed law's are actually not so fixed and may fluctuate.

In a nice smooth runing theory this would not be a problem but throw this into the work's and the current model you have to admit is woefully insufficiant to take into account all potential fluctuation's, it does not for example take into account unknown fluctuation's which may have caused isotopic decay rate's to vary, speed up or even slow down and our current cosmological model is also likewise (though it is the best we can do as you know at the moment and there are several competing main stream models' and countless less accepted theory's) insufficiant.

Of course as the model is refined we may find prediction's that we can try to varify and if we can then perhaps we can refine it to provide a more accurate analysis technique.

Ok there was an argument but remember the controversy about the polonium in deep strata which seemed too young that was a case were some creationists (I am a creationist but think therefore my god is a scientist he has to be and I am not averse to a 4 billion year old planet, a planet that in that time may have hosted many earth's?) used the standard argument based on standard radioactive decay prediction's to try to use it to prove a young earth.

My belief is that most isotopic dating is poorly analysed, it is only accurate in a short time window of the find and artifact's or even the analysis of them can be and is often flawed and returns often erroneous result's, a good example is the Turn Shroud in which as you know the base shroud had medievil fabric hand stiched into it by nun's after it was damaged when Turin cathedral burned down and the later isotopic dating analysis both failed to take into account fresh carbon isotopes from the smoke of the fire as well as century's of exposure to fresh bacteria and mould and also actually sampled a mix of both the original shroud material and the later sewn in material.

Likewise just like tree ring dating fluctuates/varies dependent upon local climate variation's (and the amount of carbon 14 therefore also varies over that time period), there may be local fluctuations in background radiation of an area and even the type of local rocks' an object is found in relation too, while external radiation may have little effect on the decay curve I am sure it has some effect as of course sub atomic particles react with unstable nuclei and therefore an isotope may decay faster in a higher radiation environment due to more particle radiation interaction speeding the nuclear reaction up moderately over a long time period and has it to your knowledge ever been analysed as to what rate of variation this could cause or indeed if anyone has ever tried to create a real world equation to take this into account.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Nothing you have posted actually calls radioisotope dating into question. Your belief is a gnosis, a thing based on feelings, not evidence. Now if it was eidein (something based on data) then you could present it.


Cosmology

We are still working out what we think happened at the beginning of the universe, and as such, our theories are subject to change. None of them are theories, all are hypotheses. The words mean different things in science, as I am sure you know.

Rather than retype some arguments I've done here many times. Here are some citations for you.
rationalwiki.org...
answersinscience.org...
aigbusted.blogspot.co.nz...

Now you bring up the shroud of Turin. A debunked fake. Sorry to tell you, to make it something worthy of study (beyond what it already has had) you will have to explain several known flaws about it. For example, that at the time Jesus was supposed to have lived (I am not an Abrahamic follower, but I am spiritual, and I have no stake in that game, Jesus is not my saviour, I don't need one, my Gods expect me to be responsible for myself). So these flaws?

(a) It is the wrong sort of burial cloth for the supposed time period. It does not equate with cloth from the period, in the area of interest.
(b) You critique the dating used? Yet the church has been unwilling to provide enough representative samples to independent labs.
(c) The supposed "blood" is iron oxide. A pigment. Blood does not turn into iron oxide when it ages.
(d) The proportions of the "image" are unrealistic.
(e) The style of burial wrappings mentioned in the bible (dubious) and in historical evidence for the time period, are multiple cloths, with a separate cloth over the face, NOT a single cloth.

So yeah, not great evidence, as a proven fraud, is still a fraud. The carbon dating is correct.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

We still have a long way to go... I see the animal in people everywhere I go, sometimes there's no controlling it.
We definitely have less animilistic instincts than say a roman soldier, or early man, and we seem to be working on it with every new generation, sometimes confusing ourselves deeply in the process.

Human social evolution hasn't really ever stagnated, something we need to get over and done with, but peace is a long way off.

But we're getting better and going somewhere...
Humans will evolve on a mental level much quicker than on a physical level, I dream of progress not just for the rich, but for everyone.
Pipe dreams.

a reply to: Noinden

Sorry for the late comeback, if the quantum hypothesis of a less than stable underlying structure for the so called law's of the universe which postulates the potential that they are in flux or at least variable over time due to superspacial interaction's between brane verses is provable (Which it currently is not but remain's highly likely within the given hypothesis and it's theoretical framework as an explanation for such notable anomalies as the faster than light expansion of the very early TSC (universe is probably an incorrect term in that scenario as I am sure you can understand).

