Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 121 of 342 (718068)
02-04-2014 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Eliyahu
02-03-2014 11:06 PM


Re: The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
Eliyahu writes:
About the part of your message from where you say "I'll say something about them" up until where you say "If you want me to say more about the fossiles, just let me know", isn't that all just unattributed cut-n-pastes from the web?
Yes it is. And that's because those people are all evolutionistic paleontologists or zoologists, or something like that, so they know much more about the subject than me. Therefore I quote them.
But you didn't quote them. You just cut-n-pasted their words into your message as if they were your own.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Eliyahu, posted 02-03-2014 11:06 PM Eliyahu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-04-2014 10:27 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 122 of 342 (718069)
02-04-2014 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by Eliyahu
02-04-2014 1:37 AM


Re: The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
So what you are saying is: Gould, Eldredge, and all other evolutionists cited in my quotes they are wrong when they say that the fossil record shows STASIS, and not evolution.
Have you considered that you may be wrong in understanding them? Why is it that those that interpret them as you do are so overwhelmingly Abrahamic in their faith? Do you think there might be a pattern?
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Eliyahu, posted 02-04-2014 1:37 AM Eliyahu has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 123 of 342 (718070)
02-04-2014 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Eliyahu
02-03-2014 10:56 PM


quotes do not invalidate science
Here's a thought for you Eliyahu,
If I were going to discuss the stories in the Torah ...
... would I do better to read quotes from people that read it, or
... would I do better to read the Torah?
And if I were going to discuss what was or was not in those stories ...
... would I do better to read quotes from people that read it, or
... would I do better to read the Torah?
Just askin
Edited by RAZD, : +

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Eliyahu, posted 02-03-2014 10:56 PM Eliyahu has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 124 of 342 (718078)
02-04-2014 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Faith
02-03-2014 10:55 PM


Re: Nothing can ever disprove evolution
There's so much that disproves evolution, where to start? Well, start with the fact that you DON'T have the transitionals Darwin said you'd have to have. You have a few paltry wannabe transitionals, but nothing like the great number and variety Darwin knew were required.
Your lie does not disprove evolution, because of being a lie.
However, we may note that it would disprove evolution if it was true, and you yourself know this, which is why you tell it. So when you pretend that nothing would disprove evolution, you yourself know that you're talking crap.
The mere appearance of created things disproves it, so clearly the result of a Creative Intelligence, not mindless physical and chemical accidents. But you deny that too, pretend an Intelligence is not needed. Invent scenarios, Interpretations, call them Fact, say This happened, That happened, as if it really did. Silly Putty.
Your circular reasoning does not disprove evolution, because of it being a childish logical fallacy.
When there's the Flood, which so nicely accounts for the strata and the fossils but you can just assert it doesn't and make up Likely Stories out of bits and pieces of known fact but mostly sheer imagination, say you've disproved the Flood. Yes, just say it, that's all you have to do, name it and it's true. Silly Putty.
The Flood does not disprove evolution, because of it being a made-up story for which no-one can find any evidence, and against which there is copious evidence. The idea that it "nicely accounts for the strata and the fossils" could only occur to someone so pitifully ignorant of geology as you are.
Darwin declared that what was known to have genetic causes, i.e. microevolution or the well known variation within Species, which is the ONLY known "descent with modification" was capable of producing new Species. Simply declared it, no evidence, no proof, just rename things and there you have it.
Your lie does not disprove evolution, because of being a lie.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 02-03-2014 10:55 PM Faith has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 125 of 342 (718079)
02-04-2014 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Eliyahu
02-04-2014 12:26 AM


Re: Nothing can ever disprove evolution
OK, just copy and paste a few here and we'll discuss them.
Talk is cheap. Talking about talking is cheaper.
I've shown you the fossils, stop being afraid and look at them. They show that the animals evolved. They directly refute your argument.
Discussing quotes is just a distraction.
No it would not, because then the precambrium suddenly isn't the precambrium anymore.
That's so stupid it's retarded. Please try harder.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Eliyahu, posted 02-04-2014 12:26 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Eliyahu, posted 02-05-2014 1:57 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 144 by Eliyahu, posted 02-05-2014 7:44 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 126 of 342 (718080)
02-04-2014 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Faith
02-03-2014 8:18 PM


