Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,581 Year: 2,838/9,624 Month: 683/1,588 Week: 89/229 Day: 61/28 Hour: 3/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   dinosaur and human co-existence
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 271 (559246)
05-07-2010 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Iblis
05-07-2010 7:44 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
Iblis writes:
No, the word dinosaur, "thunder lizard", turns out to be a misnomer. Lizards are reptiles, dragons, crocodiles and alligators are reptiles, snakes are also reptiles. Dinosaurs are not in fact reptiles. If you wanted to group them into one of our modern classifications, birds are in the direction you want to look. Different body structure, different apparent metabolism. The dodo would be a nice modern dinosaur, if they weren't extinct themselves. Those awesome birds like ostriches and emus in Catholic Scientist's Theropods and Birds showing a change in kinds are the best match for "modern dinosaurs" if you like.
That's assuming you're a (relative) uniformitarian and skeptic of the Biblical Genesis record.
There are several archived threads on this topic including this one, where beginning with message 7 I began debating this topic in that thread by quoting myself from a former thread, WHY WERE THERE VENOMOUS SNAKES:
Venomous Snake Thread; Buzsaw writes:
Perhaps the Biblical answer lies in the details of the curse upon the serpents in Genesis 3: 15, "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head and you shall bruise his heel."
The serpent was radically changed at the fall, according to the Genesis account. The clear implication is that the prefallen ones had longer legs and were walking and possibly flying creatures. Imo, the prefallen serpents were the dinosaurs whose offspring became snakes, lizzards, allegators, etc. They are all of the serpent family. (abe: aka referred to in literature and some sectors of academia as serpents) Likely two not mentioned results were diminished intelligence and poisonous venom. The serpents were the most intelligent of the animal kingdom at creation according to the account. A lot happened at this catastrophy of the fall, including thorny plants and so forth. I believe some plants became poisonous as well.
I do not agree with most creationists such as ICR who believe and teach that dinosaurs were in Noah's ark. I do believe however, that the parent prefallen dinosaurs lived very long lives and many survived until the flood which would have been about 1500 years since many humans lived nearly a thousand years.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Update message title

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Iblis, posted 05-07-2010 7:44 PM Iblis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Iblis, posted 05-07-2010 9:42 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 19 by Coyote, posted 05-07-2010 10:27 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 31 by PaulK, posted 05-08-2010 6:22 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 271 (559257)
05-07-2010 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Iblis
05-07-2010 9:42 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
Iblis writes:
I would have been happy to firmly agree with you on this one when I was 7. But when I was 8 I caught a "chameleon" (green anole) and stuck him on the table where I had my dino-rama set up to interact with his reptile buddies from ancient times. At that time, I became very aware of the fact that unlike alligators or iguanas or whatall, my komodos pictured previously, dinos look nothing like reptiles. Their body structure is profoundly different.
Their body physiology, in fact did become profoundly different after the fall curse, in which they lost their long legs, became belly crawlers, much smaller and perhaps other changes adapting them to a totally different existence.
If you could take an alligator balloon; one of those that you can reshape and stretch out and enlarge the hind legs, and blow up the torsal, you wouldn't have to do a whole lot to the head and rest of the body to make it appear like Euparkeria

