Thread: Evolutionary fossils POOFING to dust?

Though this has developed into a very interesting conversation, can I take us back to the OP for a second?

Originally Posted by LouaiB

So, if a million year old half scull is dug up, according to him, it can't be used because it immediately poofs into dust.

Has the true-believer echo chamber become so perfectly insulated from reality that such an obvious fallacy can be presented and accepted as real? Forget websites proving the existence of fossils, or their general acceptance as real by pretty much everyone for at least the last century -- even the religious right; they may have different opinions of the source of fossils, but they never assumed fossils disintegrated when dug up. Forget all that, and consider that fossils are extremely common. Most of us have viewed them, held them, encountered them personally in nature, and have even dug them up... all without ever, even once, seeing them go "poof" upon removal from the ground. Many of us own them, myself included, and have viewed and handled them for years without any "poofs."

In other words, the very nature of fossils has been well known and accepted for a century; has the echo-chamber become so insulated that that nature can be ignored so easily? Has that echo chamber become so insulated that simple facts (i.e., fossil are stone and not bone) can be forgotten, or assumed to be invented by a conspiracy of billions over several generations?

Originally Posted by Sageous

In other words, the very nature of fossils has been well known and accepted for a century; has the echo-chamber become so insulated that that nature can be ignored so easily? Has that echo chamber become so insulated that simple facts (i.e., fossil are stone and not bone) can be forgotten, or assumed to be invented by a conspiracy of billions over several generations?

If they place their thumbs in their ears and go "lah, lah, lah, I can't hear you" they can ignore anything.

Besides Sageous, what excuse would you choose to use, if accepting evolution and history before humans is not an option? Given the absolute need to be correct, how would you teach your child "the truth" in the face of all these seemingly contrary facts, that clearly are false, because you NEED to be correct?

I think poofing is a bit silly, but may have been coined by uneducated. It becomes harder when your child will receive a public education or have access to the internet. Then you probably have to claim God is testing the faithful, by allowing Satan to manufacture false evidence. Any suggestions on what we can teach our children, in light of such clearly false evidence (since clearly our religion CAN NOT be wrong)?

Originally Posted by LouaiB

I didn't mean that because he didn't know that the basis of heredity is DNA means that he would be wrong. I said that I meant heredity when I said genetics, and that he got that part (heredity) wrong. I'm not sure myself either of hypothesis like these. I'd have to check.
Thnx for pointing it out for me Denziloe, I really appreciate it! I might have misused that again if you hadn't warned me

I still don't really know what you're referring to.

What, specifically, did Darwin think about heredity, which was later found to be erroneous?

Originally Posted by Denziloe

What, specifically, did Darwin think about heredity, which was later found to be erroneous?

Pangenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Denziloe

I still don't really know what you're referring to.

What, specifically, did Darwin think about heredity, which was later found to be erroneous?

I guess BlueLine gave an example, but I'm not sure myself. I only heard Richard Dawkins say that.
It seems I might have misunderstood. Sorry, but good thing you pointed it out to me.

@ Sageous. You own one?! I never new you can just buy a million year old fossil. Wow, this alone will make my friend stop using the disintegration excuse.
Yeah, it's surprising how they can just be in this denial. Well, today I got religion class, where the teacher promised me to provide quotes from Darwin saying his own theory is wrong (I'm pretty sure it's quote mining). You can't trust this guy's sources! When he was giving the 'god must exist' lesson, his refutal of the big bang was that if the singularity was a cloud of gas (lol he even got the start wrong), then how would wood and metal and so on exist after the bang. He used a certain book to get this. He said "this book got all the refutes of these theories. Science isn't as powerful as you think it is. For example, scientists are still struggling to figure out how the ant walks on the wall! They can't find out how!" Of course and then he was like "now that we annihilated the big bang, non-muslims don't have any excuse anymore!".

So yeah, after I get the quote, I'm asking for it's source and then just straight forward telling him that over 90% of scientists believe in evolution and it's proven. So either you're saying it's all a conspiracy, or you got a valid refutal for it, which then I would congratulate you and nominate you for a Nobel prize!

