Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-26-2019 2:30 AM
25 online now:
AZPaul3, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Tangle (4 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,793 Year: 9,829/19,786 Month: 2,251/2,119 Week: 287/724 Day: 12/114 Hour: 1/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
45678
9
Author Topic:   101 evidences for a young age...
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 6316
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 121 of 135 (518998)
08-10-2009 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by wirkkalaj
08-08-2009 11:52 PM


Did you hit your quota of 20 posts?
You committed to continuing this topic in an appropriate thread. Are you now backing down?

You have been given the link to the appropriate thread. You have posted to other threads since you agreed. Is there a problem? Do you need someone to start the debate?

Are we to assume since you have hit your quota of 20 you are no longer posting? Or that you realize you can not back up your assertions?


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by wirkkalaj, posted 08-08-2009 11:52 PM wirkkalaj has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by wirkkalaj, posted 08-20-2009 3:13 AM Theodoric has responded

    
Coyote
Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 122 of 135 (519002)
08-10-2009 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by RAZD
08-10-2009 9:02 AM


Re: reality testing - the evidence/s neccessary
RAZD, I have presented evidence far better than what the creationists have presented showing that centaurs and humans coexisted.

They use various rock paintings and carvings of dubious detail to show dinosaurs are/were still around just a few thousand years ago. Those paintings and carvings, as you point out, are subject to multiple interpretations and prove nothing.

But the carving I linked to, being correct in anatomical detail, definitively proves that centaurs existed!

And if you want to discard this evidence, you'll break a lot of creationists' hearts as they are relying on much flimsier evidence for their claims.

So are you going to be a big meanie and dash all of their hopes and aspirations that dinosaurs and humans were cavorting about together just a few thousand years ago, thereby "proving" a young earth?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by RAZD, posted 08-10-2009 9:02 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by bluescat48, posted 08-10-2009 3:58 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 870 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 123 of 135 (519014)
08-10-2009 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by RAZD
08-09-2009 7:04 PM


Re: reality testing
Hi, RAZD.

RAZD writes:

However, the argument is that these depictions are anatomically correct, thus demonstrating knowledge of the living animal.

I disagree with this. Wirkkalaj's argument is that dinosaurs influenced ancient cultures and art, not that the ancients were particularly good at anatomical illustration.

Your entire line of argument is easily defeated by Wirkkalaj suggesting that the artisan was carving based on an anecdote, or from memory long after the sighting.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by RAZD, posted 08-09-2009 7:04 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by RAZD, posted 08-10-2009 4:25 PM Blue Jay has responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2362 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 124 of 135 (519025)
08-10-2009 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Coyote
08-10-2009 11:17 AM


Re: reality testing - the evidence/s neccessary
And if you want to discard this evidence, you'll break a lot of creationists' hearts as they are relying on much flimsier evidence for their claims.

Maybe their hearts wouldn't break if they got some legitimate evidence.
The next thing they will be saying that the Flintstones proves young earth, oh, I forgot that they have already tried that, the "Creation Museum."


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Coyote, posted 08-10-2009 11:17 AM Coyote has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19887
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 125 of 135 (519027)
08-10-2009 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Blue Jay
08-10-2009 1:43 PM


Re: reality testing
Hi Bluejay, I think you are reading more into his argument than exists.

I disagree with this. Wirkkalaj's argument is that dinosaurs influenced ancient cultures and art, not that the ancients were particularly good at anatomical illustration.

I went back over all his posts on this thread and did not see that argument.

Message 75
Message 80
Message 93
Message 95
Message 99
Message 101
Message 102
Message 110

What I did see was:

Message 72

quote:
So how could they have drawings, statues and other artifacts that (in many cases) look just like dinosaurs if they never saw them?

Message 87

quote:
I still don't see how can say that the carvings do not at least resemble a Stegasaurus (spelling?). Even a 1st grader could see the resemblance!? You might consider that their interpretations of the beast are more accurate than our fossil re-constructions because they saw them first hand.

Your entire line of argument is easily defeated by Wirkkalaj suggesting that the artisan was carving based on an anecdote, or from memory long after the sighting.

A position that also destroys the argument that they are drawn\carved etc from first hand knowledge, as he is quoted as arguing.

No, for the only way the argument can be valid is if the argument follows this form:

Depiction (A) shows a dinosaur
this depiction compares to (B) a known dinosaur
Therefore humans and dinosaur (B) co-existed

And there can be no anatomical errors (spikes on the head instead of the tail, head too large, etc)

Enjoy.


