3
   

Darwinists: Persisting despite the evidence

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 May, 2009 02:00 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
MAcroevolution, as a mechanism, is only denied by the Cretinists because they deny everything that comes close to being evidence.


Let's see the filmed evidence of an abortion being performed. You can use keyhole cameras now so we can see it all and put it on telly. Where's the liberal evidence that the sport would be as popular as it is if it was shown the evidence rather than just the sanitised "pro-choice" verbal.

Quote:
Hows the search for the ARK going?


How the $15 billion, and counting, search going for what happened just after the big bang?

Quote:
ANy evidence of Cambrian "explosion" mammoths yet?


There's a raft full every Sat night in the pub.

Quote:
What have ya gotta say about all the fossil birds and prebirds theyve been finding throughout the world?


It's so sad don't you think. Look at Ida. Broken leg. Obviously hadn't been eaten otherwise it would be brown and sausage shaped with a point on each end. Must have been left behind by its mates because it couldn't keep up and died of a broken heart. All alone. Its pitiful squeaks getting fainter and fainter. That's how a kid with a clean head might well see it not having a good grasp on 47 million years. And how many more must there be waiting for scientists to uncover them. It really is sad. Not really suitable for the formative years is it now? At least I don't think so. Morbid. Necro stuff. You could get a nation of Allen Ginsbergs.

Quote:
Any evidence of a FLOOD yet?


There's plenty of that around.

Quote:
How fast was sea floor spreading going for 3 events of continental drift to have occured since the Vendean.


At the risk of making myself look foolish I'll take a quick guess. 33.333 mph.

Quote:
When did the Vendean begin (in gunga time?)


When our glorious Christian culture defined it and gave it a name so that silly sods like you could go about thinking you have your head round it to the nearest few million years. Has it ended yet?

Quote:
How come we can use isotopes to create energy but we cant use them to calculate time? (same equations govern both)


What's time? As far as what we call time, like "Time, gentlemen please", I understood that isotopes can be used to calculate time. I've heard of atomic clocks.


0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 May, 2009 02:17 pm
The real question about the "big bang" idea is this: If I were to somehow or other transport myself to a place and time two minutes prior to the big bang, would my electronic Timex watch stop working since supposedly time didn't exist prior to the big bang???
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 May, 2009 02:17 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I honestly don 't think so.
I like the chuckles as much as the next guy,
but I just don 't see it.


Too much science Dave. It is a cheerless subject. And stuff written by people with the same problem only gears it up in proportion as it flatters you by enabling you to drop those "seems to know" words into your cocktail party discourse.

Perhaps a study of Rabelais and Flaubert and Joyce would help.

Quote:
How woud Carl Sagan have put it?
Billion$ of billion$ . . . .


He wouldn't surely?

Quote:
Did u get Sagan in England?


I doubt it. I've seen a couple of things he wrote and they seemed to me to be both unoriginal, unmemorable, badly expressed and stupid.

Perhaps we have cross-cultural immiscibility. I remember reading Ezra Pound on that matter. It was in an essay on Henry James I think.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 May, 2009 06:43 pm
@spendius,
Who is claiming it is the missing link?
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 06:51 am
@gungasnake,
Oh gunasnake the man you had just quoted as support for your claim that evolution is a junk science got his PHD from a diploma mill by the name of the California Pacific University that was later shut down for that reason by the state of California.

Yes sir you have high power real scientists backing your attack on the field of evolution not pay for hacks that are just producing good sounding nonsense for far right religion foundations<NOT>.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 07:24 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
Who is claiming it is the missing link?


The "experts" the BBC wheeled out did say a few "might be" type things and "bringing us nearer" stuff but, and I suppose it is unfortunate in some ways if not in others, depending upon where one sits, these word formulations do rest in the public mind as the real thing.

Put it this way--they did not actually say it is the missing link but they gave a distinct impression that it is, or very likely to be.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 08:21 am
@BillRM,
http://actingschmacting.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/broken-record.jpg
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 08:30 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
from a diploma mill by the name of the California Pacific University that was later shut down for that reason by the state of California.


