‘It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as a student, from Trueman’s Ostrea/Gryphaea to Carruthers’ Zaphrentis delanouei, have now been “debunked”. Similarly, my own experinece [sic] of more than twenty years looking for evolutionary lineages among the Mesozoic Brachiopoda has proved them equally elusive.’
Ager, D.V., The nature of the fossil record, Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 87(2):131–160, 1976
 | EDUARDO on O significado de “Dia… |
 | Joao lurdes on Os bicos das áves e a irrelevâ… |
 | Mats on George Smith e o Dilúvio de… |
 | Agenor G. Oliveira on Quando porém vier o Filho do H… |
 | José Costa on Porque é que os homens possuem… |
 | Hezio on George Smith e o Dilúvio de… |
 | Tiago de Oliveira Bo… on Mais uma “revisão”… |
 | Henrique Lima on A existência de limites biológ… |
 | João on A historicidade do Dilúvi… |
 | Carlos J. Gomes on Será o Senhor Jesus uma cópia… |
 | Marget Hoose on Ex-ateu revela lado oculto do… |
 | Anderson on A existência de limites biológ… |
 | jair on Cientista Isaac Newton pergunt… |
 | Antônio Aparecido Ma… on Os dinossauros e a Bíblia |
 | corsariofox@gmail.co… on Criacionismo Científico: O Obs… |
Darwinismo 
O próprio refuta isto melhor que eu:
“For a century and a half the geological world has been dominated, one might even say brain-washed, by the gradualistic uniformitarianism of Charles Lyell. Any suggestion of ‘catastrophic’ events has been rejected as old-fashioned, unscientific and even laughable. This is partly due to the extremism of some of Cuvier’s followers, though not of Cuvier himself.
On that side too were the obviously untenable views of bible-oriented fanatics, obsessed with myths such as Noah’s flood, and of classicists thinking of Nemesis. That is why I think it necessary to include the following ‘disclaimer’: in view of the misuse that my words have been put to in the past, I wish to say that nothing in this book should be taken out of context and thought in any way to support the views of the ‘creationists’ (who I refuse to call ‘scientific’).” [Ager’s emphasis]
Reference: Ager, Derek, 1993, 1995 (paperback edition), The New Catastrophism: The Importance of the Rare Event in Geological History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Great Britain.
LikeLike
Rui,
ele não refutou o que ele disse. Dizer-se que todas as evidências que ele foi ensinado numa altura foram descartadas noutra altura,não é refutado com o “disclaimer” de que ele não quer mal citado pelos criacionistas.
Num ponto ele fala em como as supostas evidências foram sendo cientificamente refutadas, e nouto ponto ele fala sobre o uniformitarianismo e o catastrofismo.
LikeLike