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 123 by Blue Jay, posted 08-10-2009 1:43 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Blue Jay, posted 10-12-2009 11:40 AM RAZD has responded

  
wirkkalaj
Member (Idle past 3506 days)
Posts: 22
From: Fernley
Joined: 07-03-2009


Message 126 of 135 (520241)
08-20-2009 3:13 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Theodoric
08-10-2009 9:58 AM


Re: Did you hit your quota of 20 posts?
Not at all. I just do not post as often as I'd like to. I will continue the debate, but it comes at a bad time. I am moving to Hawaii on the 24th of Aug. It will take me a while to get settled, but I look forward to getting my computer set-up! I still don't have a laptop.....I want one sooo bad!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Theodoric, posted 08-10-2009 9:58 AM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by Coragyps, posted 08-20-2009 9:14 AM wirkkalaj has not yet responded
 Message 128 by Theodoric, posted 08-20-2009 10:49 AM wirkkalaj has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5393
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 127 of 135 (520273)
08-20-2009 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by wirkkalaj
08-20-2009 3:13 AM


Re: Did you hit your quota of 20 posts?
I am moving to Hawaii on the 24th of Aug.

You poor thing! Eat some shrimp from one of the white trucks, and think of us poor suckers you left here on the mainland.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by wirkkalaj, posted 08-20-2009 3:13 AM wirkkalaj has not yet responded

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 6316
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 128 of 135 (520282)
08-20-2009 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by wirkkalaj
08-20-2009 3:13 AM


Still waiting for wirkkalaj in the thread on carbon dating
Whatever happened to posting to the dating thread? You said multiple times you were going to bring your argument to a thread where it would be on topic. We never did see you there.

As a reminder.

Radioactive Carbon Dating

Edited by Theodoric, : fixed coding


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by wirkkalaj, posted 08-20-2009 3:13 AM wirkkalaj has not yet responded

    
holerelay
Junior Member (Idle past 3503 days)
Posts: 1
Joined: 05-27-2009


Message 129 of 135 (520712)
08-23-2009 1:19 PM


Odd spam hidden
(The movement has begun. Joint it. Copy the following message to your email address, enlarge it and send it to the people on your list.)

Nature has always been God's most powerful spokesman.

The natural beauty which compose our world and summon awe have all testified.

Now, for the first time ever, natural science has reveled to the world the afterlife.

The secret diary of an anonymous physicist details the recent discovery.

Despite attempts to conceal the diary, "Doe's Account", it has finally been made available to all through DoesAccount.com

People of faith and progressive thinkers are uniting under this single discovery
Join the movement. Forward this to all those you care for and help build the staircase to heaven.

{For unknown reasons, someone registered 3 months ago, and this is the members first message.- Adminnemooseus}

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Peek away to see the content. It's spam, but an odd spam. Not banning the spammer.


Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by pandion, posted 08-24-2009 1:01 AM holerelay has not yet responded

    
pandion
Member (Idle past 1173 days)
Posts: 166
From: Houston
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 130 of 135 (520787)
08-24-2009 1:01 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by holerelay
08-23-2009 1:19 PM


Re: Odd spam hidden
{For unknown reasons, someone registered 3 months ago, and this is the members first message.- Adminnemooseus}

It smacked of Heaven's Gate complex to me. Or even Jim Jones.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by holerelay, posted 08-23-2009 1:19 PM holerelay has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 870 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 131 of 135 (530129)
10-12-2009 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by RAZD
08-10-2009 4:25 PM


Re: reality testing
Hi, RAZD.

I didnít even see this reply, and itís really old now. But, Iím kind of bored right now, so I might as well stir up the old pot a little again.

Also, this serves as a bump for dragon material, which has recently cropped up in TOE and the Reasons for Doubt.

RAZD writes:

Hi Bluejay, I think you are reading more into his argument than exists.

This was kind of an odd thing to say to the person who was taking a more conservative stance on the topic than you were.

Bluejay: Wirkkalaj thinks ancient humans saw dinosaurs and made artwork about them.

RAZD: Wirkkalaj thinks ancient humans saw dinosaurs and made perfect anatomical reconstructions of them.

-----

RAZD writes:

Bluejay writes:

Wirkkalaj's argument is that dinosaurs influenced ancient cultures and art, not that the ancients were particularly good at anatomical illustration.

I went back over all his posts on this thread and did not see that argument.

You know damn well Wirkkalaj was arguing that the ancients saw dinosaurs and made artwork of them, not that the ancients were good at drawing dinosaurs. Even though he made one statement about the accuracy of the reconstruction, this is at best a peripheral issue in his argument, and defeating that one statement wouldnít even come close to defeating his overall argument.

You were willing to accept that inaccurate reconstructions of jaguars and eagles donít mean the ancients didnít see jaguars or eagles, but, in the case of dinosaurs, you demanded higher standards. Why? Was the perfection/accuracy of the art really the issue here?

-----

RAZD writes:

Bluejay writes:

Your entire line of argument is easily defeated by Wirkkalaj suggesting that the artisan was carving based on an anecdote, or from memory long after the sighting.

A position that also destroys the argument that they are drawn\carved etc from first hand knowledge, as he is quoted as arguing.

