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
JonF
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 76 of 108 (298399)
03-26-2006 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by knitrofreak
03-26-2006 5:59 PM


Re: Searching Questions for Evolutionists
Most discussion boards, including this one, disapprove of unacknowledged quotes, especially when an entire long post is plagiarized. Do You Believe that Evolution is True?. Also, the moderators of this forum are strict about topics, and will probably have a comment on your exceptionally off-topic post (and, no doubt, on my reply).
Perhaps when you learn enough to come up with your own questions you will also know enough to realize that your post is no challenge to the ToE, consisting as it does solely of PRATTs (Points Refuted A Thousand Times), but it does reflect poorly on your state of knowledge. An Index to Creationist Claims is a good resource to check before posting something you've grabbed from a creationist website without deliberation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by knitrofreak, posted 03-26-2006 5:59 PM knitrofreak has not replied

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


Message 77 of 108 (298444)
03-26-2006 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by knitrofreak
03-26-2006 5:46 PM


Re: on the creation side... nothing.
Okay, lets recap on the topic issues.
In your first post you said:
knitrofreak, msg 44 writes:
God created every kind of all the animals at one time, also humans were created then too. So according to the Bible I believe that Adam and Eve and others walked with the dinosaurs. My thought on how they became extinct is when the flood happened.
When confronted with the evidence of layers in the geological record not supporting this view you said:
knitrofreak, msg 57 writes:
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
You acknowledged that you had not "looked closely" at the things you asserted in your post, and then proceeded to make another similar assertion on the chronology. This too was challenged, with a (proper) thread provided to pursue this matter, but so far this has not been attemped.
(http://EvC Forum: Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III))
Whereupon you made another post:
knitrofreak, msg 67 writes:
"Feel free to believe that the sun orbits the earth. What you believe is irrelevant to the issue of what the evidence shows."
Exactly. There is no evidence for neo darwinistic evolution.
And now when that assertion is challenged you post:
Yes thanks for saying that. I guess I shouldnt be so dogmatic about there isnt evidence for evolution even though I still dont believe it.
It appears that you have a pattern of making unsubstantiated and unsupportable assertions that are based on nothing more than your belief, and making no effort to determine their validity before making the assertions.
As far as your belief goes, I again repeat that you are free to believe whatever you want - that the sun orbits the earth and that the earth is only 6000 years old - the real question is what evidence you deny as true to maintain that belief, or whether you are ready to accept facts that contradict your beliefs.
Just because they say it it in Scientific Journals doenst make it true.
Of course not. But when {experiments\predictions\results} are {validated\repeated\confirmed} by other scientists then it becomes rather impertinent to hand-wave the results away, especially without doing any studies that show how the results are wrong. This is what the scientific process is about -- eliminating mistakes step by step as more information is aquired.
In my biology textbook last year they were putting lots of things that have been proven untrue.
That doesn't surprise me in the slightest for three reasons:
(1) High School biology textbooks are known to contain errors in part due to publication problems and in part due to influence on the publishers from non-scientists (parents, politicians),
(2) Science marches onward, so things that were theorized before as the best explanation get invalidated, and new theories arise to explain the changes (this is how relativity replaced newtonian physics), as theories can ONLY be shown false and never "proved" and
(3) I suspect that the "lots" is another of your assertions based on your beliefs and that a number of these things if listed would be shown as valid.
Certainly it saddens me that our schools present false information to our students, but this is off-topic here.
This would actually make a wonderful thread topic (Randman tried something like it, but didn't have a textbook to use for a source of published errors). If you still have your textbook you could start a topic taking these items one by one. I'm sure that if you call it "Biology Textbook Errors" - and keep it to one (perceived) error at a time - that the admins will promote it (Is It Science would be the appropriate forum eh?).
I was just saying there is no evidence that one animal turned completely into another. Scientists have been bombarding fruit flys with radiation for years and what do they get. A different type of fly or insect? NO just more mutatated messed up fruit flys.
Oh dear. Another PRATT. This is really getting off-topic here too (Humans walked with dinosaurs). I'm sure this has been addressed previously on this forum on other threads - perhaps one of the admins can find a good fit for further discussion.
Speciation has been observed outside the labs. See the {Imported weed diversification supports macro-evolution} for and example of speciation (but not "macro"evolution as claimed):
http://EvC Forum: Imported weed diversification supports macro-evolution
To sum up:
No substantiated evidence that humans walked with dinosaurs has been presented yet on this thread.
The {geological\paleontological} evidence that this did NOT happen has not been addressed in any way that would invalidate the logical conclusion that all (large non-bird) dinosaurs died out well before any humans (or for that matter apes (or for that matter monkeys)) existed on this earth.
This is NOT a matter involving evolution, per se, but the geological and fossil evidence.
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 70 by knitrofreak, posted 03-26-2006 5:46 PM knitrofreak has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Coragyps, posted 03-26-2006 10:13 PM RAZD has not replied
 Message 81 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 12:44 AM RAZD has replied

