Nascent

'tiktaalik' is the Inuktitut word in Canada's western and central arctic for ling cod [a feshwater cod]. I personally don't think this moniker is too relevant for this fossil. The way Inuit would say "one that walks' would be 'pihuktalik'. to say "a fish that walks" would require two words in Inuktitut.

When wondering about darwinism(no wonder at all)who made darwin?Always relates back to GOD........DAWN

On April 10th 2006 in the everglades:A new sloth has been discovered....now what.....DAWN

Dear Sir,

The debate between people who believe in divine creation and those that
believe in evolution continues to be an ongoing affair. However, the
truth probably lies somewhere in between.

In fact it is long overdue that the concept of the universe and god be
debated on a global scale by people of different disciplines and
religions. As there is no tangible proof for the existence or non-
existence of god, I hope rational people world over will deliberate
this topic with an open mind. We probably have access to more
information on this subject now then we ever had before. Unfortunately,
even in this century a degree of dogmatism persists pertaining to this
and related issues.

There is a good possibility as to what we refer to as god may just be
an intelligent entity or a group of intelligent entities that have
created life and the universe. This creator (or creators) may also have
given living things enough latitude in order to cope with changes in
the environment. This leeway may eventually result in evolution.
Moreover, most data suggest that life could not have arisen on its own
(similar views have often been expressed by many famous scientists such
as Einstein, Hoyle, Prigogine, etc.), as living things are just too
cleverly made to have come together on their own. For example it is
highly unlikely that limestone could come together on its own to
form a pyramid, which is certainly a simple entity in relation to even the
simplest living being.

Finally it might be mentioned that (according to Plutarch) when
Alexander of Macedonia asked a Gymnosophist (naked philosopher) in
India, "Which is the most cunning (meaning intelligent in this case) of animals"?
The Gymnosophist replied, " The animal which man has not yet discovered".

Sincerely yours,

Upinder Fotadar, D.Sc
Associate Research Scientist
Basic Sciences Division
New York University
345 East, 24th Street
New York, NY 10010
Phone: 212-998-9578
E-mail: uf4@nyu.edu

$250,000 Offer! Dr. Kent Hovind is offering $250,000 to anyone with scientific evidence of cosmic evolution (origin of time, space, and matter; Big Bang Theory), chemical evolution (origin of higher elements from hydrogen), planetary evolution (origin of stars and planets), organic evolution (origin of life), or macro-evolution (origin of major kinds).

Students, if your teachers claim they have any scientific evidence of evolution (as stated above), then let them know about this offer. Kent Hovind will fly to any school on his own expense and debate them publicly, exposing the lies! You can visit Kent’s website at www.drdino.com for more information and watch his on-line videos for FREE!

Vestigial Organs? Many biology school textbooks say vestigial (useless) organs are evidence of evolution because they serve no purpose. Some examples of claimed vestigial organs include the human tailbone, appendix, and the pelvis of a whale. Some books say the pelvic bones of whales are vestigial and prove they used to walk on land, and evolved from land dwelling animals. That is a lie! Those pelvic bones are anchor points for muscles to attach to and are needed for whales to reproduce. Those bones have nothing to do with whales walking on land. The appendix plays a role in antibody production and protects part of the intestine from infections and tumor growths, just ask any doctor. There are no vestigial organs! Evolutionists don’t seem to realize that this type of evidence is the opposite of what they need to prove their theory. Vestigial organs (if they existed) would be examples of losing something, not gaining something!

Macro-Evolution Has Never Been Proven: Macro-evolution (major changes within kinds) teaches that species can produce a different kind of species, such as a monkey producing a human, or a reptile producing a mammal. Macro-evolution has never been observed in nature, the laboratory, or the fossil record, and therefore is believed by faith, not science. Micro-evolution (minor variations within kinds) teaches that humans produce a variety of humans, and dogs produce a variety of dogs. This is factual science because it has been tested and observed several times. Textbooks give examples of micro-evolution and say it will eventually add up to macro-evolutionary results. No evidence supports this.