Re: Nothing can ever disprove evolution
Naa, you'd just "prove" it was a hoax somehow or other, and blame it on creationists too of course, or it accidentally got dislodged and displaced somehow, or you'd misidentified that layer. You'd come up with something.
Regardless, it would still disprove evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 02-03-2014 8:18 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 127 of 342 (718083)
02-04-2014 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Faith
02-03-2014 10:55 PM


No opinion can ever disprove evolution ... just facts
Darwin declared that what was known to have genetic causes, ...
Can you please cite the book and chapter where he discusses genetic causes Faith?
Well, start with the fact that you DON'T have the transitionals Darwin said you'd have to have. ...
Transitional have been found, so that prediction was filled.
In fact this was part of the prediction for finding Tiktaalik -- the proper ecological location, the proper age for a transitional species from marine to terrestrial animal: transitional found.
Then there are the Pelycodus fossils:
A Smooth Fossil Transition: Pelycodus
quote:
As you look from bottom to top, you will see that each group has some overlap with what came before. There are no major breaks or sudden jumps. And the form of the creatures was changing steadily.
You can see evolution generation by generation, transitioning from a single species at the bottom to two reproductively isolated species at the top.
Each level show transitional fossils intermediate between the layer below and the layer above, every one of those fossils are transitional.
... You have a few paltry wannabe transitionals, but nothing like the great number and variety Darwin knew were required. ...
Can you please cite the book and chapter where he discusses how many transitionals should be found Faith?
How many are needed to show\demonstrate that species transition from one form to another?
When we look at fossils like the Therapsids we not only see a progression from reptile jaw and ear to mammal jaw and ear, we see several intermediate forms where the jaw is double jointed -- one at the reptile location and one at the new mammal location. Functional intermediates.
quote:
The reptiles, as we have noted, have one bone in the middle ear and several bones in the lower jaw, and mammals have three bones in the middle ear and only one bone in the lower jaw. On the other hand, the jaw joints in the reptile are formed from different bones than they are in the mammalian skull. ...
... it can be clearly seen in a remarkable series of fossils from the Triassic therapsids. The earliest therapsids show the typical reptilian type of jaw joint, with the articular bone in the jaw firmly attached to the quadrate bone in the skull. In later fossils from the same group, however, the quadrate-articular bones have become smaller, and the dentary and squamosal bones have become larger and moved closer together. This trend reaches its apex in a group of therapsids known as cynodonts, of which the genus Probainognathus is a representative. Probainognathus possessed characteristics of both reptile and mammal, and this transitional aspect was shown most clearly by the fact that it had TWO jaw joints--one reptilian, one mammalian: ...
In a slightly later group, known as the ictidosaurians, the mammalian part of the double jaw joint seen in Probainognathus was strengthened, while the old reptilian part was beginning to become reduced in size. In describing a member of this group known as Diarthrognathus, paleontologists Colbert and Morales point out: "The most interesting and fascinating point in the morphology of the ictidosaurians (at least, as seen in Diarthrognathus) was the double jaw articulation. In this animal, not only was the ancient reptilian joint between a reduced quadrate and articular still present, but also the new mammalian joint between the squamosal and dentary bones had come into functional being. ...
Thus, the fossil record demonstrates, during the transition from therapsid reptile to mammal, various bones in the skull slowly migrated together to form a second functional jaw joint, and the now-superfluous original jaw bones were reduced in size until they formed the three bones in the mammalian middle ear. The reptilian quadrate bone became the mammalian incus, while the articular bone became the malleus. ...
This is the process of evolutionary transitions demonstrated in spades in the fossil record.
... But that doesn't stop evolution.
Correct, fantasy opinion does not affect any science, only facts affect science.
... 'Cuz it's Silly Putty, it can be shaped any way you like it.
um, just like your Grand Canyon fantasies? I'll have to remember this insightful refutation ...
The mere appearance of created things disproves it, so clearly the result of a Creative Intelligence, ...
And yet not one species has been observed to appear de novo anywhere at any time, no one species has a form that is uniquely new in arrangement ... no one species has DNA that is not linked to other species ...
... and then there is the issue of Silly Design.
... or the problem of the appearance of design in the eye of the beholder -- especially one without a complete knowledge of what they are looking at.
... not mindless physical and chemical accidents. ...
Which of course you have been told thousands of times is not how evolution works. Willful ignorance is not a valid basis for argument, Faith.
... But you deny that too, pretend an Intelligence is not needed. ...
What science finds is that selection between different traits caused by "physical and chemical accidents" is sufficient for species to adapt to their ecologies. Curiously it was Dawin's insight that natural selection operated in essentially the same manner as the controlled selection of animal husbandry, and that this was sufficient to explain the fossil record.
... . Invent scenarios, Interpretations, call them Fact, say This happened, That happened, as if it really did. Silly Putty.
You really should stop describing your argument regarding the Grand Canyon in this thread Faith, this is about the fossil record and how it shows evolution occurred.
Darwin declared that what was known to have genetic causes, i.e. microevolution or the well known variation within Species, which is the ONLY known "descent with modification" was capable of producing new Species. ...
Where "descent" has the meaning in descendant -- the offspring of the breeding populations rather than going down stairs.
And this has been observed to occur! And we have fossil evidence of this occurring! (see above). Who woulda thunk!
We can see the process of evolution going on in virtually all breeding populations of all living species, and we have seen instances of speciation and reproductive isolation that then allows independent descent of the daughter populations in different ecologies, accumulating more adaptations to the different ecologies as the generations pass.
Simply declared it, no evidence, ...
Actually he formed a theory based on lots of evidence Faith. Perhaps you should read his books instead of making up fantasies, not that you will pay any attention to any corrections of your misimpressions.
... no proof, ...
No theory is ever proven, another item you have been told a thousand times but choose to ignore ... because it is too dangerous to really understand science eh?
... just rename things and there you have it. And ever since that's all that's happened, the renaming of everything. ...
ROFLOL, you really are an amusing comedienne Faith. Ignore reality and then make up stuff to suit your fantasy -- isn't that (what do you call that ... oh yeah)
... . Silly Putty. Mental transformation. Word Magic.
Good one.
Tell me Faith -- how would we distinguish one breed of dogs from another without names?
Names make discussion easier and more practical, they are key to knowing that we are talking about the same things. You use names for all the different layers in the Grand Canyon formations -- they are all just randomly assigned names, not precise descriptions of what the layers are. The names are defined to pertain to the layers with a precise description so that they can then be discussed without needing to repeat the descriptions every time you want to talk about them.
Tell me Faith ... how does using names to define different groups in any way affect what is discussed other than making discussion simpler?
This is the best argument you have against evolution? Denial, muddled thinking, misrepresentations and ranting about names??? Really?
Epic fail.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 02-03-2014 10:55 PM Faith has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 128 of 342 (718084)
02-04-2014 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Percy
02-04-2014 7:01 AM


