Evolution? How?

cicerone imposter wrote:

Just the facts, man, just the facts. No conjectures are acceptable.

Can you give us the facts on Archaeoraptor, CI?

The Archaeoraptor hoax is an example of how science works. When an error is made or fraud is committed, it is discovered and dealt with publicly. Science is self-correcting, unlike creationism. If this case was unusual it was due to the hoax being discovered almost immediately after the National Geographic article appeared. The Archaeoraptor fossil only had a few months of glory as the missing link between dinosaurs and birds before it was exposed as a composite. We now know that the head and body of a primitive bird and the tail and hind limbs of a dromaeosaur dinosaur were glued together by a Chinese farmer.*

CT scans have shown that the tail and hind limbs belong to a Microraptor zhaoianus, a small, bipedal, meat-eating dinosaur with some bird-like features and the avian parts are from a fish-eating bird known as Yanornis martini. "Prior to their appearance in the false Archaeoraptor fossil, both Microraptor and Yanornis were unknown species."* Both are considered important new finds. They were found in the Liaoning Province of China, "where thousands of flying and non-flying dinosaur fossils have been uncovered. The site has provided compelling evidence confirming the bird-dinosaur link."*

Intrepid wrote:

Pauligirl,
All you have "proven" is that both evolutionists and creationists can made mistakes. Some, on both sides, even fabricate their claims.

I think that you are overlooking this important part of Pauligirl's post.

Pauligirl wrote:

Keep in mind that that these errors were uncovered and corrected from within the scientific community. In contrast, creationists rarely expose their own errors, and they sometimes fail to correct them when others expose them.

Can you point to any similar corresponding info of creationists exposing fraud within their community?

That's what science does; it corrects past mistakes if found. Creationism on the other hand starts from an unknown one; it's pure conjecture. Creationists can't prove anything, because they rely on a 2000 year old fictional book called the bible, and that's all you have. If you study the origin of the bible, it's been written by many men over a long period of time with many revisions and deletions. The only thing consistent about the bible is the inconsistency of its message.

At least science tries to explain naturalism to the best of its ability. Nobody said all science is perfect, but that's the only field in which it tries to explain our environment. The bible only said one thing, "in the beginning..." that can never be proven. You may continue to ask your dumb questions that you can't even answer yourself. At least science tries to answer our existence.

cicerone imposter wrote:

That's what science does; it corrects past mistakes if found. Creationism on the other hand starts from an unknown one; it's pure conjecture. Creationists can't prove anything, because they rely on a 2000 year old fictional book called the bible, and that's all you have. If you study the origin of the bible, it's been written by many men over a long period of time with many revisions and deletions. The only thing consistent about the bible is the inconsistency of its message.

At least science tries to explain naturalism to the best of its ability. Nobody said all science is perfect, but that's the only field in which it tries to explain our environment. The bible only said one thing, "in the beginning..." that can never be proven. You may continue to ask your dumb questions that you can't even answer yourself. At least science tries to answer our existence.

You refute that there was a beginning....no matter the cause?

Intrepid wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

That's what science does; it corrects past mistakes if found. Creationism on the other hand starts from an unknown one; it's pure conjecture. Creationists can't prove anything, because they rely on a 2000 year old fictional book called the bible, and that's all you have. If you study the origin of the bible, it's been written by many men over a long period of time with many revisions and deletions. The only thing consistent about the bible is the inconsistency of its message.

At least science tries to explain naturalism to the best of its ability. Nobody said all science is perfect, but that's the only field in which it tries to explain our environment. The bible only said one thing, "in the beginning..." that can never be proven. You may continue to ask your dumb questions that you can't even answer yourself. At least science tries to answer our existence.

You refute that there was a beginning....no matter the cause?

If matter, space, and time were created together, there may not be a beginning in the simple, temporal sense that you mean. Things may be much more complex. It's very foolish to try to apply human experience and intuition to this realm.

"If the Darwinian theory is true, Genesis is a lie, the whole framework of the book of life falls to pieces, and the revelation of God to man, as we Christians know it, is a delusion and a snare."
"If this hypothesis be true, then is the Bible an unbearable fiction; ... than have Christians for nearly two thousand years been duped by a monstrous lie. ... Darwin requires us to disbelieve the authoritative word of the Creator."

Satan, being the Great Deceiver, never creates a lie by itself, but rather always creates lies in pairs. The first and lesser lie is intended to alarm the faithful and to drive them to embrace the second and more pernicious lie, trapping them there. That Christian viewed both creation science and evolution as lies, but evolution was the lesser lie which Satan uses to frighten Christians and to drive them to embrace the truly pernicious lie, creation science.

The "they" are all of you bible god creationists that doesn't believe in science.

It's only the creationists that push ID, and many of those same people do not believe in science or evolution. The shoe fits alright; can't even support the bible, and you guys talk about "evidence." LOL