Mutations do not produce any kind of evolution because they don’t produce a new species. There is no new information added to a mutation, only scrambled information that already exists in the gene code. Example: You can scramble up the letters of the word CHRISTMAS and get all sorts of new words. But you are never going to get XEROX, ZEBRA or QUEEN out of CHRISTMAS because the letters aren’t available. Real mutations would give new information, not just reshuffling existing information. There hasn’t been one beneficial mutation ever discovered.

Similarities do not prove common ancestors. Textbooks say monkeys and humans have 97% similar DNA, then come to a conclusion that monkeys and humans have a common ancestor. This conclusion is not scientific, but a belief that promotes the evolution theory. This could be evidence that God created different life forms to have similarities, just like a carpenter creates different houses with similar structures. To say similarities between different species is evidence of evolution is faulty logic. Anything can be related depending on what you want to compare!

Fossils Are Not Evidence Of Evolution: The very existence of thousands of fossils found in all parts of the world more likely indicates that there was a worldwide flood. Animals and plants that die today do not become fossils unless they are buried rapidly under layers of mud. Textbooks often state that “fossil evidence shows that organisms have been changing continuously since life first apperared on earth.” Statements like this are not scientifically valid. Nobody can know this as a fact of science since no one observed the formation of life or new life forms. No one has ever documented a genuine transitional fossil linking different kinds of animals. If the fossil remains of an animal are found in the ground, there is no way to know if it had any descendants! Many textbooks claim that missing links have been found. This is not true! Many so-called missing links such as “Piltdown Man,” “Nebraska Man,” “Neanderthal Man,” and “Lucy” have been proven to be frauds or misidentified. No missing links exist between different kinds of animals, as many evolutionists have admitted. Not only can the intermediates (link between 2 different kinds of animals) not be found, they cannot even be imagined! How can an animal with half wing and half leg survive? It couldn’t fly and it couldn’t run! In addition, who would it marry? And who would its offspring marry? The evolutionists must imagine that these same changes happened to two individuals of the opposite sex, at the same time, in the same location! Nobody has ever observed any animal change into any other kind of animal. The so-called fossil record doesn’t exist!

Geologic Column is supposed to be layers (strata) of the earth representing different time periods laid down over billions of years. Creationists though understand that nearly all of these layers were formed rapidly during a global flood. The general lack of erosion between the layers and the existence of many fossilized trees that extend straight up through many different layers indicate that these layers were not formed slowly over billions of years. Textbooks arrange life forms from so-called simple to complex and give an age to each rock layer, based on how long evolutionists think it would take these life forms to evolve from one kind into another. Today, evolutionists date the rock strata by the fossils they contain, then turn around and date the fossils by the strata they are in! This is called circular reasoning! Even if fossils were found in order from so-called simple to complex, (and they are not) it would not prove the evolution theory. Order of burial does not prove any relationship. If I was to get buried on top of a rabbit, does that prove it is my grandfather? The geologic column isn’t found anywhere in the world, except in the textbooks!

Dinosaurs Lived With People: Many people would think you’re crazy if you told them dinosaurs lived with humans. There is more evidence dinosaurs lived with humans, then there is evidence that dinosaurs lived before humans. Textbooks say statements like “dinosaurs lived millions of years before man was around” as if it were a fact. There is no evidence supporting this, only statements to promote the evolution theory! Let’s look at the facts and decide what to believe… Dinosaur wasn’t a word until 1841. Before that time, they were known as dragons. There are thousands of dragon legends throughout history. Encyclopedias in the 1500’s describe dragons as rare living animals. There are many ancient drawings and artifacts of dinosaurs found all over the world. In 1496 the Bishop of Carlisle, Richard Bell, was buried in Carlisle Cathedral in the U.K. His tomb is inlaid with brass, with 2 long necked dinosaurs engraved upon it. The Vikings in 1000 A.D. carved dragons as their figure heads on the front of their ships. In Cambodia, a Buddhist temple called Ta Prohm was constructed in 1186 and contains a carving of a stegosaurus dinosaur. Over 1100 Inca Ceremonial Burial Stones were found in tombs in Peru during the 1930's. About 500 of these stones have realistic and accurate depiction of dinosaurs. In 1571, the Spanish conquistadors were the first to report burial stones with dinosaurs carved on them. Why would people in ancient times carve dinosaur pictures if they never lived together? The city of Nerluc, France was renamed to Tarasque in honor of the dragon killed there. In 300 B.C, Alexander the Great reported that his soldiers were scared by dragons when they conquered part of India. Marco Polo who lived in China for 17 years, reported in 1271 A.D. that the emperor raised dragons to pull his chariots in parades. Fossilized dinosaur and human footprints were discovered side by side and overlapping each other in Glen Rose Texas.

Fire-Breathing Dragons: It is scientifically possible that fire-breathing dragons could have existed. The Bombardier Beetle is half an inch long and it can explode a jet of hot, noxious fumes at its enemies. Imagine a creature thousands of times larger with the same type of mechanism! The T-Rex’s skulls has many hollow compartments all connected to its sinus cavities. These compartments might have held explosive chemicals which were needed to breath-fire. If dragons did exist with humans, then maybe some of the stories about them being hunted were true? Many dinosaurs also died from Noah’s Flood, and their fossils prove it. For truthful information about dinosaurs, go to www.TrueAuthority.com

Basic Chemistry Does Not Support The Evolution Of Life: The evolution theory has not been able to explain why earth’s atmosphere has so much oxygen. Too many chemical processes should have absorbed oxygen on an evolving earth. Besides, if the early earth had oxygen in its atmosphere, compounds (called amino acids) needed for life to evolve would have been destroyed by oxidation. But if there had been no oxygen, there would have been no ozone (a form of oxygen) in the upper atmosphere. Without ozone to shield the earth, the sun’s ultraviolet radiation would quickly destroy life. The only known way for both ozone and life to be here is for both to come into existence simultaneously –in other words, by creation. For more evidence disproving evolution, go to www.CreationScience.com

Please Help Me expose the lies about evolution! Email me and I’ll send you the original so you can print out several copies to give out. If you have any questions about this subject, then please email me at ArizonaRush@yahoo.com

Can fossil records be used to determine the first of any species including humanoids? If so this can not be an objective approach.

Some time ago the fossils of the oldest known humanoid were found in Thailand. This in no manner indicates that our species originated in Thailand. This is just the oldest humanoid fossil found and not the first humanoid.

Skull fossil 'oldest human remains'
Ananova.com, Tuesday 30th October 2001

Scientists believe pieces of fossilised skull found in Thailand are the oldest remains of early humans.
Thai experts reportedly claim the remains, belonging to the ancestor of modern man, homo erectus, date back over 20 million years.
They may re-write history and provide evidence that human life started in Asia and not in Africa as previously thought.
The previous earliest confirmed remains of the species were found in the Rift Valley in East Africa and in South Africa. They are up to one million years old.
Archaeologists believe homo erectus migrated from Africa to Asia and Europe one million years ago.
Recent dating techniques, however, suggest some remains discovered on Indonesia's Java island and the Caucasus mountains may be over two million years old.
The new findings by the research team from the Office of Atomic Energy for Peace (OAEP) and Mahidol University offer further evidence that Asia gave birth to modern man.
Somporn Chongkum, of the OAEP, told The Nation: "The latest discovery in Thailand is significant to the study of human history. It shows that it is possible that Asia is the origin of modern man."
The OAEP says tests show the fossils belonged to a prehistoric man about two metres tall and dated back 20-25 million years.