Re: The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
But you didn't quote them. You just cut-n-pasted their words into your message as if they were your own.
He went further and even insinuated that they were his own words:
quote:
I'll say something about them:
The fossil record flatly fails to substantiate this expectation of finely graded change.
In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another.
The record jumps, and all the evidence shows that the record is real: the gaps we see reflect real events in life’s history - not the artifact of a poor fossil record.
The fossil record itself provided no documentation of continuity - of gradual transition from one animal or plant to another of quite different form.
Gaps between higher taxonomic levels are general and large.
The lack of ancestral or intermediate forms between fossil species is not a bizarre peculiarity of early metazoan history. Gaps are general and prevalent throughout the fossil record.
The known fossil record is not, and never has been, in accord with gradualism. What is remarkable is that, through a variety of historical circumstances, even the history of opposition has been obscured . . . ‘The majority of paleontologists felt their evidence simply contradicted Darwin’s stress on minute, slow, and cumulative changes leading to species transformation.’ . . . their story has been suppressed.
Instead of finding the gradual unfolding of life, what geologists of Darwin’s time, and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record. and it is not always clear, in fact it’s rarely clear, that the descendants were actually better adapted than their predecessors. In other words, biological improvement is hard to find.
If you want me to say more about the fossiles, just let me know. Glad to oblige.
It doesn't get much more bald-faced than that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Percy, posted 02-04-2014 7:01 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 129 of 342 (718087)
02-04-2014 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Eliyahu
02-03-2014 11:27 PM


