Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

@Quehoniaomath,

Lucy ws Never a direct ancestor. She an her fossil relatives are, at best, members of the group of hominids that include us. She is not a common ancestor of Hss, but may be a common ancestor of other extinct hominids and hominims.(Lucy is a hominim). She has many features that clearly show her closely related to apes>BUT, she walked upright because her pelvis shows the structural changes inherent with early bipedalism.
Evolution evidence from fossils is rarely a "direct line" , its a dog's brekfst of specimens most of whom show a composite of related advancing traits as time moved along.The hominids are all extinct though.
If you look at bird -like reptiles of the Triassic and Cretaceous, there are no "Last links" between proto avian dromeosaurs and Aves, its all a statistical game of increasing "Bird-like" features piled on fossil specimens , all of whom went extinct, save one or two orders.

PS,that article is over 15 years old and nothing new has been presented from the Creationist side whereas in the intervening time , at least 12 other real Hominim and hominid fossil species have been found that show earlier and later advancing structures of"becoming human"

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Heres some more "evidence" from a later specimen of Au Afarensis that shows the developed "arch of the foot" that evidences that LUCY's relatives walked upright.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110210-lucy-feet-walked-feet-science-afarensis-fossil/

"Small Steps" were taken as new features were added on to later hominims and older forms just disappeared. That's what evolution is made of.

0 Replies

And then there is this Just some things to ponder and think about, so not for the regular fundamental religious evolutionist, like fm and other very blind believers.

Quote:

Have any intermediate fossils ever been discovered?

Quote:

- Did Ernst Haeckel admit that the embryo illustrations submitted as evidence of evolution were hoaxes?

Quote:

Have mutations ever been observed to produce beneficial organs?

Quote:

- Is it true that inanimate atoms cannot join together and spontaneously give rise to life?

Quote:

- Is it true that 40 fundamental components need to be present at the same time and working in harmony together in order for the human eye to see?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

these areas of discussion have been praded out on these for a many many times (look up gungasnake-he probably was singly responsible for bringing them up every 6 months or so since 2005).
All the points have bbeen discussed and disposed several times and I don't think the answers hhave changed much. If you think you've got something NEW here, just go back a few hundred pages on the ID threads and see what other Creationists hve tried on A2K.

And you claim that youre not a Creationist.

s far as 40 nucleotide cascades needed for eyesight for humans-it may be the case. The neat thing is that , for every simpler life form, these same nucleotide nd enzyme cascades take fewer and fewer steps
(Except for top sight predators like owls and eagles and tuna fish)

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Just out of curiosity ...regarding this thread dynamics and repeated ad nauseum behavior here...don't you feel like you're talking to a wall? Your scientific and well-thought-out points of logic and provable science are constantly being thwarted and obfuscated. What is the purpose of trying to engage with him? It's for ****-sure it's not stopping his blather and flooding this website with nonsense.

2 Replies

@Ragman,

Quote:

Just out of curiosity ...regarding this thread dynamics and repeated ad nauseum behavior here...don't you feel like you're talking to a wall? Your scientific and well-thought-out points of logic and provable science are constantly being thwarted and obfuscated. What is the purpose of trying to engage with him? It's for ****-sure it's not stopping his blather and flooding this website with nonsense

.

provable science??????????????????????????????????????????????????????

what the **** is HE talking about?!

0 Replies

@farmerman,

I am indeed no creationist.

It seems very very very extremely difficult for you just to even imagine that someone who is not a creationist is against evolution!

WAKE THE **** UP!!!!

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Of course you aren't a creationist. You're just a bad egg.

1 Reply

@parados,

see, that is NOT a creationist! Wink

But seriously folks! How can someone keep on defending a stupid theory for which there is no evidence?? IT IS ALL BASED ON FAITH!!!!!

0 Replies

When Quahog first arrived here, it was with a rant against public education. At that time, he stated that he "didn't have a religious bone in his body." Of course, he's just a troll, and his particular brand of trollery is the contrarian. Apparently, he thinks it makes him look bold and intelligent to deny things which he in fact does not understand. He particularly rails against science, and in the beginning, against physics in particular. That lead me to believe that he is a failed physics major. Whether or not he is, all of his contrarian views he supports with arguments from the christian home schooling nuts and from the creationists. So not only is he a contrarian troll, he hasn't sufficient intelligence and originality to come up with his own arguments--he relies on the religious nutbags for that. I no longer talk to the idiot, and wouldn't be commenting on him, had he not derailed this thread yet again, and this time in particular with anti-evolution arguments ripped directly from crationsist web sites. Ignore him, people. He will eventually tire of the sound of his own voice, and go plaug someone else.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

When Quahog first arrived here, it was with a rant against public education. At that time, he stated that he "didn't have a religious bone in his body." Of course, he's just a troll, and his particular brand of trollery is the contrarian. Apparently, he thinks it makes him look bold and intelligent to deny things which he in fact does not understand. He particularly rails against science, and in the beginning, against physics in particular. That lead me to believe that he is a failed physics major. Whether or not he is, all of his contrarian views he supports with arguments from the christian home schooling nuts and from the creationists. So not only is he a contrarian troll, he hasn't sufficient intelligence and originality to come up with his own arguments--he relies on the religious nutbags for that. I no longer talk to the idiot, and wouldn't be commenting on him, had he not derailed this thread yet again, and this time in particular with anti-evolution arguments ripped directly from crationsist web sites. Ignore him, people. He will eventually tire of the sound of his own voice, and go plaug someone else.