No offence but having come back to the net after a short hyatus I find your last post suspiciously defensive of what I assume are your own entrenched opinion's or at least accepted criteria upon which you base your own cosmological view point, it is not casting your point into doubt however and merely postulates another potentially valid point of view so I feel it is still open to conjecture.

Still you make valid point's and your point's are good but as for your headline introduction statement about the radio isotopic dating I have to disagree, if the quantum variation caused by variable brain activity in superspace can be supported it not only provides a valid explanation for the early fluid structure of the law's of universal physics (hypothetical of course) but it also provided a more than ample suggestion that radiographic decay rate's may themselves as well as other factors be not so predictable as we would like to think as posited by the static model of physic's.

Still as you rightly may point out Quantum theory's and there offshoot's are still not universally accepted, indeed many physicists still see them as voodu like idea's though I don't know your own opinion, personally I think that both approaches offer solutions if not actual answers and given a complex enough equation then the standard model would still work though the number of variables and factors to take into account is beyond the pale as you certainly know.

Though conversely the standard approach would seem to deny the idea of multiple universe or parrallel reality's which do offer explanations for many phenomena that lack standard explanation's (or at least accepted credible explanations) at this time and it is also growing in acceptance to the point it is now as you know mainstream science and look's likely to eclipse the standard model entirely before too long though wether that is a good thing or a bad thing is something else to be considered as if it is wrong then it is draining many talented theoretical physicists away from the standard model approach.

So what I am saying is that the view of radio isotopic decay rate's as predictable may indeed be flawed, the evidence is in the form of QUANTUM fluctuation's in the structure of the universe itself and one such notable fluctuation can be clearly seen in the current hypothesis that speculates that the universe actually expanded faster than the speed of light in contravention of einstein's theory for a finite period of time during or just after the big bang during which it seem's that the very law's we now percieve as fixed were in fluctuation and had not yet settled down, another is the theory of brain interactions and the interesting theory that gravity is actually not from our own native brain but from another brain that is in partial contact/interaction with our brain in superspace hence a potential candidate to explain which it is litterally million's of time's weaker than other universal law's such as electromagnetism though of course our universe as we perceive it could not exist without it and perhaps it is another Goldilocks zone type event to draw a coarse analogy in which our interaction provided our brain with just enough gravity to allow the familiar structures of matter to form such as galaxy's stars, planets and even atom's without them simply falling into a too deep gravity well which of course would have simply nulified the event of the white hole which we call the big bang immediately as if the balance was just right, not to hot or too cold it you like were the heat I am referring too of course is the amount of gravity in this TSC as we percieve it from our percieved dimension of reality.

a reply to: LABTECH767

It probably does NOT help I am a skeptic on all things mystical. I say this as someone who belongs to an occultic spiritual path )

a reply to: Noinden

I tend to avoid the occult, I did have what you may regard as occult experience, ghosts, object's appearing and disappearing, poltergeist activity, mist like apparitions and shadow like apparitions and far worse which I would rather not talk about and what is more I do actually regard the whole experience as having had a serious detrimental effect upon my sanity along with head injury's I suffered at about the same time, I would indeed put my experiences down to that had not members of my family also experienced them.

I am however a Christian by faith as I pointed out earlier and so it does slightly colour my other view's.

I do however have respect for paraspychology and think it is an interesting subject but something that regardless of whether it is regarded as credible as a field by the researcher involved or not is potentially dangerous for a number of reason's, clinically it can be harmful psychologically (you have heard the old story about the psychiatrist whom went nutty after being with crazy people too long) and if the field has any validity then also potentially harmful (but then also essential research if there is evidince of another populated dimension impacting our own often harmfully but also sometime's beneficially) to the researchers themselves as they are to look at it abjectly a little like blind men stumbing around on there hand's and knees' inside a nuclear reactor without knowing if the radiation is bathing them or if the rod's are in there graphite sheaf's.

a reply to: LABTECH767

I'm a neopagan Druid (which is not an actual Druid, just a convenient tern for Pre-Christian Celtic spiritual path, less of a mouthful) and a Celtic Reconstructionist. I understand that there are things beyond sensing out there, however, a fake is a fake is a fake.

a reply to: Noinden

Well just to make thing's a little quirky for you I did fall onto an Oak as a child were I split my palm wide open on a broken bottle someone had left there by it and well and truly watered it's root's with my blood, it was a female oak with only a dying sappling of an oak nearby in the Lancashire town of Skelmersdale (a corruption of the viking name meaning shield horse valley though due to it's history of haunting including having it's own white lady near the heavily polluted tawd river - just a stream these days though it was once a trout river it is also colloquially called devil's dale by many).