Which also wasnít the core issue of his argument. He doesnít have to argue that the artists carved the dinosaur while looking at one grazing in a nearby field in order to argue that ancient humans saw dinosaurs and depicted them in their art. The discrepancies can be chalked up to bad memory, bad art skills, or fixation on one particular aspect of the animal at the expense of others.

-----

RAZD writes:

Depiction (A) shows a dinosaur
this depiction compares to (B) a known dinosaur
Therefore humans and dinosaur (B) co-existed

And there can be no anatomical errors (spikes on the head instead of the tail, head too large, etc)

Why can there be no anatomical errors? I hear first-hand bug stories all the time about cockroaches six inches long and spiders with twenty or more legs (neither of which has ever been documented)... Iím very familiar with the inability of people to properly diagnose the weird stuff right in front of their eyes.

Look at this carving of a human:


A Sheela-na-Gig (depiction of a nude female) from a Medieval church in England

Here all of its anatomical inaccuracies:

  • huge head and eyes
  • no ears
  • arms longer than legs
  • genitalia longer than legs
  • head wider than body
  • head round
  • no forehead
  • no eyebrows
  • no hair on the head
  • no breasts

Does this mean the artist never saw a human?

Why do you demand that depictions of dinosaurs be more accurate than depictions of humans or jaguars? Canít they be authentic without being perfectly faithful reproductions?

-----

Disclaimer: Sure, humans certainly never saw dinosaurs. But, discrepancies in the details of ancient artwork are not a good way to support this, because the quality and accuracy of ancient artwork are always suspect anyway.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by RAZD, posted 08-10-2009 4:25 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by bluescat48, posted 10-12-2009 12:16 PM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply
 Message 133 by greyseal, posted 10-12-2009 1:41 PM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply
 Message 134 by RAZD, posted 10-12-2009 4:18 PM Blue Jay has responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2362 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 132 of 135 (530138)
10-12-2009 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Blue Jay
10-12-2009 11:40 AM


Re: reality testing
One point that I haven't seen is this. How sure are we that our depiction of Dinosaurs is correct? Could it be that our depiction is more from these drawings than from a totally scientific depiction. Obviously there has to be some speculation as to the actual shape since no one was there to "Take pictures." I find this similar to those who "See" Christ or the Virgin Mary in toast or some other medium. Who, today, knows what they looked like? Again no Photos.


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Blue Jay, posted 10-12-2009 11:40 AM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply

    
greyseal
Member (Idle past 2034 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 133 of 135 (530154)
10-12-2009 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Blue Jay
10-12-2009 11:40 AM


Re: reality testing
humourously enough (if you'll forgive the sidelining) that particular picture, to the more conservative historians of yesteryear, was recreated and redescribed as a saintly picture with a holyman/angel of some sort opening his chest to reveal his pure heart.

Rather than, you know, a woman pulling her second pair of lips wide...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Blue Jay, posted 10-12-2009 11:40 AM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19887
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 134 of 135 (530180)
10-12-2009 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Blue Jay
10-12-2009 11:40 AM


Re: reality testing
Hi Bluejay, yeah, old posts

Does this mean the artist never saw a human?

No, what it means is that the statue is not proof that the artist did see humans.

Why can there be no anatomical errors? I hear first-hand bug stories all the time about cockroaches six inches long and spiders with twenty or more legs (neither of which has ever been documented)... Iím very familiar with the inability of people to properly diagnose the weird stuff right in front of their eyes.

Because only with anatomically correct representations can you conclude that they co-existed.

Any other depiction that can be derived from seeing fossil bones can only prove that they saw fossil bones.

Enjoy


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 131 by Blue Jay, posted 10-12-2009 11:40 AM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Blue Jay, posted 10-12-2009 5:43 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 870 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 135 of 135 (530223)
10-12-2009 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by RAZD
10-12-2009 4:18 PM


Re: reality testing
Hi, RAZD.

RAZD writes:

Because only with anatomically correct representations can you conclude that they co-existed.

But, you can't expect too much of ancient people. The quality of, for instance, the Angkor-Wat carving, if interpreted as a stegosaur, is consistent with the quality of the other pictures depicting other creatures.

By the way, Stegosaurus was endemic to North America, so there's no way the Angkor-Wat carving was based on Stegosaurus: however, there are Old World stegosaurs that have horns on their shoulders, very near to their heads, e.g.:


Kentrosaurus

If they only ever saw such an animal with its head down in the grass than I suspect it would look like it had horns on its head.

Again, it's just apologetics, but I think it's only fair to grant that we can't really expect much more than that level of quality from the ancients. I don't know what else the carving could be interpreted as, other than a stegosaurid, so it at least shows that the ancient Cambodians knew about stegosaurs.

But, the best argument against this isn't to point out its anatomical inaccuracies, because everything back then was carved with anatomical inaccuracies.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by RAZD, posted 10-12-2009 4:18 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Prev1
...
45678
9
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019