The fossil record conclusively proves Eliyahu wrong about evolution
If the fossil record showed species turning into other species, who would need PE?
Pelycodus, Message 5, shows speciation.
PE is a desperate attempt to give an explanation for the total lack of evolution in the fossil record.
Foraminifera, Message 5, shows 65 million years of continual evolution. Gould agreed.
But, like I said, the fossil record is totally in line with creation, and disproves evolution.
How come there is no single point in time where all species are created? Or even two species at the same time? Why is it more of a continual process over time?
How is that consistent in any way with bible\torah\koran stories?
Why are fossils of mammals (to say nothing of man) not found with the fossils from the first life to some 70 million years ago and hominids only in the last 10 million years, Homo sapiens in the last 200,000 years?
How is that consistent in any way with bible\torah\koran stories?
Curiously I wonder if you know what "consistent" means ...
Thus the evo's try to explain the fact that there is not the slightest proof for evolution in the fossil record.
Again this claim was falsified in Message 5, and your continued denial\ignoring of this fact does not make your argument any more valid than it was then ... when it was demonstrated to be invalid. Repeating it is just silly delusion.
Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1987, p. 229.
More cherry-picked quote mining.
Once again you are caught red-handed quoting from some creationist site rather than from an original reading of the book:
Quote Mine Project: "Large Gaps"
quote:
"It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. ...Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and (we) both reject this alternative." (Dawkins, Richard, The Blind Watchmaker, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1996, pp. 229-230)
While it can be gleaned from this quote, it needs to be pointed out specifically that this is a discussion of Dawkins' disagreements with Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge over Punctuated Equilibrium and Dawkins is here discussing the fact that Gould and Eldredge would agree with him that the "sudden appearance" of animals in the Cambrian Explosion is really the result of the imperfections of the fossil record.
The part in the ellipsis is an explanation for this, as follows:
"Evolutionists of all stripes believe, however, that this really does represent a very large gap in the fossil record, a gap that is simply due to the fact that, for some reason, very few fossils have lasted from periods before about 600 million years ago. One good reason might be that many of these animals had only soft parts to their bodies: no shells or bones to fossilize. If you are a creationist you may think that this is special pleading. My point here is that, when we are talking about gaps of this magnitude, there is no difference whatever in the interpretations of 'punctuationists' and 'gradualists'."
- J. (catshark) Pieret
In other words ... your quote-mine does not tell the full story and meaning -- it is a misrepresentation. And because your usage exactly matches that found on other sites, your claim of making the quotes yourself is demonstrably false.
Note please that Dawkins is and has been an ardent spokesman against punk-eek -- that the time scales are still measured in hundreds of years during the introduction of new species.
Curiously I wonder that you lie and deceive so much when you could just cite actual evidence if your argument had any real validity. All you have are third hand misquotes of opinions and not a single fact. Sad. Pathetic.
Why do you need to lie?
Edited by RAZD, : +

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Eliyahu, posted 02-03-2014 11:27 PM Eliyahu has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 130 of 342 (718091)
02-04-2014 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by Eliyahu
02-04-2014 1:37 AM