I had an emotional link to that tree and climbed it often as a small boy obviously getting plenty of it's sap back in the form of splinters, the council took it down because it was a health and safety risk since little boy's liked to climb it and some kid ahd fallen out of it injuring himself, I ask you what is the sense.

You may even say that I have my own knowledge of the oak though my own tree has gone now though she had no holly, the other oak near it which as children we called the helicopter (it was in a sorry state no bark but somehow clung to life always trying to put up fresh shoot's every year with a few branches) had some holly near it's crown, that was about twenty feet from it, forlorn and alone in a mowed field of grass in a new town.

Still from the top of dalton hill (we called it the beacon) which has a nice grove of ancient oak's nearby you can see the island of Anglesey at such an angle that the menai strait is clearly visible on a clear day as well as the isle of man.

Actually the Learned men of the Roman history's were a bloody bunch whom indulged in huge sacrifice of human's and animal's as you know, I could not follow the neo paganism as I see it as just a rebellion against the system type of reflex though admittedly modern druids (whom are thankfully not those blood thirsty true druid's - the last of them barring a few in Eira were it clung on for a few more centurys and of course in Caledonia were wiped out by the Roman's following the tribal rebellions of the British Gaul's and the Roman's recorded how they fell over there long white robe's as they tried to escape the Roman sword after the roman's invaded there stronghold of Anglesey - the Druid Vatican if you like - and finished them off along with there most sacred grove's which they burned down).

What little we do know of the pre druid's that built stone henge is not my field but I do remember reading about great tree's found at some sight's from about roughly the same period which had apparently been dug up and replanted by these people with there branches and leave's buried and there root's in the sky as if there view and this is only to speculate they believed there underworld or afterlife was inside the earth or maybe it was some kind of sacrifice.

What I can tell you is that I did see and so did my family grey mist like shape's - you could call them cloud, in the hebrew old testament the glory of the lord on the tabernacle was like a cloud so in my mind a huge spirit or a group of spirit's around it and in the new testament when jesus ascended he did so with cloud so he became spirit which to read back on it he was all along, spirit manifesting as a physical being just like when a young soldier was shot and killed but at about the same instant back were he lived his neighbours saw him walking to his parent's house they said hello and he waved but did not speak, his parents heard the nock but there was no one there but in Jesus case far more powerful on an order of magnitude beyond human soul's ability.

Of course I can not convince you but it is something to ponder.

a reply to: LABTECH767

For me, there are two types of knowledge (que the eye rolling from some of the creationists here, who have heard this adnauseum from me).

Gnosis, which is "spiritual" knowledge, you just "know it to be so".
and
Eidein. Which is intellectual knowledge, you can prove this. From here we derive the english word idea.

So I've got a lot of gnosis about spiritual things. I've experienced the feeling of my Gods, and other deities I don't worship. I've experienced Jehovah (but he's not all powerful to me). So a personal gnosis of mine (actually its a shared gnosis) is tht deities are real. I can not prove it, nor should I try. It is a matter of faith.

Now a physical relic, such as the shroud, is something that should at least test correctly for the age it proports to be. IT falls in the realm of "intellectual knowledge". For me, it fails. I also have some experience (in my undergrad education) in radioisotope training, I've as a post grad taught papers in it too. So I've gotten into the weeds, with that aspect of chemistry. I trust it, as it's proven to be reliable to me, and every paper I've read. Its been lots of papers.

So tying it back, I don't see that one can be intellectually honest, and try to discredit isotope dating, for fossils. I have seen a whole heaping, steaming pile of creationsit dogma try however

Person A says that there is a gapless, infinite series of numbers between 1 and 2.
He counts 1.1, 1.2, etc.

Person B says Person A cannot be correct because what about the numbers from 1.1 to 1.2.
So A says 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, etc.

So B says aha! What about the transition from 1.11 to 1.12.

You will always be able to point to gaps. That doesn't make you right.

a reply to: secretboss

I'd love to pile on along with some other responses on here as to why evolution is real but then again I believe that the human race was some sort of medical experiment by aliens so what do I know? Is evolution legit? Pretty safe answer is yes.

a reply to: Noinden

Now you bring up the shroud, hmm I have to say your knowledge there is actually out of date, the lead researcher from the group whom took sample's actually died of cancer and made among his other final statement's a claim that he believed the data may have been wrong simply because the sample they took included material sown in after the fire which destroyed the original Turin cathedral.

