Lies.

Because "dinosaur" means a lot of different things. That's like asking why there are more bird skeletons on the earth than there are raccoon skeletons.

It's rare to find any fossil that is completely whole. Most things that die disappear forever. Fossilized remains are more or less "accidents" of nature, because they require certain felicitous geological conditions to last so long.

The "full" dinosaur skeletons seen in museums tend to be artificial. Real fossils are too rare and valuable. To have an ACTUAL fossil exhibit come to your museum (e.g. Lucy) is a pretty big deal. They treat the actual finds as if you they would disintegrate if you looked at them from the wrong angle.

If you were to compare the number of fossils we've found of our own ancestors to a smaller group, say the relatives of the tiger, then you would have a more even playing field. He's forcing you to compare the general to the specific, which is dishonest.

(Go figure).

i was linked to articles such as these concerning the early hominids and australopithicans

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/263.asp http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0722lucy.asp

edit: I would link to the forum, but it is an off-site forum of my call of duty 4 clan, and i don't want to be kicked out for bringing hordes of RRS members in.

Conclusion: (1)There is no fossil evidence that man is the product of evolution. (2)The missing links are still missing because they simply do not exist. (3)The Bible clearly states, “then the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7).

LALALALALLALALALALALALALALALALALA!!!!!!!!!!

1. I won't admit any evidence you have as evidence

2. I will misrepresent what your theory purports to explain and again disregard any evidence to the contrary(ie missing links).

Transitional fossils are the fossilized remains of transitional forms of life that illustrate an evolutionary transition. They can be identified by their retention of certain primitive (plesiomorphic) traits in comparison with their more derived relatives, as they are defined in the study of cladistics. "Missing link" is a popular term for transitional forms. Numerous examples exist, including those of primates and early humans.

According to modern evolutionary theory, all populations of organisms are in transition. Therefore, a "transitional form" is a human construct of a selected form that vividly represents a particular evolutionary stage, as recognized in hindsight. Contemporary "transitional" forms may be called "living fossils", but on a cladogram representing the historical divergences of life-forms, a "transitional fossil" will represent an organism at the point where indivual lineages (clades) diverge.

3. I will allude to a book, supposedly containing the inspired word of God, that has no evidence or proof, but a mere single statement(out of a few conflicting statements in the same book) of how God created man as the definitive version of human existence.

1.) Name one biologist or paleontologist at a public university in America who thinks that Lucy has been discredited.

2.) I wasn't aware we'd even found a single complete dinosaur skeleton.

What claptrap.  This person clings to the information of frauds.

Ok, now it is true that if you compare the DNA of the entire human race to one small tribe of chimps then us Homo sapiens are remarkably similar.  However, this in no way points to us not being evolved from an ape-like ancestor.  The main reason that our brains became so large is multifaceted.  We grew larger brains for social interaction, greater dexterity, but most importantly to survive a very precarious ordeal that nearly wiped us out completely.

Africa used to be covered with lush rainforests from shoreline to shoreline.   That is until the pesky island-continent of India crashed into southern asia.  This started all kinds of regional changes in Africa.  As India continues to push into Asia it is pushing up the Himalayas and the tibetian plateau.  This created a change of weather patterns that severly depleted the rainfall that the African continent received.  Also the tibetian plains actually act like a giant CO2 scrubber that sucks up the CO2 out of our atmosphere.  This caused the Earth to cool in bursts.  Slowly the continent changed from rainforest to open grassland.  This is when our ancestors split from the chimps and started to evolve into us.  Now as the Himalayas continued to get taller and taller things started to get really bad for our ancestors.  Major drought and famine.  They were stuck in eastern Africa around current day Ethiopia.  Things got so bad that it is estimated that we were reduced to less than 10,000 members in total.  Only the most intelligent survived.  Then they spread throughout the world and dominated it.  So we are getting more populous where the other apes are going in the other direction.  Hence why they have much more genetic diversity than we do.  Smack this guy for being an idiot.

Yeah, punctuated equilibrium.  So?  Doesn't say shit against human evolution.

"indisputably"?  What?  Nothing, absolutely nothing is indisputable with any fossil.  And definetly not human fossils.  Evolutionary biologists fight like cats and dogs over every tiny detail. 

Ok, I'm browsing over several things in this report because it's utter nonsense.  If they want to bring up a specific point just let me know and I'll take a look.

Holy fucking shit, my brain is starting to ooze out my ears. 

By definition the deleterious mutations won't be passed on naturally.  *slaps hand on face*  These guys really don't fucking understand how it works.  To show an example that even an ID proponent can understand, genetic mutation is like batting with a blindfold on.  You just swing blindly at the ball.  Most of the time you miss and it goes no where.  You're out.  However every so often you knock the shit out of the ball and you move on in evolution.  The bad mutations do not get passed on and it dies, the good mutations do get passed on. 

Of course in human society we care for our sickly people.  This is great for temporary problems and a boon for survival of our species.  For life-long problems our current method of caring for the infirm is definitely not kosher compared to natural evolution.  This will cause a great die-off among a portion of our species if civilization collapses.  But so what?  It won't wipe us out.  Just thin out our numbers a tad.  You can't compare human deleterious mutations that we overcome in society with natural selection.  Currently we are resisting that to an extent.  How idiotic to compare humans living in society to an animal living in the wild.

Pretty much.  Like I was saying above, this is when our ancestors were in eastern africa and we were very few in numbers.  Another nitpick.  The mtDNA is passed from mother to both sons and daughters.

WTF?  Is this guy fucking retarded?  Try 7 million years ago.  Just because we are all descended from one guys Y chromosome around 100-150 thousand years ago and one gals mtDNA 150-200 thousand years ago doesn't point them out to be humanities common ancestor.  They are definetly each one of them, but not the "last common ancestors" to humanity.  That completely misses the entire fucking point of the study and human evolution.

I see what these people are doing here, Revolver.  They are taking a lot of good, scientific information, regurgitating it to sound like they know something, and then they throw in bald-faced lies.  This is really fucking slimy shit, and it chaps my ass.

Reeeeetch!  *pushes trashcan away*

*groans* This is shit logic.  We evolved most likely from Homo erectus.  But just like you don't die off as soon as you have a son, not all erectus evolved into Homo sapiens and then croaked.  It looks like some of them evolved into Homo floresiensis as well.  Most likely us Homo sapiens and Homo erectus coexisted for a while before they died off.  And as far as "the fossil record is just incomplete", who fucking cares?  Where the fuck is deludedgod?  He'd shit all over this BS.  Molecular Biology has confirmed and augmented the theory of evolution.  Including our evolution from an ape-like ancestor. 

This article babbles a lot of true, scientific data, throws in religious conclusions, and then just dismisses evolution of man based on fucking nothing.  It's retarded.

These guys can drive you nuts.

They nitpick their way thru details on how well the progression of fossils in the geologic column supports evolution theory.  They believe the flaws they have found voids all of evolution theory and means their theory, which is supported by fossil progression based solely on how well plants and animals could tread water during a great earth wide flood 4000 years ago, is therefore proven correct.

If you stay with them long enough you will find out their treading water based theory relies on "Super Evolution" which you foolishly thought they were arguing against just the other day.

(Something about the ark not being able to fit the millions of plants and animals required to throw in the water at exactly the right time so they could evolve and breed while treading water, die and fill the geologic column in exactly the correct order.  Or something like that.  Search Kind vs. species, for the details, my brain hurts just thinking about it.)

And you believe you can reason with these people? Based on what, their demostrated, critical thinking skills?