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


Message 78 of 108 (298449)
03-26-2006 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by RAZD
03-26-2006 9:54 PM


Re: on the creation side... nothing.
I'm sure that if you call it "Biology Textbook Errors" - and keep it to one (perceived) error at a time - that the admins will promote it (Is It Science would be the appropriate forum eh?).
That would be a wonderful topic! Dig that book out, KNO3!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by RAZD, posted 03-26-2006 9:54 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by arachnophilia, posted 03-26-2006 11:02 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 79 of 108 (298467)
03-26-2006 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Coragyps
03-26-2006 10:13 PM


Re: on the creation side... nothing.
That would be a wonderful topic! Dig that book out, KNO3!
randman had a thread like that, i think. it turned into another "OMG HAECKEL LIED!!!!~~~ONE" thread.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Coragyps, posted 03-26-2006 10:13 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
knitrofreak
Inactive Member


Message 80 of 108 (298500)
03-27-2006 12:37 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by knitrofreak
03-26-2006 5:59 PM


Re: Searching Questions for Evolutionists
WELL EXCUSE ME!!!!
here is the site I got the information from. Its great stuff and will test what you believe.
TurnPike Web Hosting Services and E-Commerce Solutions by Crystal Lust

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by knitrofreak, posted 03-26-2006 5:59 PM knitrofreak has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by nwr, posted 03-27-2006 12:48 AM knitrofreak has not replied
 Message 83 by RAZD, posted 03-27-2006 6:56 AM knitrofreak has not replied
 Message 85 by ramoss, posted 03-27-2006 12:59 PM knitrofreak has replied

  
knitrofreak
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 108 (298502)
03-27-2006 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by RAZD
03-26-2006 9:54 PM


Re: on the creation side... nothing.
"Of course not. But when {experiments\predictions\results} are {validated\repeated\confirmed} by other scientists then it becomes rather impertinent to hand-wave the results away, especially without doing any studies that show how the results are wrong. This is what the scientific process is about -- eliminating mistakes step by step as more information is aquired."
Ok so tell me how evolution can be repeated if it takes such a long time to happen or so fast you cant see it(puncutated equillibrium). Evolution does not fall in the the science category: repeatable, testable or observable.
I would also like to apoligize for some of the statements that I have made. I would like to start fresh and forget all I said and try to have more EVIDENCE because YES that is what determines this stuff. Guys just forgive me or leave it. I would appreciate it!
Thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by RAZD, posted 03-26-2006 9:54 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by RAZD, posted 03-27-2006 7:07 AM knitrofreak has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 82 of 108 (298505)
03-27-2006 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by knitrofreak
03-27-2006 12:37 AM


Re: Searching Questions for Evolutionists
WELL EXCUSE ME!!!!
Are you talking to yourself?
If you look at the top right of your message, you will see that it is a reply to your own message.
That site has really bad arguments. Even many creationists will cringe on seeing such nonsense.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 12:37 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 83 of 108 (298543)
03-27-2006 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by knitrofreak
03-27-2006 12:37 AM


Another possible new topic
Its great stuff and will test what you believe.
Again this is material for another thread. Each "question" could be taken one at a time.
This topic is humans walked with dinosaurs, so it needs to involve
Humans
Dinosaurs
Coexistence
Anything without those elements is off-topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 12:37 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 84 of 108 (298544)
03-27-2006 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by knitrofreak
03-27-2006 12:44 AM