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Iblis, posted 05-07-2010 9:42 PM Iblis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by DC85, posted 05-07-2010 11:09 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 23 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-07-2010 11:27 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 27 by Iblis, posted 05-08-2010 1:03 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 271 (559263)
05-07-2010 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Coyote
05-07-2010 10:27 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
Coyote writes:
Buz -- there was no fall, no flood, and no ark. People did not live nearly a thousand years, nor did dinosaurs survive up to modern times (i.e., coexisting with humans) -- 1,000,000 Years B.C. notwithstanding (but Raquel Welch in a fur-lined outfit was worth the price of admission).
You keep trying to superimpose your religious belief on reality and the two don't seem to match.
By the same token I can say there was no space and time which the BB could have happened and no outside of into which it could expand. All hypotheses and theories have their unfalsifyable aspects. No?
By the same token you keep trying to superimpose your secularist belief on reality and the two don't match. All that is observeable has an outside of, space into which it could exist and in which to expand,
Reality is that both dinos and reptiles are known as serpents, many having similar visible physiological appearances, so which is more compatible with reality, your belief or mine?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Coyote, posted 05-07-2010 10:27 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-07-2010 11:29 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 25 by DC85, posted 05-07-2010 11:31 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 26 by Coyote, posted 05-07-2010 11:43 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 271 (559340)
05-08-2010 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Dr Adequate
05-07-2010 11:27 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
DrAdequate writes:
Of course, to get it to breed true you'd also need to change to its genes such that its children grew up to look like Euparkaria.
Would you do that gradually or all at once?
First off, this aspect of the debate is relevant to topic in that the more evidence of similarities between dinos and contemporary reptiles, the more scientific the hypothesis that man and dinos lived contemporaneously becomes. As well, the more scientific the Biblical Genesis record becomes and the more scientific ID becomes.
1) The genes would have been ID altered so as to change the first generation of the parent dinos.
2) It would not have been sudden. It would have applied to the offspring of the cursed species. Since man lived hundreds of years, likely many of the parent dinos lived up until the time of the flood, their altered gene offspring modern reptiles being the ones which were loaded on Noah's ark. Thus, no unfossilized bones of dinos remaing and the likelihood of a false radiometric reading for age.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-07-2010 11:27 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Huntard, posted 05-08-2010 5:41 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 40 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-08-2010 9:54 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 271 (559345)
05-08-2010 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Huntard
05-08-2010 5:41 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
Huntard writes:
Wow, that's some nice conjecture. You know what would make it really neat? Some friggin' evidence instead of wild made up ridiculous fairytales.
Seriously, this is the best you can come up with? Made up stuff? Pure friggin' magic? I can only assume you think us all complete retards, if you think this drivel will convince anyone with half a brain.... Sheesh!
This is simply another blind asserted Bibliophobic example of why you people wouldn't admit evidence to anything; anything, I say smacking of evidence of an intelligence existing in the Universe higher than what is observed in planet earth's human creatures. Relative to this, you elitist science minded members think on the level of Model Ford T technology.
1) Are you denying the evidence of similar appearance of Euparkeria to gator?
2) I assume that you're also denying my evidence that dinosaurs, as is the case with lizzards, allegators, turtles, etc are reptiles.
Online dictionary writes:
1. Any of various extinct, often gigantic, carnivorous or herbivorous reptiles of the orders Saurischia and Ornithischia that were chiefly terrestrial and existed during the Mesozoic Era.
(Embolding mine for emphasis)
3) Which evidence is more observable with the naked eye, the alleged BB singularity event or the Buzsaw dino evidence? Hmm, Huntard and friends?
Edited by Buzsaw, : word change
Edited by Buzsaw, : Add Dictionary quote

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Huntard, posted 05-08-2010 5:41 PM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by hooah212002, posted 05-08-2010 7:01 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 271 (559348)
05-08-2010 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by PaulK
05-08-2010 6:22 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
PaulK writes:
Of course, Buz, you know from the previous discussion that your idea is nonsense, The most important fact being that snakes existed alongside dinosaurs, as proven by the fossil record.
Thanks, Paul; thanks much (:cool for citing this, further evidence of the veracity of the Genesis record and the Buzsaw Hypothesis. My position right here on this thread, as well as in archived threads has always been that they co-existed for many centuries, in that the offspring egg hatched short legged reptiles became the altered members of the reptillians.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by PaulK, posted 05-08-2010 6:22 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by PaulK, posted 05-09-2010 3:21 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 271 (559351)
05-08-2010 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by hooah212002
05-08-2010 7:01 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
hooah writes:
When was the Mesozoic Era, Buz?
The problems with Dating methology is for another topic, Hooah. In the mean time, how about one thing at a time. How about you addressing my challenges to Huntard. I'll add another visible evidence of my assertions:
Apatosaurus, the Sinclair Oil trade mark, has the head and long tail features of snake, quite unlike reptile alligator and his bumpy torsal resembling his look alike dino, previously cited.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by hooah212002, posted 05-08-2010 7:01 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by hooah212002, posted 05-08-2010 7:22 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 56 by Meddle, posted 05-09-2010 10:11 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 271 (559369)
05-08-2010 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Blue Jay
05-08-2010 9:01 PM


