Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Humans walked with dinosaurs
knitrofreak
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 108 (295801)
03-16-2006 12:55 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by AdminJar
03-16-2006 12:51 AM


Re: Need a decision from you.
hey sorry about that keep the one im using "knitrofreak" and delete the other one
thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by AdminJar, posted 03-16-2006 12:51 AM AdminJar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by AdminJar, posted 03-16-2006 12:57 AM knitrofreak has not replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 108 (295802)
03-16-2006 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by knitrofreak
03-16-2006 12:55 AM


Re: Need a decision from you.
will do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by knitrofreak, posted 03-16-2006 12:55 AM knitrofreak has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 48 of 108 (296401)
03-17-2006 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by knitrofreak
03-16-2006 12:47 AM


Re: on the creation side...
Welcome to the fray, knitrofreak.
... I believe that Adam and Eve and others walked with the dinosaurs.
This is a science forum thread, which means that evidence is needed when assertions are challenged. How do you explain the absence of any human (or for that matter ape (or for that matter monkey)) fossils in layers that have (not bird) dinosaur fossils AND the absence of any (not bird) dinosaur fossils in layers that have human (or for that matter ape (or for that matter monkey)) fossils?
We're talking real certified and properly documented fossils, not creatortionista conflations.
How do you explain the separation of layers with (not bird) dinosaur fossils and layers with human (or for that matter ape (or for that matter monkey)) fossils by a layer with extraodinary high iridium levels (a rare earth element but common in meteors) that is found around the world at strata levels that consistently date to ~65 million years ago (and by a number of different methods)?
IE: not only are the layers with these various fossils just different layers, but all (not bird) dinosaur fossils are below this iridium layer and all human (or for that matter ape (or for that matter monkey)) fossils are above this iridium layer?
My thought on how they became extinct is when the flood happened.
I'm wondering how much you have (really) thought about this? Have you tested this concept by seeing how it compares to the {fossils\data\evidence} that is available, particularly on the rate and timing of extinction events?
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by knitrofreak, posted 03-16-2006 12:47 AM knitrofreak has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by knitrofreak, posted 03-20-2006 12:10 AM RAZD has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 49 of 108 (296529)
03-18-2006 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by randman
01-30-2006 12:00 AM


Re: anybody got a link besides TalkOrigins
I have read the entire TalkOrigins FAQ and have not noticed any lack of credibility. Could you please elaborate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by randman, posted 01-30-2006 12:00 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by AdminJar, posted 03-18-2006 8:56 PM anglagard has not replied
 Message 51 by ramoss, posted 03-18-2006 10:57 PM anglagard has not replied
 Message 52 by randman, posted 03-19-2006 1:11 AM anglagard has not replied
 Message 55 by Coragyps, posted 03-19-2006 2:54 PM anglagard has not replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 108 (296531)
03-18-2006 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by anglagard
03-18-2006 8:51 PM


Welcome to EvC
Pull up a stump and set a spell. Keep your feet to the fire and the smoke never gets in your eyes. At the end of this message are some links to threads that may make your stay here more enjoyable.
Again, welcome home.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
    New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
  • "Post of the Month" Forum
  • "Columnist's Corner" Forum
    See also Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 49 by anglagard, posted 03-18-2006 8:51 PM anglagard has not replied

      
    ramoss
    Member (Idle past 611 days)
    Posts: 3228
    Joined: 08-11-2004


    Message 51 of 108 (296544)
    03-18-2006 10:57 PM
    Reply to: Message 49 by anglagard
    03-18-2006 8:51 PM


    Re: anybody got a link besides TalkOrigins
    I do not think you will be waiting a long time for any kind of reasonable answer.
    Basically, randman thinks Talk origins is unreliable because the YEC sites he puts his trust in say they aren't.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 49 by anglagard, posted 03-18-2006 8:51 PM anglagard has not replied

      
    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 52 of 108 (296556)
    03-19-2006 1:11 AM
    Reply to: Message 49 by anglagard
    03-18-2006 8:51 PM


    Re: anybody got a link besides TalkOrigins
    I guess if you think propaganda is good science, maybe so....but if you don't like indoctrination technigues such as using the term "evolution" in different ways, insisting because one definition is true that the other is as well, a logical fallacy, and the many other errors and fallaciousness you can find there, well, if you cannot see it, I suggest you put your thinking cap back on.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 49 by anglagard, posted 03-18-2006 8:51 PM anglagard has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 53 by Modulous, posted 03-19-2006 8:18 AM randman has replied

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


    Message 53 of 108 (296566)
    03-19-2006 8:18 AM
    Reply to: Message 52 by randman
    03-19-2006 1:11 AM


    TalkOrigins/propaganda
    but if you don't like indoctrination technigues such as using the term "evolution" in different ways, insisting because one definition is true that the other is as well, a logical fallacy
    You attempted, and failed, to support this accusation of equivocation at Message 29. Every page you linked to was quite clear in differentiating between common ancestry and allele frequency change. I post this here because the thread is still open if either you or anglagard wish to discuss it further (since it is not about humans/dinosaurs it is heading off topic).