LOL

So, you really don't get it then eh??
Anything to defend the status quo eh?

Just start doing your research and you will find out I am right.

We are being lied on a massive scale.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion. But as long as you don't give any evidence, it is just that, your opinion. And thus, totally insignificant and extremely unimportant.

Anyway, when starting your research what you are not going to do I am sure, but lookup 'cognive dissonance' It is a summary of why you wrote the above. Because you can't handle the truth!

So be it.

2 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Just start doing your research and you will find out I am right.

...

But as long as you don't give any evidence, it is just that, your opinion. And thus, totally insignificant and extremely unimportant.

OW!!! Stop hurting us with your irony.

Next thing you will be telling us the evidence is all in your scrambled egg head.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

Just start doing your research and you will find out I am right.

Research what? ICR? The Discovery Institute?
I don't read Harry Potter and think that its physics. However, you do. You claim youre NOT a Creationist. Why then do you use their lame argument that hve been debunked over and over? Do you even hve the capacity to learn anything?

As I said in the previous page, its a troll feeding an I really should stop. BUT hell, hes like a car wreck.

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

Just out of curiosity ...regarding this thread dynamics and repeated ad nauseum behavior here...don't you feel like you're talking to a wall?

An old Joke: "What's the difference between debating with a Creationist and banging your head against a brick wall?"... "You might eventually make some progress with the brick wall."

1 Reply

But as yet, STILL NO EVIDENCE!!

I only ask:

SHOW US THE EVIDENCE!!!

There IS NONE!

Not in the universities, not in tthe museums, really nowhere!!!!!

Ah well, Hitler told us already:

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/ed/61/89/ed6189949c0b7917a78d01976b8fad2b.jpg

And Mark Twain of course:

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/82/60/97/826097b7d03e69359c760e8288059369.jpg

And then there is Schopenhauer:

http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-all-truth-passes-through-three-stages-first-it-is-ridiculed-second-it-is-violently-opposed-arthur-schopenhauer-164749.jpg

You see, it is a process of unlearning.

Not always simple for some. Wink

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

Problem here is, I am NO creationist. People here really don't get that!

It is possible to see evolution as a hoax, simply, becasue there is NO EVIDENCE.

Not because one is a creationist or whatever.

Actually, it shows he sheer stupidity of black and white thinking by the people who really believe the evolution hoax is a real deal. So, they show they can't think logically at all. Figures, because at biology you don't get a course in logic or crtitical thinking of course. Now, they are totally hooked and addicted to the biggest hoax on earth!

And of course strange people like fm and consorts won't admit this anyway, because they will fall flat on their face.
For them it would need a lot of courage to admit they where wrong for many many many may years.
So, I am not expecting them to change their minds openly. just won't happen.
So, a discussion with those people is futile of oourse.
Maybe one day they will start to doubt their so called 'knowlegde'.
But I won't count on it.

But if they believ it or not:

THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES

NO CLOTHES AT ALL

2 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

The thing is, Quahog, that Schopenauer quote is precisely applicable to the history of the reaction against evolution. You, clearly, are still stuck in the ridicule phase. One hopes you will eventually come to realize that the truth of evolution is self-evident.

Incidentally, if you are not a creationist, why do you keep relying on creatiionist web sites for your material. Copy an unattributed cite of a couple sentences and paste it into a google search box and it will give you its source. Do that with your cite on austraopithecus and it come up with a web site run by a rather notorious Turkish creationist (the "evolutionist" in the cite versus "evolutionary" rules out a bunch of other creationist sites who obviously are cutting and pasting the same crap). And it, and he, and "Science et Vie", and you, are wrong yourselves about Lucy and Australopithecines in general. No hoax ther. Just misinformation from the creationists. Just to take one extremely telling example of many, the location of the foramen magnum in australopithecus skulls shows you're full of crap. Why not, for a change, try a web site which will tell and show you the truth, like http://bio.sunyorange.edu/updated2/pl%20new/71%20hominids%201.htm

As farmerman (who, believe me, is far less "strange" than you are) and the others like rosbourne and setanta have pointed out AND CITED over the hundreds of pages of this discussion, there is oeverwhelming evidence for evolution and NONE for your fantasies.

0 Replies

fm and others, tell me this, did you have ANY course at probablity or logic at all??

1 Reply

Quote:

there is overwhelming evidence for evolution and NONE for your fantasies.

Well, it is easy then, eh?!

SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE!!!!!

That is all I am asking.

Just WRITING there is plenty of evidence won't do!

SHOW ME THE ******* EVIDENCE!!!!!

Never in these pages that is done!

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Ah, the stupid probability argument from you again. So we went over this last time you brought it up and you refused to answer.

Do you think no one has ever won the lottery?

I fully expect you to run away from this question because it reveals the fault in your probability argument.

1 Reply

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know