New Topics Needed -- NOT Here.
I would also like to apoligize for some of the statements that I have made. I would like to start fresh and forget all I said and try to have more EVIDENCE because YES that is what determines this stuff.
But you did it again:
Ok so tell me how evolution can be repeated if it takes such a long time to happen or so fast you cant see it(puncutated equillibrium). Evolution does not fall in the the science category: repeatable, testable or observable.
This is off-topic here, as it doesn't involve the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs.
If you want to discuss evolution this needs to be on another thread.
Note that changing the topic is a classic dodge in the book of creatortionista shuck-and-jive, "How to reply to Evolution without answering the questions"
So, I look forward to three new topics from you:
Biology Textbook Errors
Challenging Questions for Evolutionists
Evolution: Repeatable, Testable, Observable?
I think these are all good topics, and should provide plenty of material to debate with substantiated answers.

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 81 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 12:44 AM knitrofreak has not replied

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


Message 85 of 108 (298686)
03-27-2006 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by knitrofreak
03-27-2006 12:37 AM


Re: Searching Questions for Evolutionists
Hum. What is a whole bunch of logical fallacies with misinformation and lies have to do with 'humans walked with dinosaurs'?
I mean, the misinformation in that one page is astounding.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 12:37 AM knitrofreak has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 8:50 PM ramoss has not replied

  
knitrofreak
Inactive Member


Message 86 of 108 (298839)
03-27-2006 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by ramoss
03-27-2006 12:59 PM


Re: Searching Questions for Evolutionists
just the same i think evolution is a fallacy that may seem logical to those who want to make them not responsible to a higher power they may need to answer to. but thats off topic as ive well been told.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by ramoss, posted 03-27-2006 12:59 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Chiroptera, posted 03-27-2006 9:00 PM knitrofreak has not replied
 Message 88 by jar, posted 03-27-2006 9:06 PM knitrofreak has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 108 (298841)
03-27-2006 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by knitrofreak
03-27-2006 8:50 PM


Re: Searching Questions for Evolutionists
Hey, knitrofreak, you're in luck! There's a still active thread to discuss that very topic! Click here!

"Religion is the best business to be in. It's the only one where the customers blame themselves for product failure."
-- Ellis Weiner (quoted on the NAiG message board)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 8:50 PM knitrofreak has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 88 of 108 (298843)
03-27-2006 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by knitrofreak
03-27-2006 8:50 PM


Fine but still wrong.
just the same i think evolution is a fallacy that may seem logical to those who want to make them not responsible to a higher power they may need to answer to. but thats off topic as ive well been told.
That's fine, but way wrong. Almost every major Christian Church accepts the Therory of Evolution and opposes the teaching the myth of Biblical Creationism. So don't try that silly argument even in a thread where it would be on topic.
To quote from the Clergy Project, an open letter signed by over 10,000 US Christian Clergy, Priests, Pastors, and Ministers:
We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge.
Biblical Creationism is simply wrong and a retreat into Holy Ignorance.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 8:50 PM knitrofreak has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 10:23 PM jar has replied

  
knitrofreak
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 108 (298848)
03-27-2006 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by jar
03-27-2006 9:06 PM


Re: Fine but still wrong.
are you a christian?
also there are many sects that have formed and they arent all true christians they dont believe the same. Let me just say that true christians DO NOT believe in evolution that changes one animal to another type. I do know that there is an evolution that exists. I need to research it more
This message has been edited by knitrofreak, 03-27-2006 08:43 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by jar, posted 03-27-2006 9:06 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by RAZD, posted 03-27-2006 10:27 PM knitrofreak has replied
 Message 91 by jar, posted 03-27-2006 10:45 PM knitrofreak has replied

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


Message 90 of 108 (298852)
03-27-2006 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by knitrofreak
03-27-2006 10:23 PM


Re: Fine but still OFFTOPIC.
Yes he is. Would it matter if he wasn't? No.
This is still off-topic. Perhaps it needs to be closed for a while if we can't get back on:
humans
dinosaurs
coexistence
something relevant to the evidence against this having happened.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 10:23 PM knitrofreak has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by knitrofreak, posted 03-27-2006 10:45 PM RAZD 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