As you know the shroud appeared in the west after the crusader sacking of constantinople were it may have actually been help sacred as a different relic since it may have been folded into a small square with only the christ like face impression visible, the Veil of Veronica - the woman whom wiped christ's face to remove the blood from his eye's when he stumbled.

I won't get into the whole history of how that happened, how the crusaders (whom were only really in it for the money and prestige and were mainly norman's by lineage were tricked and blackmailed by the doge of venice into attacking the christian city of constantinople (the main rival of Venice) and causing the eventual downfall of the then bankrupted byzantium empire but it though the trail went cold for a while that relic (the Veil of Veronica as it was believed to be as it was folded into that face only image) dispeared there and then the shroud of Turin appeared in the west not long after.

But anyway I digress.
www.innoval.com...
There are other theory's as well though admitedly even given my own scepticism about radiographic dating this is odd but still valid.
www.telegraph.co.uk...

Now let me tell you a little story, I do not know what it is that you think you felt but it certainly was not the Yahwey. I believe in.

Back in 1989 I was with my then best friend and his two cousin's and we took a weekend down at the Snowdonia National Park here in Britain (Wales to be precise) and there we rented a sheep shearing shed which had been converted into a small bunk house for camper's near the base of Mt. Snowdon.

On one wall there was a painting which was dark against the dark stone and I certainly could not make it out and neither could the other three.

That first night it was fine but as darkness drew in the weather took a change for the worse and it whipped up a high wind driven rain storm and by the next morning the field in which our bunk house/hut was which had been filled with tent's when we arrived had only two abandoned water logged tent's left and we were the only campers left.

Now that rain kept on for the next three day's and two night's that we were there so we put off our walk up the mountain and explored instead but on the final night we decided that we WERE going to go up the next day come what may be, a fatal decision as we had the wrong gear, jean's, trainers (sneakers), light jacket's and no water proof's but we were all 18 and 19 so we were foolhardy and reckless but that night I had what you may call a presentment, a powerful feeling - no a knowledge that I WAS going to die there and I could not avoid it, I had the bunk under that painting that none of us could make head's or tails of and I could not sleep despite it being so quiet except for the wind and rain and dark with no street light's out there though I should have been out like a light, I felt frightened but I simply prayed that if it was my time then I accepted the lord's will though I did not want to die, that he please look after my friend's, my mother and brothers and sisters and even my enemy's.

I can not explain it and there is no word's to describe the sensation but I felt the most immense presence I have ever felt (I have had clair audient experience and this was NOTHING like it at all believe me), I felt surrounded by this immense but calming presence and yet it also terrified me as I felt so suddenly self aware and imperfect before it, the presence felt like it was above but also all around and I heard but not sound or even in my head or those other ears that hear clair audient activity which can not be recorded, no this was something else and it simply said - no sound but a voice nevertheless and definitely huge and male and as far as I am concerned God like or at least Angel like "Do not be afraid my son this is neither the time nor the place", though fearful (litterally #ting myself at this experience I found myself falling into a restful and totally peaceful sleep.

The following day we walked to the cog railway station were there is a train which takes visitors up (in good weather it was closed of course) and walked up the side of the track, Jude said he knew a short cut having been there several years earlier with his school but I think in truth he got us lost and we headed off to the left of the track into the mist (We could only see maybe three or four feet ahead clearly and the rain and water was in our eye's constantly blinding us as well as being soaked to the skin), this sheep/goat track which was merely a slightly flatter path among the scree led us to a cliff and there Jude (who later worked for the UN as a peace negotiator) decided that we should climb (sneakers and jean's in wet weather) up this nearly vertical rock face, it was only about 3 to 5 degrees off the vertical but only about twenty feet high before a more navigable slope, I was second up and forgot the three point's rule since I could not find perchase for my other foot, as I reached for what I took to be a rocky hand hold with rain in my eye's I over reached and found it was a clump of moss which came away in my hand, now I was about ten feet up and at the base of this cliff the sheep/goat track fell away into the must down another cliff like very steep sloop that was below it, the path was only about a foot and a half wide at this point if that, I fell streight down and landed at an angle with my heel's on the path and falling out over the drop but John and Andrew each caught my wrists at exactly the same instant.