But it was only shut down for practicing too crudely and more efficiently, dispensing with the minuets I mean, what all the other universities were practicing. It was quite simply indecorous. Which is to say that not enough money had changed hands.
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 08:52 am
http://www.icr.org/article/4637/

Quote:

'Missing Link' Ida Is Just Media Hype
by Christine Dao*

Scientists and media outlets around the world are praising “Ida,” the primate fossil hailed as the long-sought-after “missing link” in the human evolutionary theory.

In a major public relations campaign, Ida was unveiled in New York City yesterday, May 19, 2009, and will make a stop in London May 26 before returning to its owners at the University of Oslo’s Natural History Museum. BBC1 will air a documentary based on the fossil the same day as its UK unveiling, and Little, Brown"publisher of the popular Twilight fiction series"put out a book about the find today. Even Internet search engine Google posted a special banner in Ida’s honor.

But despite the hype, a whirlwind of questions still surrounds the discovery. First, the environment in which the fossil was kept for 20 years is unclear. Ida, who bears the technical name Darwinius masillae in honor of this year’s 200th anniversary of British naturalist Charles Darwin’s birth, was found in 1983 by an amateur fossil hunter at Germany’s Messel Pit. He kept it in unknown conditions before deciding to sell it through a dealer two years ago.

Second, the purchaser’s stated motivation for obtaining the fossil seemed to emphasize business over research. University of Oslo paleontologist Jørn Hurum nicknamed the fossil “Ida” after his own small daughter and told UK news outlet The Guardian, “You need an icon or two in a museum to drag people in…this is our Mona Lisa and it will be our Mona Lisa for the next 100 years.”1 Hurum purchased the fossil for an undisclosed sum from the dealer based on seeing only three photographs and not the actual fossil, a “huge gamble” that suggests pressure to make some kind of return on the university’s investment.

Third, the fossil was hailed as humanity’s missing evolutionary link before the technical details of the find were published. This strategy effectively prevented the scientific community from evaluating the data and possibly calling a halt to the campaign on account of the fact that Ida has no transitional features and is therefore irrelevant to the evolutionary hypothesis of human development. Paleontologists are speaking out, but their voices are thus far being drowned out by the hype. Richard Kay from Duke University told Science that “the data is cherry-picked.”2

Ida, though an amazingly well-preserved fossil, will prove to be another Lucy, Java Man, Archaeopteryx, Confuciusornis, Pakicetus, and Eosimias. It will undoubtedly join the growing collection of fossils that were once thought to be missing links, but that upon further study turned out to be extinct creatures with no transitional features.

Look for more news soon on detailed analyses of Ida from ICR.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 09:08 am
@spendius,
One way or another the attacks on evolution is not driven by anything but wealthy foundations of the far right Christian kind who paid hacks to come up with good sounding nonsense that people like gungasnake can then post.

I even remember hearing some fool on TV attacking evolution on the grounds of the second law of thermodynamics of all things. Ending up shouting at my TV look up at the sun you fool earth is not a closed system and that law does not apply to earth as long as the sun can produce energy.

Just as I ended up shouting when some fool or other claimed without challenge on TV that the US was founded as a Christian country on Christian principles by the Christian founding fathers. Fox network was the last time I hear this being stated as a fact without challenge.

Lying for Jesus in any case is a ongoing and in a least some cases a highly profitable business to be in.

Somehow I can not bring myself to the conclusion that gungasnake is some honest but stupid fool and if not why is he posting what he know is nonsense here that was written by hacks?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 09:11 am
@gungasnake,
Believe it or not, I can support gungas post but not for a reason that it "defies evolution". Instead, the fossil is one that , has NOT been vetted for its lineage. UNLIKE , say archeopteryx , which has about 3 intermediate featrures twixt reptile and bird, this one needs to be more carefully detailed. EG, I see a very human like forepaw that almost has a fully opposable thumb. The teeth are lemurid. Thats where I stop. Ive read the articles wanselk posted and they help not a bit because they are purely descriptive. I think that we are about 2 years too early on publication of these data.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 09:13 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
Look for more news soon on detailed analyses of Ida from ICR.