Re: Reptiles and Dinosaurs
Bluejay writes:
There's been some misinformation going around on this thread which has been a partial cause for some really inane sub-discussions, so I thought I'd step in to provide some clarification.
But Bluejay, your two word terms, misinformation and clarification are relative to your secularistic con-ID premise from which you extrapolate from observed evidence. I have demonstrated that your premise is no more falsifiable than the ID premise as per the Genesis record.
One of the problems with your premise as to what happened to the dinos is that all (I say all) of the dinosaur species disappeard exclusively of the other reptiles which co-existed with the dinos.
The Buzsaw Hypothesis solves/eliminates that problem with a logical explanation evidencing similarities of dinos and respective conventional reptiles.
Bluejay writes:
You’ll note that crocodilians are considered to be more closely related to dinosaurs than they are to lizards or snakes. Euparkeria looks a lot like a crocodilian because both crocodilians and dinosaurs evolved from an organism that was very similar to Euparkeria. In fact, for the purpose of this discussion, we can go ahead pretend that Euparkeria was the ancestor of both crocodilians and dinosaurs, because, even if it isn’t a direct ancestor, it is very close to their common ancestor.
However, it should be noted that Euparkeria is quite different from lizards or snakes. Its ankle joints are archosaur-like, and it seems to have had upright or semi-upright limbs, as Dr Adequate illustrated earlier.
I said they were different, citing evidence that the Sinclair dino more resembled the snake model than Euparkeria which modeled the alligator. I alluded to the fact that other physiological adaptations were likely necessary due to the different environs, etc.
Bluejay writes:
Buzsaw, it is thus ridiculous to argue that lizards are degenerate dinosaurs (and I’m rather certain that torsal is not a word: perhaps you meant dorsum?).
That is correct, Bluejay. Thanks.
Bluejay writes:
Furthermore, in arguing that reptiles and dinosaurs are similar animals, you are not presenting anything that’s a problem for evolution. Evolutionary biologists and palaeontologists are well aware of the similarities, and have, in fact, organized these animals into groups based on these similarites, the results of which look like the nested hierarchy we expect from our Theory of Evolution. So, from our perspective, ToE is more realistic than Genesis.
Heh. Yah, like I said, from your perspective. But I'm not arguing your perspective. I'm arguing mine which appears to make more sense than yours. As I said, mine solves the puzzle as to why one complete species died of exclusive of the other reptillians.
Again, Bluejay, neither you or any other evolutionist is ever going to acknowledge evidence of a higher intelligence if you were wading knee deep in it. To acknowledge just one eensy little bit of something supernatural would would utterly demolish your whole evolutionist premise. It would be the 9/11 demolition of your twin towers of the BB and evolution.
Bluejay writes:
The Word Reptile
Different people consider the word reptile to properly refer to a different grouping of animals. Most people think it only refers to scaly, cold-blooded diapsids (lizards, snakes, turtles, crocodilians and dinosaurs). Some, however, like to use it to refer to all diapsids, such that it also includes birds. I even know some who think it should only refer to lepidosaurs, and exclude turtles and crocodilians. Personally, I simply prefer to avoid the word altogether.
Obviously it would be to your advantage to avoid the word, reptile but lol on that. Your problem is that it supports the ID argument and tends to refute that of the evolutionist. The reason you and yours have so much problem with defining the word term is that no matter how you cut it, it's problematic to your premise.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Blue Jay, posted 05-08-2010 9:01 PM Blue Jay has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Blue Jay, posted 05-08-2010 10:30 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 45 by bluescat48, posted 05-08-2010 11:15 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 52 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-09-2010 3:42 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 74 by ZenMonkey, posted 05-09-2010 9:12 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 271 (559371)
05-08-2010 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by hooah212002
05-08-2010 7:22 PM


Re: Dino Serpents
hooah writes:
You used a definition of dinosaur that also used the term Mesozoic era, saying that is the period in time in which dinosaurs lived. If you don't believe that, you don't get to use that definition. You can't pick and choose which parts of a definition you like the same as you do your bible.
Hooah, all I cited the conventional definition for was to demonstrate that from the conventional premise both dinos and modern types were considered reptiles. My purpose was to dispell the notion of some that dinos were not considered reptiles. That the conventional mindset depicts Mesozoic has no relevance to my usage of the online definition.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by hooah212002, posted 05-08-2010 7:22 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by hooah212002, posted 05-08-2010 10:36 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 271 (559386)
05-09-2010 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Blue Jay
05-08-2010 10:30 PM