There are currently 50,000 fossils for sale on E-Bay. Many for only $5- with free shipping. That is how common they are. You could order one but even holding an obvious fossil would not get them to back down.

LouaiB,

Reading that last post of yours, I am now sorry for feeling disappointed by your behavior (you trying to criticize the logic of your friend). I take it all back! Sorry LouaiB!

I just can't believe this is what you are learning in Religion class. And just thinking these things might be happening in the USA (or even maybe Canada? No! It's way too far fetched to be happening in my country! ) To think this is happening in our day and age is maybe even more scary than circumcision still being a thing.

I understand why atheists are raging. It's just never been like this at my school so I couldn't relate with their need to criticize every passage in the Bible when we only read 3 in class and no one ever insisted they were to be taken literally.

It is sad that Religion class would be used to spread Dogma instead of what should actually be taught: a relationship with God.

That said, this battle is not just for atheists, and, actually, I don't think atheists will ever win this battle. I think it's a battle for people who love God. I think it is those who love God who should be telling dogmatic people that science is no threat to God. Maybe I'm partly wrong, atheists are probably good allies to the cause too, maybe.

So, as a last advice LouaiB, I do encourage you to continue your battle of sorts, but maybe you should explain before you do, that you are criticizing the dogma, not the relationship with God. This might be able to help them open up the door. Especially, if they truly have a relationship with God. If the only aspect of religion they have is dogma, than attempts of a devout believer and those of an atheist are just as good. And I wouldn't be impressed the number of religious people who only have the dogma aspect of religion be big, given this is what is being taught in Religion class.

Originally Posted by sivason

Besides Sageous, what excuse would you choose to use, if accepting evolution and history before humans is not an option? Given the absolute need to be correct, how would you teach your child "the truth" in the face of all these seemingly contrary facts, that clearly are false, because you NEED to be correct?

I think poofing is a bit silly, but may have been coined by uneducated. It becomes harder when your child will receive a public education or have access to the internet. Then you probably have to claim God is testing the faithful, by allowing Satan to manufacture false evidence. Any suggestions on what we can teach our children, in light of such clearly false evidence (since clearly our religion CAN NOT be wrong)?

Though I assumed these questions were rhetoric, I couldn't get them out of my head all night (slow night, I guess). My trouble with them is I had no answers because even though I was raised by devout Catholic parents, I have never been exposed to the kind of affected ignorance that has been thriving in the religious right in recent years. I simply cannot understand how a parent, who knows that a fossil will not turn to dust upon exhumation, can then teach their children something that they have had proven to them as false (the fossils), or something that they know was proven and accepted science when they were children themselves (age of the earth, evolution, global warming, etc.). In the U.S., there was little to no talk about Satan's hand in fossils, the "real" age of the earth, the incorrectness of evolution, etc, as little as twenty years ago (and what talk there was came from a generally ignored lunatic fringe -- and Kansas, for some reason). In other words, discussions like this would have been almost universally absurd (at least in the West) within the lifetimes of most parents; they have the capacity to remember that the things they are arguing against now were once just fine in their world, and within their patterns and choices of belief.

Given that, there is no reason parents cannot simply grow up, gather some inner strength, and teach their kids what they once understood in a very no-brainer manner as well-established truths (or at least acceptable theory) things like evolution, the age of the earth, and that fossils come from dead animals, and not Satan. It did not used to be that difficult to incorporate all this stuff into a religion's tenets -- even the Catholic Church itself broke down and did so some time ago -- and it would not be too hard to do so now, if people would just grow a spine and stand up to the nonsense with which their are being browbeaten by the far-right media, their churches, and some governments/schools. Faith is one thing; dogged adherence to nonsense recently handed down by authorities with more interest in political gains and rabble-rousing than in helping elevate their followers is another thing altogether. In other words, parents can remember that the crap they are teaching their kids is wrong, but choose not to do so. Instead they are choosing to teach their kids the fundamentalist B.S. for whatever reasons they have given themselves (or more likely had given to them) ... they do not need to do this, and they know they do not need to do this. Screwing up their kids heads is a choice they make, and one they make out of things like fear, brainwashing, herding mentality, or fantastically misguided but actual faith, but never Truth.