HA HA HA HA HA HA HA< thats rich. "Detailed Analyses" HA Ha HA HA HA HA
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 09:22 am
@farmerman,
Farmerman no one as far as I know is defending what a few newspapers imply in order to increase their readership.

It is an interesting find and at the moment that all it is.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 11:01 am
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

Quote:
Fat-Cat Theocrat Funds Creationism Crusade....


Proves even a fat cat can come up on the right side of something here and there, doesn't it?

Bully for the fat cat. Evolution is junk science and, as junk science goes, a spectacularly evil and dangerous variety of such and getting rid of it is a service to the world for fat and thin cats alike.

Again this is not about Christianity. I RECOMMEND Christianity if anybody needs a recommendation but if all you need is something better than evolutionism, pretty much anything would do, that isn't asking for much. Rastafari is better, voodoo is better, and santeria is better.



Gunga, by what reasoning
is genetic evolution "spectacularly evil"?





`
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 02:06 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Gunga, by what reasoning
is genetic evolution "spectacularly evil"?

This aughta be good.

Go get im David. Smile
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 03:02 pm
When Lord Kelvin did his calculation of the age of the earth. He did it based upon how long it would have taken to go from a "molten" state to the tempreature he recognized at the time he did his calcs.
He came up with a number of 400 million years, which, according to him was "correct" UNLESS, there would be another form of heat that He was not aware of. So, Mr Thompson left himself some wiggle room and now our age of the earth is determined from decay product in zircons in meteorites and zircons in stable shields.

NO significant errors have been noted from conchordia curves and thus, the methods are self checking.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 05:07 pm
@farmerman,
You are treating this nonsense attacks on science with one hell of a lot more respect then I can bring to bear.

I take my hat off to you in dealing with all the silly attacks that are constantly being generated.

Wonder if next the 'problems' with the moon orbit will be brought up. I hope not as my celestial mechanics course is 30 plus years in the past.

In any case there is no end to this silliness.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 05:22 pm
@BillRM,
You're post is circular Bill. It proves its own conclusion.

It was very silly. effemm has dealt with nothing. I wouldn't like to try to estimate the number of questions he has been asked and failed to answer. He has even had recourse to Ignore on a number of occasions. And that's bottom of the barrel stuff in any serious debate.

BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 05:54 pm
@spendius,
Spendius none of us here can deal with all the thousands of silly attacks that a wealth foundation can dream up by carefully picking and choosing facts and narrow elements of theories and then spinning it like crazy.

As I said my background and most others does not allow us to see the weakness and falsehoods hidden in all those attacks.

That fact however does not indicate that there is not weakness and falsehoods contain in them.

I do know that not one of the claims or concerns of the Discovery Foundation and it like had pass scientific peer review and all the claims in areas of knowledge I do have a firm understanding of have been complete nonsense.

Once more the burden of proof in attacking/changing of any accepted scientific theory is with the attackers and that burden have been completely out of reach for the anti-evolution crowd.

At lest two Federal judges had hear this issue in relationship to teaching of science in our high schools and after hearing experts on both sides had rule that there is no reason to teach ID as a scientific theory.

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 06:35 pm
@BillRM,
People like gunga snake actually believe in their hokum. He will cherry pick science in order to try to make a point of debate, conveniently forgetting the bases from which the science he wishes to deny actually support the science and not his beliefs.

He wishes to deny "intermediate fossils" , yet their very tructure tells us more than his denials. Also he denies the age of the earth yetr, on another thread he is upping Nuclear Power, the design of which is heavily dependent upon the measurable decay of radioisotopes. Gunga wasnts it one way but conveniently fails to see the counter evidence . Hes a fraud and a trog.
However, hes free to babble away . The only thing we should be mos concerened about are the numbers of american kids that pop in and out of the line (unless they are too busy doing narcissistic **** like posting on facebook)
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 07/12/2024 at 11:42:47