Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
About Traditional Art / Hobbyist Dylan88/Male/Canada Recent Activity
Deviant for 1 Year
Needs Core Membership
Statistics 50 Deviations 670 Comments 5,326 Pageviews
×

Newest Deviations

No Dromaeosaur In Particular by leptoceratops No Dromaeosaur In Particular :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 12 6 77th Montgomery's Highlanders (Britain 7yw ) by leptoceratops 77th Montgomery's Highlanders (Britain 7yw ) :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 4 0 Hort Frei Infanterie NCO (Prussia 7 years war) by leptoceratops Hort Frei Infanterie NCO (Prussia 7 years war) :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 5 0 1st Braganca Infantry (Portugal 7 years war) by leptoceratops 1st Braganca Infantry (Portugal 7 years war) :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 5 0 Sciurumimus by leptoceratops Sciurumimus :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 11 2 Pterodactylus Kochi by leptoceratops Pterodactylus Kochi :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 14 2 Majungasaurus  by leptoceratops Majungasaurus :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 28 13 Sordes pilosus by leptoceratops Sordes pilosus :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 18 6 Smilodon fatalis  by leptoceratops Smilodon fatalis :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 13 2 moreexperimentingwithdigitalart(nemicolopterus) by leptoceratops moreexperimentingwithdigitalart(nemicolopterus) :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 5 3 SENATVS POPVLVS QUE ROMANVS by leptoceratops SENATVS POPVLVS QUE ROMANVS :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 3 0 Insanity by leptoceratops Insanity :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 15 6 Napping Carno couple, featuring annoying shadow! by leptoceratops Napping Carno couple, featuring annoying shadow! :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 10 3 An ankylosaurid by leptoceratops An ankylosaurid :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 7 20 Dodo by leptoceratops Dodo :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 9 7 My favourite dinosaur by leptoceratops My favourite dinosaur :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 6 4

Favourites

Cretaceous Sunset by FeatherNerd Cretaceous Sunset :iconfeathernerd:FeatherNerd 152 19 Totally White Spinosaurus by Lythroversor Totally White Spinosaurus :iconlythroversor:Lythroversor 148 11 The Impeachable Giant by Wyatt-Andrews-Art The Impeachable Giant :iconwyatt-andrews-art:Wyatt-Andrews-Art 38 27 Azhdarchidae sp. by Wyatt-Andrews-Art Azhdarchidae sp. :iconwyatt-andrews-art:Wyatt-Andrews-Art 46 25 The River Styx by Wyatt-Andrews-Art The River Styx :iconwyatt-andrews-art:Wyatt-Andrews-Art 68 8 Showing your age by Zhombah Showing your age :iconzhombah:Zhombah 86 26 CULVERINE by moonxels CULVERINE :iconmoonxels:moonxels 160 11 War of the Roses Armor 6 by Andaltno War of the Roses Armor 6 :iconandaltno:Andaltno 20 2 15th Century archer 3 by Skane-Smeden 15th Century archer 3 :iconskane-smeden:Skane-Smeden 28 8 Infantryman With A Billhook by RyanRyzzo Infantryman With A Billhook :iconryanryzzo:RyanRyzzo 65 12 XI century duellists by RyanRyzzo XI century duellists :iconryanryzzo:RyanRyzzo 55 15 The British are coming! by RyanRyzzo The British are coming! :iconryanryzzo:RyanRyzzo 30 6 Thorin and Company by RyanRyzzo Thorin and Company :iconryanryzzo:RyanRyzzo 34 15 Random spearmen by RyanRyzzo Random spearmen :iconryanryzzo:RyanRyzzo 46 9 Medieval thing by RyanRyzzo Medieval thing :iconryanryzzo:RyanRyzzo 17 9 Warrior dudes by RyanRyzzo Warrior dudes :iconryanryzzo:RyanRyzzo 24 11

Groups

Activity



You're never too old for what you love
Stephen Hawking.StarChild.jpg
I am very bad at words for grief, so I will say little.
Sorry to bother but I am back, I have had a bit of bad luck lately with flu, frostbite, foot-fungus,work stuff, and lazy indolence of a disgusting degree to boot.
  • Listening to: the voices
  • Reading: fanny hill
  • Watching: my sanity slip out of multiple orphuses
  • Playing: five finger filet
  • Eating: your girl
  • Drinking: absinthe
So Its been a while...