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 52 by randman, posted 03-19-2006 1:11 AM randman has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 54 by randman, posted 03-19-2006 2:17 PM Modulous has replied

      
    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 54 of 108 (296619)
    03-19-2006 2:17 PM
    Reply to: Message 53 by Modulous
    03-19-2006 8:18 AM


    Re: TalkOrigins/propaganda
    No, I demonstrated it amply. No objective person that is educated in indoctrination and propaganda technigues could fail to see what I wrote is true. To hear someone like yourself say "you failed to support" means nothing. If you were taught the sky was orange, and I produced photos of it being blue, it wouldn't change your opinion. You'd still say the same thing. There are no facts, logic, etc,...that can affect you as you cling to what appears to me to be a religiously held beleif.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 53 by Modulous, posted 03-19-2006 8:18 AM Modulous has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 56 by Modulous, posted 03-19-2006 4:23 PM randman has replied

      
    Coragyps
    Member (Idle past 734 days)
    Posts: 5553
    From: Snyder, Texas, USA
    Joined: 11-12-2002


    Message 55 of 108 (296624)
    03-19-2006 2:54 PM
    Reply to: Message 49 by anglagard
    03-18-2006 8:51 PM


    Re: anybody got a link besides TalkOrigins
    Big Spring???!!!! Yowza! Let's get together for a beer/coffee/other beverage!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 49 by anglagard, posted 03-18-2006 8:51 PM anglagard has not replied

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


    Message 56 of 108 (296629)
    03-19-2006 4:23 PM
    Reply to: Message 54 by randman
    03-19-2006 2:17 PM


    Re: TalkOrigins/propaganda
    No, I demonstrated it amply. No objective person that is educated in indoctrination and propaganda technigues could fail to see what I wrote is true. To hear someone like yourself say "you failed to support" means nothing. If you were taught the sky was orange, and I produced photos of it being blue, it wouldn't change your opinion. You'd still say the same thing. There are no facts, logic, etc,...that can affect you as you cling to what appears to me to be a religiously held beleif.
    Keep your hair on. Naturally that was my opinion of the debate based on your lack of showing any section where the accused equivocation was employed. It wasn't like you responded to any of my refutations, so how would I know if you had addressed/refuted them? I didn't see any suitable refutation in any of your other posts. I'm not going to raise my objections again, but if you'd like a reminder check out the following posts of mine that you didn't respond to:
    Message 31
    Message 45
    Message 52
    Message 87
    Message 89
    Message 208
    Message 223
    Message 227
    I would be more than happy if you want to show your evidence/refute my position/show me the sky is blue. I also remind you that this thread is about dinosaurs and humans allegedly walking with them. The thread we are now discussing was an offshoot of this one that was created in response to your claims here. I ask you nicely to not continue the off topicness of this discussion and if you want to discuss T.O propaganda, take it to the referenced and appropriate thread. Thanks, and take care.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 54 by randman, posted 03-19-2006 2:17 PM randman has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 60 by randman, posted 03-20-2006 1:52 AM Modulous has not replied

      
    knitrofreak
    Inactive Member


    Message 57 of 108 (296688)
    03-20-2006 12:10 AM
    Reply to: Message 48 by RAZD
    03-17-2006 10:12 PM


    Re: on the creation side...
    Ok first i havent looked closely at the fossil record but just because they arent in the same layer doesnt meant they didnt die at the same time. I dont believe that the fossil record is in chronological order. Layers could have been shifted up and down to jumble things a bit. Like i said its been a while since i was in biology

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 48 by RAZD, posted 03-17-2006 10:12 PM RAZD has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 58 by ReverendDG, posted 03-20-2006 12:23 AM knitrofreak has not replied
     Message 59 by DrJones*, posted 03-20-2006 12:23 AM knitrofreak has not replied
     Message 63 by RAZD, posted 03-20-2006 7:58 AM knitrofreak has replied

      
    ReverendDG
    Member (Idle past 4110 days)
    Posts: 1119
    From: Topeka,kansas
    Joined: 06-06-2005


    Message 58 of 108 (296689)
    03-20-2006 12:23 AM
    Reply to: Message 57 by knitrofreak
    03-20-2006 12:10 AM


    Re: on the creation side...
    Sorry, but I have to say this, you are thinking of the wrong science if you are speaking of layers, you mean geology

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 57 by knitrofreak, posted 03-20-2006 12:10 AM knitrofreak has not replied

      
    DrJones*
    Member
    Posts: 2284
    From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Joined: 08-19-2004
    Member Rating: 6.8


    Message 59 of 108 (296690)
    03-20-2006 12:23 AM
    Reply to: Message 57 by knitrofreak
    03-20-2006 12:10 AM


    Re: on the creation side...
    I dont believe that the fossil record is in chronological order. Layers could have been shifted up and down to jumble things a bit.
    Then how do you account for the radiometric dating that shows that the deeper you go the older it gets?

    If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
    *not an actual doctor

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 57 by knitrofreak, posted 03-20-2006 12:10 AM knitrofreak has not replied

      
    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 60 of 108 (296692)
    03-20-2006 1:52 AM
    Reply to: Message 56 by Modulous
    03-19-2006 4:23 PM


    Re: TalkOrigins/propaganda
    You said nothing nice, and just spouted a bunch of crap about another thread, and are now whining about it in a juvenile fashion. Bottom line is I amply showed on that thread the distortion, illogic, etc,...of TO evo arguments. You guys don't see it?
    Why am I not surprised...

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 56 by Modulous, posted 03-19-2006 4:23 PM Modulous has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 61 by ReverendDG, posted 03-20-2006 2:13 AM randman has not replied
     Message 62 by AdminModulous, posted 03-20-2006 6:39 AM randman 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