It is good to question. there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.
It wasn't really a good question. It was similar to asking "How far to the end of the earth...?" It was a question used to make a statement that there is "discontinuity" in the fossil record. It reminds me of a common creationist tactic asking "how does information get added to the genome"-- that doesn't really mean anything. Are they talking about adding DNA?, Genes, Function, promoter regions? It's not like more is necessarily better. It's a question asked so that when one attempts to explain, the listener will say--"see, even science can't answer this question."--"scientists can't answer this question; therefore I can assert whatever I want instead."
Notice the statements and information and questions the OP ignored. Why would anyone actually curious about what is and isn't in the fossil record ignore that information and then claim he was ABSOLUTELY certain no-one answered his question. Why, despite repeated asking, did he never clarify with examples--except for his original candle example. Why did he seemingly ignore the many examples given regarding his poorly worded first question. Why did he repeatedly assert things that no one said--he boiled things down to "pat answers", "the fossil record isn't evidence", and "no one answered him". That's what he picked up out of all these pages. That's it. And he's done the same on other threads now while, admonishing them just as he's done here.
He's twisted careful explanations into sound bites that support what he believes.
Here's why it is a bad question. A fossil record is a clue to morphology--but it was carefully explained that a single point mutation can cause a very large morphological change, and huge DNA changes can leave the morphology as seen by fossils--totally in tact. Plus, with fossils, we have to take what we can find--no intelligent designer left us any clues of where to look. We've had to amass the data ourselves...and invent radiometric dating. So what was he really asking? He never clarified. What discontinuity was he referring too--He had great examples--so many...and he didn't rephrase his question with the new knowledge--he dismissed all answers because they weren't what he wanted to hear.
Creationists do this kind of crap all the time. And then they pretend that science is a good ol' boys club that doesn't want to listen to what they have to offer (nothing so far.) Anyone who was actually interested in the topic--would be tripping on all the cool information coming out, and presumably, marveling in the links provided, like I was--because it's really heady stuff. He didn't even seem to know about it. He's blind to both his ignorance and his arrogance.
He got stuck on his one question (every creationist has their lynchpin conundrum that makes evolution untrue for them--and then they insert their god--even Francis Collins who doesn't doubt evolution--for him it is (was) abiogenesis.) And when their lynchpin is explained--they just can't hear the answer. Like Kleinman and EV and Hewitt and oscillating data and Behe and irreducible complexity. No answer is the right answer, because to them it's important to say, "science can't explain this." What they really mean is, "I can't understand it, therefore, my alternate hypothesis could still be the truth."
The OP went to the Kleinman thread to ask about EV the old "point mutation" model. Why would someone wallow in this model when, now that we see DNA; we see that point mutation is but a small part in the evolution of genomes. Why that and not show the slightest interest in the myriad of information on that thread as well as links upon links upon links. When you answer a question for a creationist, they just don't hear the answer--they don't address the link or argument or explanation--they just completely ignore it. As if, NOTHING was offered. See the Behe Dover transcript if you want to see the denial in full fledged egotistical display.
I am always curious in creationist logic, but they ignore the questions. For example, they would agree, I'm sure, that all humans have a common ancestor--and Scientists put that ancestor back less than 100,000 years ago.
They may not agree on the age, of course, but because of the exponential number of grandparents we accumulate as we go back through time, they would understand that you wouldn't need to go very many generations back before you had more ancestors than people that ever existed. Hence, all humans, have a common ancestor. But here is what is really cool (to me)--behind that ancestor, every single one of our ancestors are the exact same--and when you meet up with the common ancestor of your pets--behind that line, all the ancestors are the same. So there is a direct line back through time for humans--but we are just a spring in the family tree as ancestors of all the other twigs and branches come together in the backward march through time. And we can SEE this in the DNA. And so of all the myriad of steps toward our evolution--each step forward only had to happen once amongst all the replication going on all around through the eons.
One step forward--the same step forward for all of us--all through time--with various branches moving out and making more branches and dying out and growing in complexity--lit all evolved just like our brains and the internet and cities and human knowledge and language.
How can someone not marvel at that?--Marvel at how obvious and simple and elegant and profound and true that all is? And WE humans figured it out--and the evidence keeps piling in and giving us more details and clues.
And how can one not appreciate how cool it is to be on this website and learn from such knowledgeable friendly people from all over the world eager to share a little bit of the discovery no matter what area of science or what area of the world you might be interested in? How cool is it it see a piece of the puzzle fall into place and understand the world in a way that humans in past eons could not understand it. Like Neil Tyson or Carl Sagan, and Caroline Porco (all astronomers), I feel amazing awe to know this...to understand it...to be able to communicate it--to find out more or fill in gaps from brilliant, honest, people on this forum. There are no divine truths or high priests in science--there's just information that is available to anyone who looks for it.
And it's true whether someone believes it or not. You can prove it to yourself or doubt it or use it or add to it or revel in it or reject it or deny it. Just like the earth was spherical and tilted on it's access long before humans existed and figured things out.
So often skeptics are called arrogant--so often I've watched people spend careful and detailed time crafting careful explanatory answers or indulging some mentally ill guy's math problem only to be insulted repeatedly for not giving the right answers, or being "arrogant", or being "pat", or part of the "system". These people indulge in the gifts brought by scientists--longer lives, ready answers, forensic testing, computers, airplanes --the internet--while disparaging scientists and skeptics and praising themselves, invisible gods, charlatans, and those who give them nothing but delusions.
Just as Randi is demonized by the woos because he brings them the message that they are fooling themselves (rather than taking advantage of their naivte as he could readily do), those of us in the life science have gotten to learn some very fascinating things and we are repeatedly insulted by those who pretend to seek this knowledge.
To me, this forum is a haven in a world where the majority have been lead to believe that faith is a good way to know things and that doubters deserve dismissal. Dr. A. defended the OP, and the OP repaid this "benefit of the doubt" from a very knowledgeable member by completely ignoring his explanation (and everyone else's) and then claiming that absolutely no one answered his question!!
And so there are bad questions--or at least misleading questions...questions that aren't really questions. And I admire the patience and seemingly endless goodwill of forum members that freely educate again and again despite such deception. It's nice to know that people are learning from the responses even if the OP did not.