To teach their kids obvious truths parents really do not need to defy their religion, only the angry idiots driving the earthly organizations of their religion, and their own fears or selfish needs. I highly doubt that God, Allah, and all their celestial associates really give a crap what anyone thinks about the age of the earth, or what some well-meaning but very ignorant fellows put in a book in His name a few short millennia ago. Parents need only grow up and face truths a little higher than the dogma they are being force-fed.

Sadly, Louai, I don't think any of this will help you in Lebanon -- though if I remember properly Lebanon (or at least Beirut) was a very modern place just 40 years ago, before this current wave of fundamentalism hit it, and hit it hard. So there is a chance that some parents or grandparents will come to remember what they once knew as true, and did so without losing a bit of their faith.

tl;dr: Sivason, I have no answer for those parents if they will not allow themselves to remember what they once knew as true. But if they grow up, or grow brave enough to defy their churches' doctrine, they can teach their children that evolution etc exists, and does so in concert with their God, and not in spite of their God. It's up to them.

5$?! Lol practically free!

So my friend backed down of the fossils porting part after I told he you can buy them in eBay. Progress!

And about my religion class teacher, he didn't bring the quotes for me. He told me he wanted to, but doesn't want to anymore because he knows I wouldn't be convinced. But gladly he told me the sources of the quotes. He told me they are taken from Darwin's book. Quoting Darwin from his book.

I told him that even if dawin himself said that his theory is just dumb speculation, natural selection turned out right and is proven and used as a standard by most scientists in the field of biology. But, the teacher stopped me midtalk and told me he doesn't wanna hear about it.

,buuuuuut, now that I know it's from his book, I'll make sure if it's just taking out of context.

@Occipitalred. It's alright. In fact, you still have a point. I should be less hard-fisted with them.

Well yeah, there is some crazy dogma. In fact, and I kid you not, the religious class teacher today said that "scientists assume that the earth rotates around the sun, but actually the sun rotates around the earth in an axis which differs from winter and summer".
I mean, this is so bad that I need to privately ask him again directly to make sure I didn't misunderstand. He didn't say it to the whole class, just one who was asking about a corresponding verse after class, and I just sticked around for what he had to say.

Most scholars and religion educators don't say that anymore after we proved it's wrong.
This reminds me, can we get statistics of how many scholars used to interpret the Quran saying it meant the sun rotating around the earth before the time of it's (the sun rotating around the earth) refutal? This would help against apologists who interpret the verses in the twisted way they do.

Originally Posted by LouaiB

Yeah, it's surprising how they can just be in this denial. Well, today I got religion class, where the teacher promised me to provide quotes from Darwin saying his own theory is wrong (I'm pretty sure it's quote mining). You can't trust this guy's sources! When he was giving the 'god must exist' lesson, his refutal of the big bang was that if the singularity was a cloud of gas (lol he even got the start wrong), then how would wood and metal and so on exist after the bang.

Abominable wilful ignoramus.

Originally Posted by LouaiB

And about my religion class teacher, he didn't bring the quotes for me. He told me he wanted to, but doesn't want to anymore because he knows I wouldn't be convinced. But gladly he told me the sources of the quotes. He told me they are taken from Darwin's book. Quoting Darwin from his book.

If this is about Darwin renouncing evolution on his deathbed, then that's purile nonsense. If it's about Darwin expressing doubts about evolution, it's the result of really bad quote-mining. I'd love to see the specific quotes your teacher is talking about, because I guarantee that when put into context, it'll just look like Darwin anticipating objections to his claim and responding to them.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

If this is about Darwin renouncing evolution on his deathbed, then that's purile nonsense. If it's about Darwin expressing doubts about evolution, it's the result of really bad quote-mining. I'd love to see the specific quotes your teacher is talking about, because I guarantee that when put into context, it'll just look like Darwin anticipating objections to his claim and responding to them.

