Does his help you

[hortysir]

Evolution is a religion now?

no, not now or ever.
some people see it as a competitor for the hearts and minds of believers.

Or just a handy little cocktail fork to try to stick said believers in the eye?

I'm not a YEC
I believe there is room for both intelligent design AND still allow for some evolution.

Lizard to bird, however?
In a world dictated by "survival of the fittest", anything between the lizard and bird would never survive

 

[SmedlyButler]

Creation was the briefest of moments. The rest is evolution. Get over it.

The initial conditions of the Universe do seem to have come about in the briefest moment of time. What "triggered" that big bang or what, if anything, pre-existed? I don't think anybody has a clue. Maybe it was created by a civilization billions of years in advance of ours. Maybe they set the parameters and constants of this Universe just as a 'what if" experiment. Maybe they have thousands of experiments underway in thousands of dimensions. Hell maybe it's such a minor undertaking we might be in a high school lab project. Who knows?

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law

 

[Mr. H.]

Creation was the briefest of moments. The rest is evolution. Get over it.

The initial conditions of the Universe do seem to have come about in the briefest moment of time. What "triggered" that big bang or what, if anything, pre-existed? I don't think anybody has a clue. Maybe it was created by a civilization billions of years in advance of ours. Maybe they set the parameters and constants of this Universe just as a 'what if" experiment. Maybe they have thousands of experiments underway in thousands of dimensions. Hell maybe it's such a minor undertaking we might be in a high school lab project. Who knows?

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law

I have my own thoughts on that which I've posted before. I probably need to get drunk again to remember them.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Actually they are not even close to "exactly the same thing". That walking shark is cartilaginous and tetrapods have skeletons. An evolutionary biologist might call them good examples of convergent evolution. And you do know that scientists labeled this a transitional species and not I don't you? So that would make those scientists ignorant and me gullible? Also some people call extant species that resemble a long extinct animal "Living Fossils" They're quite common.

You seem to have anger issues, has anyone ever suggested therapy? Have to watch that blood pressure you know.

Your own article pointed out that the mudfish has the same basic pelvis, I simply used the walking shark to prove you know less about science than the average kid who reads the funny pages.

The Comic Strips - Cartoon View and Uses

you get your science info.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Yee-Haw

I can't imbibe anymore but have one for me! (Once a month or so I might have a toke. It can have a stimulative effect on the imagination also.)

 

[SmedlyButler]

Sounds great.

Now that I'm retired I'd love to go on a fossil hunt. It's going on my bucket list. Any way to show us a pic?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The evidence just keeps piling up. And you're right, I haven't seen any serious objection to the bird-dinosaur connection for a long time. To me it's wonderfully counter intuitive to picture the delicate hummingbird descended from the lumbering giants of my imagination. Nature gives us great mysteries to ponder.

"The origin of birds refers to the initial stages in the evolution of birds. The scientific consensus is that birds are a group of theropod dinosaurs that evolved during the Mesozoic Era.
A close relationship between birds and dinosaurs was first proposed in the nineteenth century after the discovery of the primitive bird Archaeopteryx in Germany. Birds share many unique skeletal features with dinosaurs.[1] Moreover, fossils of more than twenty species of dinosaur have been collected with preserved feathers. There are even very small dinosaurs, such as Microraptor and Anchiornis, which have long, vaned, arm and leg feathers forming wings. The Jurassic basal avialan Pedopenna also shows these long foot feathers. Witmer (2009) has concluded that this evidence is sufficient to demonstrate that avian evolution went through a four-winged stage"
Origin of Birds- Wikipedia

SB

The hummingbird is not descended from those lumbering giants in the real world, even if your imagination thinks they are.

I almost gave your bullshit a pass...
not all dinosaurs were lumbering giants in fact there were many more small dinosaurs then large ones.
there is evidence that dinosaurs were warm blooded..

http://prehistoricwwb.files.wordpre...urus__past_and_present_by_brokenmachine86.jpg




one more thing there is no difference between the science and Techniques in forensic Reconstruction of partial human remains and dinosaurs...
proving windbag is just that!

Do you want a lecture in evolution?