Re: Reptiles and Dinosaurs
Bluejay writes:
I’m confused as to why you’re the one complaining about this when it’s the evolutionists on this thread that I am accusing of spreading misinformation. My message was a correction of some things said by evolutionists that resulted in a really weird and confusing discussion about the differences between reptiles and dinosaurs.
I got that, Bluejay, though you, nevertheless, attempt to debunk my premise rather than to refute the fact that the evidence of resemblences lends support to my extrapolation from the Genesis premise moreso than the evolution premise.
-----
Bluejay writes:
buzsaw writes:
One of the problems with your premise as to what happened to the dinos is that all (I say all) of the dinosaur species disappeard exclusively of the other reptiles which co-existed with the dinos.
Can you explain for me what you mean by this? I am currently under the impression that (1) dinosaurs can go extinct without causing my worldview any problems and (2) the coexistence of dinosaurs with the types of animals that survived the dinosaur extinction is strong evidence that these animals are not the same as dinosaurs.
Sure. I repeat: That they co-existed with pre-cursed dinosaurs and cursed parent dinos of the degenerated types supports the Biblical model, given that the Biblical model implies a very long lifespan of the parent and pre-cursed dinos.
My position is not that the degenerate types are one and the same as the dinos. They are vastly different by design, due to the curse, nevertheless co-existing with their dino parents and precursed dinos.
Your problem remains: why did the alleged Ice Age allegedly render exclusively the dinos extinct, leaving the other co-existing reptiles alive and well to flourish and survive. That is your position. No?
Bluejay writes:
It seems like I have to remind you in every thread that I’m a Mormon. I would be quite happy to acknowledge evidence for God’s existence if it could be shown to be genuine.
Can you try to remember this for next time, please?
My apologies, Bluejay. That you (as I understand) reject ID in favor of evolution makes it hard for one to remember that you are a theist. I can't, for the life of me, understand how a professed theist can deny ID, if that's indeed your worldview, but nevertheless, I'll try hard to remember that you are a theist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Blue Jay, posted 05-08-2010 10:30 PM Blue Jay has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Rahvin, posted 05-09-2010 12:10 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 49 by Blue Jay, posted 05-09-2010 12:58 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 70 by Modulous, posted 05-09-2010 4:48 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 92 by Blue Jay, posted 05-10-2010 3:32 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 271 (559387)
05-09-2010 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by bluescat48
05-08-2010 11:15 PM


Re: Reptiles and Dinosaurs
bluescat48 writes:
If I was wading "knee deep in in evidence of a higher intelligence," then there would be evidence and thus I could accept that, but since there is no such "wading evidence" I stand pat. The problem with the creationist is, rather than show evidence that their ideas are correct, they continually simply try to debunk evolution, the big bang etc. Debunking science doesn't prove creation. It would simply mean that there was some other source, you would still have to show evidence to show that creation was that other source.
What, Bluescat? You have yet to refute the evidence I have been claiming. What, specifically (I say specifically) are your thoughts on my alleged evidence?
Edited by Buzsaw, : change is to are

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by bluescat48, posted 05-08-2010 11:15 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by hooah212002, posted 05-09-2010 1:52 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 53 by Percy, posted 05-09-2010 6:53 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 271 (559415)
05-09-2010 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Percy
05-09-2010 6:53 AM


Re: Reptiles and Dinosaurs
Percy writes:
So let's see some evidence. You can start with evidence for the "curse."
The only evidence perse that I have for the curse is what I've presented. I have cited the similarities of the respective dinos to the respective belly crawler types as per the Genesis record which depicts the shortening of legs and physiology of the serpent kind to be adapted to what is observed.
Percy, I see where none of that has been effectively refuted If more than that is required by you, I guess I'm finished with this thread.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Percy, posted 05-09-2010 6:53 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Percy, posted 05-09-2010 9:47 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 271 (559419)
05-09-2010 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Percy
05-09-2010 9:47 AM