The problem is that the teacher doesn't want to give me quotes anymore. I mean, really?! REALLY?! If he's so sure, why scared?
Also, I double checked. He does think that the sun revolve around the earth, and that the earth is fixed and also doesn't rotate around itself. I mean, WOW!! Just, WOW! I made sure to ask my friend who was talking to him (the same one this thread is about), and he reassured me that the religion teacher does really believe those things. Of course my friend told me that he doesn't believe the teacher about this (duh).

Also, I'll search for old Quranic interpretations before the time of the discovery that the earth is round and moves around the sun. I suspect them to interpret those verses as indeed being the sun moving around the earth, the flat earth.
I told my friend that I am searching for these, and he responded by saying that before the 19th century (don't forget that the Quran was written in the 6th century), there where no interpretations of the Quran by scholars at all because of some dictatorship oppressions from Arab leaders, and only lately did they become interpreted, but this was so absurd that even his religious friends literally yelled and got angry at him for such, well, highly stupid and pulled-out-of-ass-like-this-is-some-game-he's-playing-without-regards-of-honesty-and-respect-for-the-debate-and-me claims. He had to back out of that claim, and he did.

(Lol, sun rotating around there earth? Has he no shame owning a cell phone and being in the 21st century?! An iPhone too! With a Bluetooth earpiece!! Each operate using new-age science! Like what Bill Nye said "how can you own cars and TVs and go into planes and use microwaves to heat your 2$ TV dinner and at the same time deny the clear scientific facts, the same thing that allowes you in the first place to have modern technology, the thing that works, science?" (Not the exact wording. He also happened to use it differently in different occasions) )

You are free really. By the time someone claims the sun rotates around a stationary earth, you no longer have to waste time thinking about them. They are not open to change, and discussions with them may as well be with a moody cow.

What about the physics teacher? What would happen if you involved both of them into such conversation, who would back off..?

Originally Posted by LouaiB

The problem is that the teacher doesn't want to give me quotes anymore. I mean, really?! REALLY?! If he's so sure, why scared?
Also, I double checked. He does think that the sun revolve around the earth, and that the earth is fixed and also doesn't rotate around itself. I mean, WOW!! Just, WOW! I made sure to ask my friend who was talking to him (the same one this thread is about), and he reassured me that the religion teacher does really believe those things. Of course my friend told me that he doesn't believe the teacher about this (duh).

Was your teacher taking up class time to discuss these things? If he's a religion teacher I assume the only thing he's teaching is religion.

I'm reading an excellent book on evolution at the moment, and there's a lot to be said about fossils. Yes - we do find actual biological remains, not only transformations of bodies under water into minerals, esp. teeth. There's much more - microorganisms consuming animals sometimes leave telltale patterns, footprints, amber-inclusions...

Buut: Any fossilisation must be viewed as an extremely unlikely thing to happen to a body, esp. one not being or getting under water.
Creatures are usually eaten incl. microbiological decay to total indistinction or physically destroyed to indistinction. Almost nothing of the sum of all the creatures that have been is in our evidence, one must assume we only see a tiny piece of it all.

So I surmise that some of them do "go poof" when approached unprofessionally, indeed they do that from time to time, mummies for example, do they count as fossils? In German fossil is only for the mineral ones, Versteinerung - it has "stone" in it, other things are remains of some sort, author seems to subsume all under fossil.

Not from the book, but we do find actual tissue in various conservation - and they surely can be very delicate things and might disintegrate.

Oh and yes, floods do leave nice fossils, humans and dinosaurs liked to live near water, there were many floods, also no doubt. So we have those and those of aquatic creatures a rather lot.

Another of the points the author makes - missing link is misleading into a view of evolution as a one-way ladder from little to more complexity and perfection, with us at the crown. A lot of function is being sacrificed when natural selection finds it too costly and it can does and did lead to loss of complexity regularly.

Very good read and I'm only through the first third: The Accidental Species - Misunderstandings of Human Evolution by Henry Gee