Being young idiot's we continued and I made a second attempt and got up there followed by the other two, I felt then the storm (figuratively speaking the weather was awful) had passed and we made our way up to the top of Snowdon (Great view all we could see was the mist, rain and low cloud) then we walked into the small station at the top of the mountain were they have a restaurant, there were three local's in there, one mopping the floor and one behind a counter but no one else while another was just talking to them, they took one look at us like they had just seen three martians walk through the door and said something in welsh that sound like it would translate into "Stupid Idiot's".

Later that afternoon as we got back down to the Hut and as I walked into the door that painting leaped out at me clear as anything, it was a shepherd in a dark grey cloak, his hood up and only his bearded chin visible, holding a lamb in his cloak with one arm while another lamb was peering out of the fold's of his grey cloak near his ankle's, he had a crook but was leaning into driving rain much like we had just walked through.

Now all I can tell you is that this was not a presence like a Ghost or even a demon (I have encountered both and they are nothing like this), let's say this made the world feel small and I knew it was good.

a reply to: LABTECH767

I felt bad not because that being or presence had been scary but because I felt all my flaw's, my failing's and my own rotten nature were visible to be seen but it still spared me, I hope for something good but it may simply have been to tell of the experience for all I know but I do know it was real, angel, god but not demon or spirit, oh spirit yes but not like any I have encountered before or since and the most profound experience of my life.

And just to go back to the shroud.

I have to add this, there is another Veil that purport's to be the real one, I personally think it a painting but the shroud I believe to be genuine but for most it is a matter of faith, however there is a chemical related to blood.
www.shroud.com...
www.shroud.com...
www.newgeology.us...
www.conservapedia.com...

Also unlike romanticized depictions of crucifixion's the shroud has the injurys on the hand's and feel in the CORRECT place's to hold the victim's weight.

I don't know if you know this but when a person dies of crucifixion it is not blood loss from the nail's that kill's them it is drowning, they can not hold there weight up and there lung's collapse and fill with fluid, incredibly painful and slow.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Now I brought it up? Ummmm Have you been reading my posts? I mentioned it when we first started posting here. I am perfectly upto date on the tests performed on it. When the church is willing to let it be tested by multiple labs, I may give a damn beyond, it failed the first set of tests for age, by a massive margin.

a reply to: Noinden

And the head scientist whom led that team actually claimed he believed the test's may have been faulty due to the inclusion of woven in fabric from the medieval period not long before he died or did that little snippet escape your attention, he had to admit it was possible that it had scewed the results' and that is without taking into account the other factor's which other later researchers have postulated.

Pollen also is present on the shroud included fragment's found in the middle east and specifically the region we today refer to as Israel/Palestine, the only remaining compelling argument against became the argument about the nature of the weave itself which it was argued was not of the first century, a crude argument which had little or no evidence to back it up and was based only on limited surviving materials from the region usually from burial's which had been excavated and this was poor evidence against at best given that the material was probably imported from much further away if it was from a buriel intended for a high ranking member of society such as Joseph of Arrhythmia in whose tomb the christ was after all buried and therefore the weave would not even have been a local weave anyway so the comparison with other fabric remain's was therefore obviously a void point.

As it stands it is what it is, you believe or you do not and that is the best way for it to be.

And there is a lot more evidence for christ than against which those that choose not to believe simply deny or deride almost as if it terrify's them or threaten's them in some way.
www.historyofinformation.com...
en.wikipedia.org...
In egypt because of the populations century's old superstitions and pagan belief's (the oldest sympathetic magic doll's etc are among other find's from the region) there was even among the early christian and semi christian convert's a strong belief in the power of talisman's and non was more powerful than the written word, this carried over to some early christian buriels and a first century gospel fragment was found among other powerful written material's incorporated into the mask of a mummy.
Now you have stated your own belief's, I respect them (Especially as most modern pagan's are actually damn nice people by and large except for the odd twisted cult) but of course do not follow them and can not approve of them since they are not my religion.
In this respect we have a common spiritual ground though as we both believe, just in different matter's.

But I am going to leave this there as we are doing some interminable damage to the direction of the thread on this tangent, it is after all about evolution and it's validity or lack of it, personally I see no reason that my god can not use such a mechanism IF he choose's to do so but think that the spark of life from nothing is as unlikely and against the law's of conservation as water flowing up a hill to quote an eminantly qualified scientists whom is also now a firm believer in God having come to this conclusion after many decades of study in his respective field.