Re: Reptiles and Dinosaurs
Percy writes:
You presented no evidence for a curse, nor have you even defined it. Just from reading this I would gather that a curse is something that makes your legs shorter. How was it established that this is what a curse does? How does one effect a curse? Have curses ever been observed directly, and if not, what form does the evidence for curses take?
Buzsaw premise of the Buzsaw thesis:
Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field...........
Genesis 3:14 And Jehovah God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:15 and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
The premise of my thesis is that a beast of the field which walked on relatively long legs was cursed because one of it's kind, evidently coerced by Satan, deceived the woman into the original sin.
The Buzsaw thesis has it that some existing beast, therefore must be evidenced in the fossil record. The evidence must be of the serpent kind. The degenerated belly crawling descendent of the dino prototype implicates significant other physiological changes relative to type and prototype.
Since the ancient language of the Genesis record has no word for the English word, reptile, context clearly implies reptile and serpent to be interchangeable terms depicting all forms of reptiles.
As observed, the dinosaur serpent kind is the one and only type that would apply to the Genesis record relative to the curse, which is the Buzsaw premise.
Note: The Genesis account of the curse is not evidence. It is the Buzsaw premise from which the Buzsaw thesis is derived.
The evidence for the Buzsaw thesis is that the relatively long legged serpent kind, the dinos are the observeable type that fits what the Biblical record implicates, a long legged serpent/reptile type.
The evidence presented has been two dyno prototypes, one being a prototype of alligator and the other a prototype of snake, the former having the relative (I say relative) shape, dorsal lumpy physiology, color and appearance of alligator and the other having the relative (I say relative) smooth dorsal, head , long tail etc appearance of snake. Others could likely be cited but these two come to mind off hand.
The Buzsaw thesis goes on to compare this thesis to that of the evolutionist, being that as per Bluejay, the similarities which I have attributed to the Genesis record are applicable to the evolutionary model.
Buzsaw has aired the problem of why the entire dino species, both large and small became extinct during the alleged Ice Age, whereas the rest of the serpent kind survived and flourished after having co-existing for a long period of time and after having endured the same harsh and deadly conditions of the alleged Ice Age. For that reason, the Buzsaw thesis argues that the Biblical record relative to this specific event more scientifically and logically interprets the observed evidence cited in the Buzsaw thesis.
The Buzsaw thesis on Dinos, as well, makes a whole lot more sense than that of evangelicals like ICR and Ken Ham, etc who's thesis is that dinos survived the flood, having been aboard Noah's alleged ark. The Buzsaw thesis is that no dinosaur types (prototypes of the cursed degenerated types) survived the alleged flood and that the degenerated ones having a different physiology of their prototypes were the only ones aboard the alleged ark.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Percy, posted 05-09-2010 9:47 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Percy, posted 05-09-2010 11:47 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 271 (559420)
05-09-2010 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Meddle
05-09-2010 10:11 AM


Re: Dino Serpents
Malcolm writes:
However the long tail and neck of the apatosaurus has an anatomy very different from that of snakes. Specifically there is no ribs present in the neck or the tail, unlike snakes whose ribs extend the entire length of their body.
Malcolm, the Buzsaw thesis calls for significant physiological changes in the types from the prototypes. As I noted, this was due to the significantly different environs of the belly crawler from the relative long legged creature.
Apatosaurus, having long legs, required bone structure in the neck and tail so as to manuver the neck and tail where as the type which it prototyped, being a belly crawler need none, the land surface supporting it's head and entire body. The similarities lie in the appearance of the dorsal, head and tail as previously noted.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Meddle, posted 05-09-2010 10:11 AM Meddle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-09-2010 12:09 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 168 by Meddle, posted 05-14-2010 11:49 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 271 (559426)
05-09-2010 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Percy
05-09-2010 11:47 AM


Re: Reptiles and Dinosaurs
Percy writes:
Buzsaw writes:
Note: The Genesis account of the curse is not evidence.
Can we therefore agree that there is no evidence for "the curse" or for the effects of curses?
If so, then how can you imply a causal relationship between "the curse" and any observations you might make about the natural world?
As I went on to explain, the Genesis record depicting the curse is not in itself the evidence. It is the premise from which the Buzsaw thesis extrapolates interpretation of the cited observable evidence.
My argument is not the Bible says so, so it's so, as has been implicated.
By the same token, ToE is not evidence in itself perse. Evolution is the premise from which evolutionists extrapolate their interpretation of the observable evidence, i.e. their thesis. No?
How is the relationship of the Genesis record relative to this topic any more casual than the relationship of ToE to the observed evidence cited in this thread? Both ideologies have other corroborating evidences and problematic aspects, not directly related to this topic which either support or hinder the respective premises and theses.
Though I'm not up to date on responses, as yet, so far as I'm aware, none of you, my evolutionist friends have effectively refuted the co-existant/survival problem of yours, a problem which mine has a practical solution for.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Percy, posted 05-09-2010 11:47 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Huntard, posted 05-09-2010 2:15 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 67 by PaulK, posted 05-09-2010 3:32 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 69 by Percy, posted 05-09-2010 4:38 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024