The offending text (humansarefree.com/2013/12/9-sc…)

Fossils prove the sudden emergence of a new species out of nowhere, complete with characteristics unknown in any other species. The fossil record has no intermediate or transitional forms. This is popularly known as the "missing link" problem, and it exists in all species. The missing link problem is getting worse, not better, with the discovery of more fossils.

No one credible has ever used the term "missing link problem" your attempt to make yourself look smart by phrasing it in that way just looks foolish. Every species is transitional and the fossil record proves that, but I don't need to use the fossil record even with modern animals speciation is apparent like in cockatoos for example

Cacatua galerita Tas 2.jpgNacktaugenkakadu Little Corella.jpg
Cacatua galerita                C. alba                                C. (Licmetis) sanguinea


  Lophochroa leadbeateri   Eolophus roseicapilla                Callocephalon fimbriatum

As you can see all of these species are similar but distinct, some are more similar than others, and that is how we classify them.

The missing links are not being discovered, which proves they never existed. Darwin assumed transitional forms would be discovered in the fossil record over time, but that has not been the case. The fossil record, or lack thereof, is a major embarrassment to evolutionists.

The fossil record is a serious rebuke of the Theory of Evolution. New species explode onto the scene out of nowhere. New fossil discoveries continue to prove evolution to be wrong.

Fossil of complete Archaeopteryx, including indentations of feathers on wings and tail


Evolution: A Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton

Michael Denton says,
"Despite the tremendous increase in geological activity in every corner of the globe and despite the discovery of many strange and hitherto unknown forms, the infinitude of connecting links has still not been discovered and the fossil record is about as discontinuous as it was when Darwin was writing the Origin."
First off, let me tell you that using some guy with university degrees to pomp your argument is sad, but even he though a believer in an intelligent creator still finds creationism absurd. Second off this quote is misinformed at best, seeing as new fossils specimens that change the way we think are discovered almost every month it seems like sometimes and to assert that paleontologist have just been spinning their wheels for since the nineteenth century is complete bollocks.

A reader of the Michael Denton's book says,
"Denton a Molecular Biologist removes all of the supports (if there ever were any) from Darwin's theory of macro-evolution (continuity of life). Denton blasts all of the previous arguments made by the pro-evolutionists showing that there is essentially no support of macro-evolution in the fossil record. He also, clearly demonstrates that there is no support coming from his specialty molecular biology. In the end the only sound explanation he can make is that life is profoundly discontinuous."

Well no, but who is this "reader" anyway? was that the best you could come up with?


Harvard Professor Gould claims that evolution occurs in spurts, not gradually. This theory attempts to explain the lack of continuity in the fossil record. However, this theory is more troublesome than the gradual change theory. Large jumps or spurts in the fossil record don't prove evolution at all. In fact, they disprove evolution.

No you imbecile that is not what punctuated equilibrium is, punctuated equilibrium is simply an observed phenomena, that being when an animal is well suited to its environment it tends towards staying similar and when its environment changes there is alot of pressure to adapt or die so change happens ad a comparatively rapid rate
Related image
The theory that evolution can occur in spurts, because the fossil record shows it did not occur gradually, is a wild stretch of the imagination. Species have some characteristics similar to other species, but similarity doesn't prove any evolutionary link whatsoever. There are more than missing links in biology. There are entire missing chains in 100% of the branches of the evolutionary tree.

 You say link and chain like they have some kind of quantifiable meaning, if by missing links you mean every ancestor to everything ever than you are just being daft. If I give you most of a puzzle and and then you tell me that I will never know what it is but that you do know and what you describe is not indicated by the pieces we do have then that makes you wrong.
Image result for partially complete puzzle
(pretty sure its a basket of fruit)

Many species are dependant upon another species for their coexistence. Hummingbirds and flowers are a good example. The flower would not be pollinated and would become extinct without the bird. They are said to have coevolved together. That is a stretch of the imagination without any basis in science. There are hundreds of these examples that cannot be explained.

HOW?! What about symbiosis can't be explained? A member of a species with a particular habit of interacting with another organism in a way that happens to benefit both of them is successful and its descendant that have traits that make this symbiotic proses easier or better are more likely to be successful, where is the mystery?