Ignoring evolution in the fossil record does not make it go away
So what you are saying is: Gould, Eldredge, and all other evolutionists cited in my quotes they are wrong when they say that the fossil record shows STASIS, and not evolution.
Not quite, what they are saying is that the fossil record shows period of slow and fast evolution. Curiously if you actually read the articles and actually understood what they meant, you too would know this. But it seems you like to get your quotes second or third hand and predigested by creationist pap sites.
Sorry for having a hard time to accept that
Which is not a big surprise seeing as you seem to be having a hard time accepting the reality of the fossil record showing evolution as shown in Message 5, Message 63, and repeated in Message 83. Let me remind you:
de•lu•sion -noun (American Heritage Dictionary 2009)
  1. a. The act or process of deluding.
    b. The state of being deluded.
  2. A false belief or opinion: labored under the delusion that success was at hand.
  3. Psychiatry A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness: delusions of persecution.
It is becoming clearer and clearer that this last definition is applicable here. Other definitions would be open to learning and correcting your belief or opinion.
Curiously your delusional inability to accept things does not hamper reality in any substantial way. All it demonstrates is a blind willingness to be foolish, ignorant and deceived.
Message 123: Here's a thought for you Eliyahu,
If I were going to discuss the stories in the Torah ...
... would I do better to read quotes from people that read it, or
... would I do better to read the Torah?
And if I were going to discuss what was or was not in those stories ...
... would I do better to read quotes from people that read it, or
... would I do better to read the Torah?
Just askin
Perhaps you can see how silly your quote mining project is when discussing the reality of evolution ... or perhaps you will be a delsuional hypocrite here as well.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Eliyahu, posted 02-04-2014 1:37 AM Eliyahu has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 131 of 342 (718094)
02-04-2014 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Eliyahu
02-03-2014 11:27 PM


Who?
There is a very simple and irrifutable proof that my quotes are right, and that is the punctuated equilibrium theory.
If the fossil record showed species turning into other species, who would need PE?
Stephen Jay Gould, the guy who thought up P.E, that's who. Stephen Jay Gould, who says (in his essay Evolution As Fact And Theory) that transitional forms are "abundant" in the fossil record, who stated on oath that there were "many" of them in his testimony in McLean v. Arkansas, and who stated, again under oath, that "it's not true to say that punctuated equilibrium is just an argument born of despair, because you don't see transitional forms."
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Eliyahu, posted 02-03-2014 11:27 PM Eliyahu has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 132 of 342 (718104)
02-04-2014 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Dr Adequate
02-03-2014 3:16 PM


Re: Authority
Let's have some more of that authority Eliyahu likes so much.
"The crowning achievement of paleontology has been the demonstration, from the history of life, of the validity of the evolutionary theory [...] The fossil record contains many well-documented examples of the transition from one species into another, as well as the origin of new physical features." --- American Geological Institute.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-03-2014 3:16 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by RAZD, posted 02-04-2014 3:04 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(3)
Message 133 of 342 (718107)
02-04-2014 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Eliyahu
02-04-2014 1:37 AM


Re: The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
So what you are saying is: Gould, Eldredge, and all other evolutionists cited in my quotes they are wrong when they say that the fossil record shows STASIS, and not evolution.
Sorry for having a hard time to accept that.
BfD
And I'm sorry that you are unable to accept that your quote-mines are wrong.
Unlike you, I have read some of those original works, and I have studied a good many of the fossils, as casts, of course. (Mrs. Ples -- now there's a real cutie!)
There has been a recent debate in paleontology about the rate of evolution. That is what these authors are discussing.
But creationists, ever hopeful, twist and manipulate their writings to make it seem that these paleontologists are saying something far different from what they are actually saying.
Those creationist websites are lying, and you fell for it.
Edited by Coyote, : minor add

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Eliyahu, posted 02-04-2014 1:37 AM Eliyahu has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 134 of 342 (718111)
02-04-2014 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Dr Adequate
02-04-2014 12:11 PM


Re: Authority
Or let's hear Dawkins discussing the very words the I-Lie-To_you quotes:
Presenting his book "The Greatest Show on Earth"

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-04-2014 12:11 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
shalamabobbi
Member (Idle past 2849 days)
Posts: 397
Joined: 01-10-2009


(1)
Message 135 of 342 (718137)
02-04-2014 9:39 PM


Out of ammo.

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by AZPaul3, posted 02-05-2014 8:26 AM shalamabobbi has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024