I did not say that dinosaurs and modern birds are not related, I stated that hummingbirds are not descended from the lumbering giants in Smedly's fevered imagination. If you knew half as much about evolution as you think you do you would have agreed with that statement, and not tried to lecture me on how stupid you are.

The common fossil between hummingbirds and swifts dates back 50 million years. That, effectively, makes the lumbering giants of Smedley's imagination and hummingbirds contemporaries, which is why I said they did not descend from them.

Feel free to admit that you shouldn't try to correct a smart ass when he is smacking an idiot, it just makes you look dumber than the idiot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It would help if we didn't try to fit every issue into a left-right box. For instance Evolution is a scientific theory. science does not regard right or left, only the evidence. You can argue the evidence, you can't ignore the evidence because you think it has some sort of political slant. Facts are facts without regard to any social judgement.

Then stop treating people who know more about science than you do like they are right wing lunatics, asshole.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I didn't mean to suggest that all or most dinosaurs were "lumbering giants". Just that is the archetype we (or at least I) have carried from childhood. Thanks for the rational posts.

The problem is that you really don't know what you are talking about. Some dinosaurs were avians, others weren't. When you really dig into it birds are warm blooded reptiles, which makes it even more confusing. Personally, I object to what you said because it takes millions of generations for the size changes you alluded to take place.

Dinobuzz: Dinosaur-Bird Relationships

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblo...ody-size-on-earth-from-mouse-to-elephant.html

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I didn't mean to suggest that all or most dinosaurs were "lumbering giants". Just that is the archetype we (or at least I) have carried from childhood. Thanks for the rational posts.

you didn't windbag did...not to worry!

Actually, you did,, just like you always do.

 

[SmedlyButler]

It would help if we didn't try to fit every issue into a left-right box. For instance Evolution is a scientific theory. science does not regard right or left, only the evidence. You can argue the evidence, you can't ignore the evidence because you think it has some sort of political slant. Facts are facts without regard to any social judgement.

Then stop treating people who know more about science than you do like they are right wing lunatics, asshole.

Any chance you could give me a specific example where I've treated anybody in this thread "like they are right wing lunatics"? Except for your outbursts I would say it's been relatively cordial. (I guess I am however right this moment wondering if perhaps there is a lunatic lurking about)

 

[westwall]

Evolution is a religion now?

no, not now or ever.
some people see it as a competitor for the hearts and minds of believers.

Or just a handy little cocktail fork to try to stick said believers in the eye?

I'm not a YEC
I believe there is room for both intelligent design AND still allow for some evolution.

Lizard to bird, however?
In a world dictated by "survival of the fittest", anything between the lizard and bird would never survive

Not lizards. They never were. The skeletal structure of the chicken is remarkably similar to the T-Rex.

 

[westwall]

Sounds great.

Now that I'm retired I'd love to go on a fossil hunt. It's going on my bucket list. Any way to show us a pic?

Yeah, I'll see if I can post a picture of it tomorrow.

 

[hobelim]

Can't help wonder how Noah got over 5 million different species on board the Ark. x2=10,000,000+ individuals. If you don't allow for evolution at least post-flood impossible!

Jesus specifically referred to various people as sheep, goats, donkeys, serpents, dogs, swine, foxes, wolves, worms, etc. as is consistent with a talking snake and the described wild beasts of the field in the OT.

If you consider that the animals brought 2 by 2 on board with Noah were of the human kind, there would have been no more than a couple dozen people.

As far as where did all the people go, genetic research suggests that about 75,000 years ago there was a cataclysmic event which reduced the human population from millions to a few thousand worldwide. Also a crater on the bottom of the Indian ocean suggests an impact event that would have instantaneously vaporized billions of metric tons of water into the atmosphere causing a worldwide deluge of super storms, tsunamis, etc which dates to the approximate time of the story of Gilgamesh which many believe the story of Noah was based on..

I haven't seen that Jesus passage, could you give me a citation. THX

SB

There are actually separate passages where Jesus specifically refers to certain people as lower beasts or birds. "my sheep know my voice', "do not give what is holy to the dogs; do not throw your pearls to the swine", "beware of wolves in sheep clothing", "you snakes; brood of vipers, how will you escape the condemnation of hell?" "who among you would not help a donkey out of a ditch on the Sabbath?", 'it is not right to throw the children's meat to the dogs', 'where the vultures gather, there lies the corpse'.

especially since the OT maintains the exact same analogies, the talking serpent, "fear not, Jacob you worm", "Ishmael is like the wild ass", psalm 22 , the bulls of bashan, lion of God, Balaam's talking donkey, etc., it is likely that the described animals who accompanied Noah were analogous of the human kind.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It would help if we didn't try to fit every issue into a left-right box. For instance Evolution is a scientific theory. science does not regard right or left, only the evidence. You can argue the evidence, you can't ignore the evidence because you think it has some sort of political slant. Facts are facts without regard to any social judgement.

Then stop treating people who know more about science than you do like they are right wing lunatics, asshole.

Any chance you could give me a specific example where I've treated anybody in this thread "like they are right wing lunatics"? Except for your outbursts I would say it's been relatively cordial. (I guess I am however right this moment wondering if perhaps there is a lunatic lurking about)

Seriously?

Tell me something, asswipe, if this is about science, what the flying fuck is it doing in Religion and Ethics? Why the fuck did you title it "Does this help you? You started this pathetic thread with an idiotic agenda, and I called you out for being taken in by a reporter that knows less about evolution than a college freshman, which is basically nothing. Don't try to pretend you won the debate after you got your ass handed to you by a guy that only knows enough about evolution to point out how little the average idiot knows.

 

[SmedlyButler]

I'm glad you have these forums as an outlet for your pathology. I can't imagine the level of low self-esteem you must be wracked with that forces you into such self debasing rants and renders you devoid of any semblance of self control. But if it relieves some of the danger that you might harm yourself or others, carry on. Pfft.

P.S. Cutting back on the booze might help.

 

[jwoodie]

I just don't get why people are so hung up on either/or. Who is to say that both aren't true?

We do not create anything, we use tools to make something from other materials. Why is it so difficult to believe that evolution may have been a tool crafted by God to serve as the engine of life?

I don't mind the people who believe in creationism nearly as much as I do the idiots who treat evolution as a religion. If you want to argue in defense of something at least know enough about it not to believe the headline of a popular science blog.

I agree. Darwinism seems to be a popular refuge for people who have a bone to pick with organized religion, especially Christianity. Thus the six day or 6,000 year straw man argument.

The legitimate topic for debate in this area is gradualism versus interventionism. The former is based on a statistical theory of random mutation. The latter recognizes the uneven and otherwise inexplicable gaps in the archaeological record, to be filled in with one's personal belief system.

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm glad you have these forums as an outlet for your pathology. I can't imagine the level of low self-esteem you must be wracked with that forces you into such self debasing rants and renders you devoid of any semblance of self control. But if it relieves some of the danger that you might harm yourself or others, carry on. Pfft.

P.S. Cutting back on the booze might help.

You realize that this post essentially concedes the argument to him, right?

 

[SmedlyButler]

I'm glad you have these forums as an outlet for your pathology. I can't imagine the level of low self-esteem you must be wracked with that forces you into such self debasing rants and renders you devoid of any semblance of self control. But if it relieves some of the danger that you might harm yourself or others, carry on. Pfft.

P.S. Cutting back on the booze might help.

You realize that this post essentially concedes the argument to him, right?

If you think his ad hominem rants constituted an argument and his cursing malevolence was justified by anything I said. They seemed kind of off-the-wall and out-of-left-field to me.

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm glad you have these forums as an outlet for your pathology. I can't imagine the level of low self-esteem you must be wracked with that forces you into such self debasing rants and renders you devoid of any semblance of self control. But if it relieves some of the danger that you might harm yourself or others, carry on. Pfft.

P.S. Cutting back on the booze might help.

You realize that this post essentially concedes the argument to him, right?

If you think his ad hominem rants constituted an argument and his cursing malevolence was justified by anything I said. They seemed kind of off-the-wall and out-of-left-field to me.

His post looked like an argument to me. But then i read it, so...