Charles Darwin had concern about his theory of natural selection. He knew that a failure to find the missing transitional links would seriously cripple his theory of evolution, but he was hopeful the missing links would be found some day.


and the day came in 1861, when Archaeopteryx Lithographica was discovered.

Well, guess what? He died not finding them. Evolutionists have never found the missing links. Each time they announce finding one, it is later proven to be false.

The only thing false here is you.
Related image
  • Listening to: the voices
  • Reading: fanny hill
  • Watching: my sanity slip out of multiple orphuses
  • Playing: five finger filet
  • Eating: your girl
  • Drinking: absinthe
deeply sorry for the inactivity (audience: who are you?)

The offending text (humansarefree.com/2013/12/9-sc…)

Evolutionists are going ape over "Ape-Girl"

if by "going ape" you mean acknowledging that the Australopithecus afarensis specimen AL 288-1 (Lucy/Dinkinesh) is a bipedal hominid then yes we are "going ape"?

(there is no such word as evolutionist by the way)

The fossilized bones of a new animal have been found in Ethiopia near the site where "Lucy" was discovered many years ago

and this is? (Side note: further down I realized He was taking about DIK-1/1 (Selam)

By the way, Lucy was a monkey, not an early humanoid. The number of bones of the Ape-girl skeleton are unique because Lucy had only a few head fragments.

Yes and so are you, but I don't see how having few head fragments remaining is "unique" many fossils in this area of the word from this time period are poorly preserved compared to some.

This find gives us a lot of information about the animal because major parts of the skeleton were unearthed (assuming these are all from the same animal).

Yes the most interesting part of the specimen is its pelvis which I have addressed in a previous entry. and when multiple highly similar bones are in the same layer and and very close in proximity and show now signs of being disturbed then assuming otherwise would be daft.

It has teeth in the jaw and is said to also have unerupted teeth still within the jaw. The evolutionists call the animal a "human-like" female child about three years of age and an "individual." This is not a "human-like" fossil. It is an "ape-like" fossil because it was an ape.

Saying "It's not a human it's an ape" is like saying "That's not a car its a Toyota".

The evolutionists call the animal a "transitional species" and a human ancestor even though it has a head exactly like a modern-day ape. The jaw is thrust forward and the forehead pushed back and slanted. The true appearance is more easily seen from side picture below.

This is very deceptive, you ignore the variation in ape skull shapes (including your own) and that we know for a fact that this is an Australopithecus afanesis and even without the skull it is undeniably so. but he ignores this because that would cast quite a bit of shade on his already shaky argument.

Ape-girl also has arms "that dangled down to just above the knees. It also had gorilla-like shoulder blades which suggest it could have been skilled at swinging through trees."

(Du na na na na na na na, Na na na na na na na na na Ape Girl!) A. afarensis was semi-arboreal and had many nonhuman traits, hence Australopithecus afarensis and not Homo afarensis, also it it funny how you only point out the traits that support your argument and nothing else, because 'science can be fully trusted, until it contradicts my preconceived beliefs that is.'

So, it looks like an ape, it has a head like an ape, it has arms like an ape, it has shoulder blades like an ape - It is obviously an ape, not a human, pre-human or humanoid. This animal is simply a young ape. Its size is as would be expected for a young modern-day ape.
Related image
Yes  they are.

The age of this fossilized animal is also very much in doubt. Scientists many years ago claimed a tooth found was Nebraska Man, a pre-human fossil millions of years old. They determined the age of the tooth. The scientists had sculptured an entire ape-like skeleton from information they found in one tooth. These lies were exposed when real scientists found the tooth to be from a peccary, an animal similar to (and closely related to) pigs.


I really don't get this game of Chinese whispers that you creationists are playing with the whole "Nebraska man" thing, literally everyone and their parrot has talked about this (come to think of it I might have in a previous entry) so I won't waste my time or yours.

'Lucy's baby' found in Ethiopia - BBC News - September 21, 2006
"The 3.3-million-year-old fossilised remains of a human-like child have been unearthed in Ethiopia's Dikika region. The find consists of the whole skull, the entire torso, and important parts of the upper and lower limbs. CT scans reveal unerupted teeth still in the jaw, a detail that makes scientists think the individual may have been about three years old when she died."
Remarkably, some quite delicate bones not normally preserved in the fossilisation process are also present, such as the hyoid, or tongue, bone. The hyoid bone reflects how the voice box is built and perhaps what sounds a species can produce.

Judging by how well it was preserved, the skeleton may have come from a body that was quickly buried by sediment in a flood, the researchers said. 
"In my opinion, afarensis is a very good transitional species for what was before four million years ago and what came after three million years," Dr Alemseged told BBC science correspondent Pallab Ghosh. [The species had] a mixture of ape-like and human-like features. This puts afarensis in a special position to play a pivotal role in the story of what we are and where we come from."

The news is literally the worst source of information you could go to but in this case ok.

Climbing Ability
"This early ancestor possessed primitive teeth and a small brain but it stood upright and walked on two feet. There is considerable argument about whether the Dikika girl could also climb trees like an ape.

This climbing ability would require anatomical equipment like long arms, and the 'Lucy' species had arms that dangled down to just above the knees. It also had gorilla-like shoulder blades which suggest it could have been skilled at swinging through trees. But the question is whether such features indicate climbing ability or are just 'evolutionary baggage'."

and?

Evolution is in trouble. The growth of biological knowledge is producing scientific facts that contradict the evolutionary theory, not confirm it, a fact that famous Prof. Steven Jay Gould of Harvard has described as "the trade secret of paleontology."

No it doesn't, none of this contradicts anything we already know, and also you are completely misrepresenting Prof.Gould's views a better quote would be:


 "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils. Yet Darwin was so wedded to gradualism that he wagered his entire theory on a denial of this literal record:Darwin's argument still persists as the favored escape of most paleontologists from the embarrassment of a record that seems to show so little of evolution [directly]. In exposing its cultural and methodological roots, I wish in no way to impugn the potential validity of gradualism (for all general views have similar roots). I only wish to point out that it is never "seen" in the rocks. Paleontologists have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study. 
For several years, Niles Eldredge of the American Museum of Natural History and I have been advocating a resolution to this uncomfortable paradox. We believe that Huxley was right in his warning [1]. The modern theory of evolution does not require gradual change. In fact, the operation of Darwinian processes should yield exactly what we see in the fossil record. [It is gradualism we should reject, not Darwinism.]"

(the words in square brackets were added after) this is a criticism of gradualism, and a very valid criticism of what most now consider an outdated view. tweaking to already evidenced ideas will always happen as we learn more that is how learning works.

The fossil record simply does not support the evolutionary theory, which claims there once existed a series of successive forms leading to the present-day organism. The theory states that infinitesimal changes within each generation evolve into a new species, but the scientific fact remains. They don't.

Yes it does, you know what it doesn't support, your magic sky-daddy Abracadabra'ing everything into existence all at once.

Related image
Stephen Hawking.StarChild.jpg
I am very bad at words for grief, so I will say little.

deviantID

leptoceratops's Profile Picture
leptoceratops
Dylan
Artist | Hobbyist | Traditional Art
Canada
i do sketches sometimes...
Interests

Friends

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconzhombah:
Zhombah Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you ever so much for the watch!
Reply
:iconleptoceratops:
leptoceratops Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
you're welcome :)
Reply
:icondinobirdman:
DinoBirdMan Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2017  Student Artist
Thanks for two faves and watch! :)
Reply
:iconleptoceratops:
leptoceratops Featured By Owner Nov 15, 2017  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
your welcome :)
Reply
:iconglavenychus:
Glavenychus Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2017  Hobbyist General Artist
Happy Birthday!!
Reply
:iconleptoceratops:
leptoceratops Featured By Owner Nov 11, 2017  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thank you!
Reply
:icontigon1monster:
Tigon1Monster Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2017
Happy Birthday!
Reply
:iconleptoceratops:
leptoceratops Featured By Owner Nov 11, 2017  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thank you :)
Reply
:icontigon1monster:
Tigon1Monster Featured By Owner Nov 11, 2017
Your Welcome.
Reply
:iconleptoceratops:
leptoceratops Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2017  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
:)
Reply
(1 Reply)
Add a Comment: