Science Proves the Bible Again

[bripat9643]

Well all in fun but...I never saw fort fun Indiana claim he thinks Jurassic park exists.

No one can convince Fort Fun Indiana different. To him birds from dinosaurs is a fact. He thinks the re-engineering of beak and legs will eventually happen or else he has to go back to the drawing board to explain how birds became dinosaurs.

Creation science doesn't think birds macro-evolved from dinosaurs because their lung structure is different and that their leg structure (femur) does not move significantly when they walk or run. They articulate their lower leg structure in order to run. This is so in order for the birds to take air into their lungs. Otherwise, their air-sac lung will collapse with dino legs which has both upper and lower leg motion. This air-sac lung gives them enough lung capacity for flight.

Their leg structure is almost identical:

Comparison of T. rex and emu feet

A T-rex and an emu are not the same size. The photo is deliberately misleading to show the similarity of the foot. You're not looking at the upper leg structure or the femur. They are quite different.

Above is the skeleton of an emu. Follow the lower leg up to the mid-leg and to the femur or upper leg above it. The femur is right above the emu's knee. It does not move as much and this allows for the emu's air-sac lungs to fill with air. If it had an upper leg like the T-Rex, then it would not be able to breathe. Its lungs would collapse. Birds have this unique leg system.

Compare the emu's femur with the T-Rex one. The T-Rex one has a very mobile femur.

I even picked out a small T-Rex skeleton to show how the femur is different and its motion is way different from the emu. There you go. Another case solved by jb.

In other words, they aren't exact duplicates. Why would anyone imagine they would be? What you can't deny is that they are very similar, and the feet are almost identical.

Check these out:

Is your avatar an exact match to you? I can see you being a whiny child ready to be timed out.

What part of the bird would not be able to breathe do you not get? As for the three fingers, the three fingers on birds aren't the same as the three fingers on theropods. Also, you have a problem in how these theropods grew wings when they didn't have any before.

Finally, it's interesting you changed the T. Rex with an Archaeopteryx without much explanation how it got to be that way. My reply to that is the fossil record shows that birds lived BEFORE the theropods and that they grew up in a parallel timeline. This is the coup de grace for the birds from dinosaurs theory.

I don't even know where to begin dissecting that mass of logical contortions.

BTW, it says "FREE fingers," not "three fingers."

The fossil record does not show that birds lived before theropods. The latter originated about 233 million years ago. Archaeopteryx didn't appear until about 150 millions years ago.

What is your justification for claiming that "birds would not be able to breathe?"

"I have problem in how these theropods grew wings?" How is that any different than explaining how animals grew legs or fingers or teeth or eyes or lungs or tongues? Before birds appeared, theropod dinosaurs already had feathers and arms. The step to wings wasn't that much of a leap.

 

[DOTR]

I think God leaves the fools to their own devices.

Explain why god made it appear that the universe is billions of years old when it's really only a few thousand years old.

Because it’s billions of years old?

So you aren't a creationist then?

I’m not myself. But I don’t see why they should be pilloried.

Because they are promoting Voo-Doo and abracadabra. They can believe what they want so long as they keep it out of our schools.

This is an example of the people who oppose science. This guy was working on *curing aging*! But, like a dissident under communism, he didn’t have the right political skills...and was destroyed for wrongthink.

The Death of a Dreamer - Quillette

 

[DOTR]

Or this....

It isn’t creationists who will drive us to a new dark age.

 

[DOTR]

Yeah well that was an interesting article but they won’t be creating dinosaurs. Just malformed chickens.

Yup, that's what happens with mutations. I think the experiment went from the beak to the legs. Fort Fun Indiana was so excited to hear that he thought Jurassic Park will be coming to some remote piece of land in his lifetime.

Well all in fun but...I never saw fort fun Indiana claim he thinks Jurassic park exists.

No one can convince Fort Fun Indiana different. To him birds from dinosaurs is a fact. He thinks the re-engineering of beak and legs will eventually happen or else he has to go back to the drawing board to explain how birds became dinosaurs.

Creation science doesn't think birds macro-evolved from dinosaurs because their lung structure is different and that their leg structure (femur) does not move significantly when they walk or run. They articulate their lower leg structure in order to run. This is so in order for the birds to take air into their lungs. Otherwise, their air-sac lung will collapse with dino legs which has both upper and lower leg motion. This air-sac lung gives them enough lung capacity for flight.

Their leg structure is almost identical:

Comparison of T. rex and emu feet

A T-rex and an emu are not the same size. The photo is deliberately misleading to show the similarity of the foot. You're not looking at the upper leg structure or the femur. They are quite different.

Above is the skeleton of an emu. Follow the lower leg up to the mid-leg and to the femur or upper leg above it. The femur is right above the emu's knee. It does not move as much and this allows for the emu's air-sac lungs to fill with air. If it had an upper leg like the T-Rex, then it would not be able to breathe. Its lungs would collapse. Birds have this unique leg system.

Compare the emu's femur with the T-Rex one. The T-Rex one has a very mobile femur.

I even picked out a small T-Rex skeleton to show how the femur is different and its motion is way different from the emu. There you go. Another case solved by jb.

I don’t know that much about bird evolution but I do know they descend from dinosaurs without a doubt. The thing is I can’t make head or tails of your complaint about lungs.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No one can convince Fort Fun Indiana different. To him birds from dinosaurs is a fact. He thinks the re-engineering of beak and legs will eventually happen or else he has to go back to the drawing board to explain how birds became dinosaurs.

Creation science doesn't think birds macro-evolved from dinosaurs because their lung structure is different and that their leg structure (femur) does not move significantly when they walk or run. They articulate their lower leg structure in order to run. This is so in order for the birds to take air into their lungs. Otherwise, their air-sac lung will collapse with dino legs which has both upper and lower leg motion. This air-sac lung gives them enough lung capacity for flight.

Their leg structure is almost identical:

Comparison of T. rex and emu feet

A T-rex and an emu are not the same size. The photo is deliberately misleading to show the similarity of the foot. You're not looking at the upper leg structure or the femur. They are quite different.

Above is the skeleton of an emu. Follow the lower leg up to the mid-leg and to the femur or upper leg above it. The femur is right above the emu's knee. It does not move as much and this allows for the emu's air-sac lungs to fill with air. If it had an upper leg like the T-Rex, then it would not be able to breathe. Its lungs would collapse. Birds have this unique leg system.

Compare the emu's femur with the T-Rex one. The T-Rex one has a very mobile femur.

I even picked out a small T-Rex skeleton to show how the femur is different and its motion is way different from the emu. There you go. Another case solved by jb.

In other words, they aren't exact duplicates. Why would anyone imagine they would be? What you can't deny is that they are very similar, and the feet are almost identical.

Check these out:

Is your avatar an exact match to you? I can see you being a whiny child ready to be timed out.

What part of the bird would not be able to breathe do you not get? As for the three fingers, the three fingers on birds aren't the same as the three fingers on theropods. Also, you have a problem in how these theropods grew wings when they didn't have any before.

Finally, it's interesting you changed the T. Rex with an Archaeopteryx without much explanation how it got to be that way. My reply to that is the fossil record shows that birds lived BEFORE the theropods and that they grew up in a parallel timeline. This is the coup de grace for the birds from dinosaurs theory.

I don't even know where to begin dissecting that mass of logical contortions.

BTW, it says "FREE fingers," not "three fingers."

The fossil record does not show that birds lived before theropods. The latter originated about 233 million years ago. Archaeopteryx didn't appear until about 150 millions years ago.

What is your justification for claiming that "birds would not be able to breathe?"

"I have problem in how these theropods grew wings?" How is that any different than explaining how animals grew legs or fingers or teeth or eyes or lungs or tongues? Before birds appeared, theropod dinosaurs already had feathers and arms. The step to wings wasn't that much of a leap.

You are not going to have any luck with him. In order to understand evolution at all (much less accept it as fact), one has to know the earth is 4.54 billion years old. This freak thinks it is no more than 10,000 years old.

 

[DOTR]

No one can convince Fort Fun Indiana different. To him birds from dinosaurs is a fact. He thinks the re-engineering of beak and legs will eventually happen or else he has to go back to the drawing board to explain how birds became dinosaurs.

Creation science doesn't think birds macro-evolved from dinosaurs because their lung structure is different and that their leg structure (femur) does not move significantly when they walk or run. They articulate their lower leg structure in order to run. This is so in order for the birds to take air into their lungs. Otherwise, their air-sac lung will collapse with dino legs which has both upper and lower leg motion. This air-sac lung gives them enough lung capacity for flight.

Their leg structure is almost identical:

Comparison of T. rex and emu feet

A T-rex and an emu are not the same size. The photo is deliberately misleading to show the similarity of the foot. You're not looking at the upper leg structure or the femur. They are quite different.

Above is the skeleton of an emu. Follow the lower leg up to the mid-leg and to the femur or upper leg above it. The femur is right above the emu's knee. It does not move as much and this allows for the emu's air-sac lungs to fill with air. If it had an upper leg like the T-Rex, then it would not be able to breathe. Its lungs would collapse. Birds have this unique leg system.

Compare the emu's femur with the T-Rex one. The T-Rex one has a very mobile femur.

I even picked out a small T-Rex skeleton to show how the femur is different and its motion is way different from the emu. There you go. Another case solved by jb.

In other words, they aren't exact duplicates. Why would anyone imagine they would be? What you can't deny is that they are very similar, and the feet are almost identical.

Check these out:

Is your avatar an exact match to you? I can see you being a whiny child ready to be timed out.

What part of the bird would not be able to breathe do you not get? As for the three fingers, the three fingers on birds aren't the same as the three fingers on theropods. Also, you have a problem in how these theropods grew wings when they didn't have any before.

Finally, it's interesting you changed the T. Rex with an Archaeopteryx without much explanation how it got to be that way. My reply to that is the fossil record shows that birds lived BEFORE the theropods and that they grew up in a parallel timeline. This is the coup de grace for the birds from dinosaurs theory.

I don't even know where to begin dissecting that mass of logical contortions.

BTW, it says "FREE fingers," not "three fingers."

The fossil record does not show that birds lived before theropods. The latter originated about 233 million years ago. Archaeopteryx didn't appear until about 150 millions years ago.

What is your justification for claiming that "birds would not be able to breathe?"

"I have problem in how these theropods grew wings?" How is that any different than explaining how animals grew legs or fingers or teeth or eyes or lungs or tongues? Before birds appeared, theropod dinosaurs already had feathers and arms. The step to wings wasn't that much of a leap.

Yes. Feathers were evolved for warmth and were later modified for flight. Feathered dinosaurs were not unusual.

 

[james bond]

No one can convince Fort Fun Indiana different. To him birds from dinosaurs is a fact. He thinks the re-engineering of beak and legs will eventually happen or else he has to go back to the drawing board to explain how birds became dinosaurs.

Creation science doesn't think birds macro-evolved from dinosaurs because their lung structure is different and that their leg structure (femur) does not move significantly when they walk or run. They articulate their lower leg structure in order to run. This is so in order for the birds to take air into their lungs. Otherwise, their air-sac lung will collapse with dino legs which has both upper and lower leg motion. This air-sac lung gives them enough lung capacity for flight.

Their leg structure is almost identical:

Comparison of T. rex and emu feet

A T-rex and an emu are not the same size. The photo is deliberately misleading to show the similarity of the foot. You're not looking at the upper leg structure or the femur. They are quite different.

Above is the skeleton of an emu. Follow the lower leg up to the mid-leg and to the femur or upper leg above it. The femur is right above the emu's knee. It does not move as much and this allows for the emu's air-sac lungs to fill with air. If it had an upper leg like the T-Rex, then it would not be able to breathe. Its lungs would collapse. Birds have this unique leg system.

Compare the emu's femur with the T-Rex one. The T-Rex one has a very mobile femur.

I even picked out a small T-Rex skeleton to show how the femur is different and its motion is way different from the emu. There you go. Another case solved by jb.

In other words, they aren't exact duplicates. Why would anyone imagine they would be? What you can't deny is that they are very similar, and the feet are almost identical.

Check these out:

Is your avatar an exact match to you? I can see you being a whiny child ready to be timed out.

What part of the bird would not be able to breathe do you not get? As for the three fingers, the three fingers on birds aren't the same as the three fingers on theropods. Also, you have a problem in how these theropods grew wings when they didn't have any before.

Finally, it's interesting you changed the T. Rex with an Archaeopteryx without much explanation how it got to be that way. My reply to that is the fossil record shows that birds lived BEFORE the theropods and that they grew up in a parallel timeline. This is the coup de grace for the birds from dinosaurs theory.

I don't even know where to begin dissecting that mass of logical contortions.

BTW, it says "FREE fingers," not "three fingers."

The fossil record does not show that birds lived before theropods. The latter originated about 233 million years ago. Archaeopteryx didn't appear until about 150 millions years ago.

What is your justification for claiming that "birds would not be able to breathe?"

"I have problem in how these theropods grew wings?" How is that any different than explaining how animals grew legs or fingers or teeth or eyes or lungs or tongues? Before birds appeared, theropod dinosaurs already had feathers and arms. The step to wings wasn't that much of a leap.

Did you not know about the fingers? See, I already got you right there. The most primitive theropods had five fingers and later it became three, the theropods had #1, 2 and 3 where 1 = thumb. The birds have three digits, but it's digits 2, 3 and 4. This does not adequately explain the birds from dinosaurs theory.

And "free" fingers? Are you looking for something for nothing? Yeah, I'm sure you can get a finger from a theropod or an emu, but it will likely cost you something.

Birds lived before and with dinosaurs. There were birds BEFORE archaeopteryx which probably wasn't a bird, but dinosaur. All of this is swept under the rug by the birds from dinosaur theorists. That is not science the way I learned it; It's fake science which you can't help subscribe to. It's science myths.

Fossil of world's earliest modern bird could help us understand the extinction of dinosaurs

Finally, I already explained how birds would not be able to breathe, but will do so again. If it had a femur like a theropod that moved, then it would be able to expand its air-sac lungs and the air-sac would collapse. With a stable femur, the lungs are able to fully expand and also allow the bird to take flight.

 

[james bond]

I don’t know that much about bird evolution but I do know they descend from dinosaurs without a doubt. The thing is I can’t make head or tails of your complaint about lungs.

See my post #687 about finding an earlier bird than archaeopteryx. These findings are not being widely publicized. As for the femur or upper leg of the bird, the full explanation is here.

Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

This does not adequately explain the birds from dinosaurs theory.

Nobody would be dumb enough to say it does. The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence supports the fact that birds are dinosaurs. Only an ingorant moron would make such an embarraasingly stupid argument, as you just have.

To everyone else:

Bond plagiarized that talking point (as he always does) from this idiot blog, written by a non-scientist, Bible thumping moron:

Living dinosaurs or just birds? - creation.com

And this one:

Ostrich eggs break dino-to-bird theory - creation.com

You can find Bond's talking point virtually verbatim in these blogs. In fact, a of his talk points are plagiarized fro this website. Of course, the uneducated morons authoring those blogs never actually bothered themselves with reading the follow up research. If anyone wants to see what actual scientists say about this (instead of ignorant, plagiarizing, bible thumping morons), then read this:

How Dinosaurs Handed Down Their Fingers to Birds

 

[james bond]

This does not adequately explain the birds from dinosaurs theory.

Nobody would be dumb enough to say it does. The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence supports the fact that birds are dinosaurs. Only an ingorant moron would make such an embarraasingly stupid argument, as you just have.

To everyone else:

Bond plagiarized that talking point (as he always does) from this idiot blog, written by a non-scientist, Bible thumping moron:

Living dinosaurs or just birds? - creation.com

And this one:

Ostrich eggs break dino-to-bird theory - creation.com

You can find Bond's talking point virtually verbatim in these blogs. In fact, a of his talk points are plagiarized fro this website. Of course, the uneducated morons authoring those blogs never actually bothered themselves with reading the follow up research. If anyone wants to see what actual scientists say about this (instead of ignorant, plagiarizing, bible thumping morons), then read this:

How Dinosaurs Handed Down Their Fingers to Birds

It seems you are upset once again. Another day of fail at re-engineering a chicken back into a dinosaur? Next time you go to your dinosaur museum, you should look to see if they have chickens there. If not, then go buy some dino nuggets and go to town.

Or maybe it's the winter weather that's got you down? It sprinkled and is 53 degrees right now where I am. Cold. B-R-R-R. Can't wait for the warm spring weather to come.

I did not plagiarize, but linked my sources. Unfortunately, none were from creation.com in which you seem to like thumping and plagiarizing. Maybe you are a closet creation.com-ist. That wouldn't be so bad. Maybe it will help you get past fourth grade.

BTW did the creation.com links you listed help you? If you did read them, they should start making you a smarter and better person instead of following the false science of evolution .

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It seems you are upset once again.

Haha...it seems you forgot to check the scoreboard again. Shall we?:

Evolution is accepted fact. Charlatans like you are a global laughingstock among educated people. You have not a shred of published science on your side, nor are any of you frauds working on any.

But yeah..I'm the one that's upset, and you're the one declaring victory.

Stupidity on parade.

 

[james bond]

It seems you are upset once again.

Haha...it seems you forgot to check the scoreboard again. Shall we?:

Evolution is accepted fact. Charlatans like you are a global laughingstock among educated people. You have not a shred of published science on your side, nor are any of you frauds working on any.

But yeah..I'm the one that's upset, and you're the one declaring victory.

Stupidity on parade.

I didn't know you were in a parade every day.

I'm only trying to give comfort to one who seems terribly upset because their evolution was debunked. Do you really care if birds didn't come from dinosaurs? Birds are birds and dinosaurs are dinosaurs. Otherwise, we would have made progress with the dino-chicken but they haven't. They do make a mean chicken sandwich at Chick-Fil-A tho. Skip the nuggets and try one of those to get over your upset.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm only trying to give comfort to one who seems terribly upset because their evolution was debunked.

Yes, I know. You like to declare victory on that. It's one of the ways that even someone reading one of your posts for the first time knows you are a delusional freak.

 

[DOTR]

I don’t know that much about bird evolution but I do know they descend from dinosaurs without a doubt. The thing is I can’t make head or tails of your complaint about lungs.

See my post #687 about finding an earlier bird than archaeopteryx. These findings are not being widely publicized. As for the femur or upper leg of the bird, the full explanation is here.

Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links

I read that article. It is from 2009 and seems to be a singular example of a theory being pushed out to see if it stood up to review. Did it? I don’t think so. Haven’t seen anything else about it.
Regardless...I don’t know what you hope to gain from citing an article that claims dinosaurs and birds shared a common ancestor rather than direct descent. Because that is what it says.

 

[DOTR]

Their leg structure is almost identical:

Comparison of T. rex and emu feet

A T-rex and an emu are not the same size. The photo is deliberately misleading to show the similarity of the foot. You're not looking at the upper leg structure or the femur. They are quite different.

Above is the skeleton of an emu. Follow the lower leg up to the mid-leg and to the femur or upper leg above it. The femur is right above the emu's knee. It does not move as much and this allows for the emu's air-sac lungs to fill with air. If it had an upper leg like the T-Rex, then it would not be able to breathe. Its lungs would collapse. Birds have this unique leg system.

Compare the emu's femur with the T-Rex one. The T-Rex one has a very mobile femur.

I even picked out a small T-Rex skeleton to show how the femur is different and its motion is way different from the emu. There you go. Another case solved by jb.

In other words, they aren't exact duplicates. Why would anyone imagine they would be? What you can't deny is that they are very similar, and the feet are almost identical.

Check these out:

Is your avatar an exact match to you? I can see you being a whiny child ready to be timed out.

What part of the bird would not be able to breathe do you not get? As for the three fingers, the three fingers on birds aren't the same as the three fingers on theropods. Also, you have a problem in how these theropods grew wings when they didn't have any before.

Finally, it's interesting you changed the T. Rex with an Archaeopteryx without much explanation how it got to be that way. My reply to that is the fossil record shows that birds lived BEFORE the theropods and that they grew up in a parallel timeline. This is the coup de grace for the birds from dinosaurs theory.

I don't even know where to begin dissecting that mass of logical contortions.

BTW, it says "FREE fingers," not "three fingers."

The fossil record does not show that birds lived before theropods. The latter originated about 233 million years ago. Archaeopteryx didn't appear until about 150 millions years ago.

What is your justification for claiming that "birds would not be able to breathe?"

"I have problem in how these theropods grew wings?" How is that any different than explaining how animals grew legs or fingers or teeth or eyes or lungs or tongues? Before birds appeared, theropod dinosaurs already had feathers and arms. The step to wings wasn't that much of a leap.

Did you not know about the fingers? See, I already got you right there. The most primitive theropods had five fingers and later it became three, the theropods had #1, 2 and 3 where 1 = thumb. The birds have three digits, but it's digits 2, 3 and 4. This does not adequately explain the birds from dinosaurs theory.

And "free" fingers? Are you looking for something for nothing? Yeah, I'm sure you can get a finger from a theropod or an emu, but it will likely cost you something.

Birds lived before and with dinosaurs. There were birds BEFORE archaeopteryx which probably wasn't a bird, but dinosaur. All of this is swept under the rug by the birds from dinosaur theorists. That is not science the way I learned it; It's fake science which you can't help subscribe to. It's science myths.

Fossil of world's earliest modern bird could help us understand the extinction of dinosaurs

Finally, I already explained how birds would not be able to breathe, but will do so again. If it had a femur like a theropod that moved, then it would be able to expand its air-sac lungs and the air-sac would collapse. With a stable femur, the lungs are able to fully expand and also allow the bird to take flight.

Ok. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Why do you keep sending articles explicitly saying birds evolved? Is it that you just think the theory is wrong and birds descended from non therapods.

 

[james bond]

I'm only trying to give comfort to one who seems terribly upset because their evolution was debunked.

Yes, I know. You like to declare victory on that. It's one of the ways that even someone reading one of your posts for the first time knows you are a delusional freak.

As I've repeated many times to you the atheist scientists have eliminated the creation scientists who disagree. Even the secular scientists who disagree about birds from dinosaurs are disregarded. This is because birds from dinosaurs is only the second example of macroevolution. The first being humans from monkeys.

Your fake science is based more on having the findings "fit" ToE and evolutionary thinking than having the theory based on factual findings. The facts that do not fit are disregarded. That's what makes your brand of science "fake." You are a "fake" poster and why you get upset with me because I post the theory that is comprised of the facts.

The only thing assumed is God which is based on "faith." The rest is the science explained in the Bible which science has backed up. That makes up the Bible theory.

We do not have to teach God in public schools as the science in the Bible can be taught at public schools, i.e. real science. Instead, the public school kids are taught atheist science or fake science. Many people are brainwashed in evolutionary science this way and leads to brainwashed atheist scientists who can't figure things out correctly because of evolution.

Don't you think Satan has done a good job on these scientists, some of the posters here and you?

 

[james bond]

I don’t know that much about bird evolution but I do know they descend from dinosaurs without a doubt. The thing is I can’t make head or tails of your complaint about lungs.

See my post #687 about finding an earlier bird than archaeopteryx. These findings are not being widely publicized. As for the femur or upper leg of the bird, the full explanation is here.

Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links

I read that article. It is from 2009 and seems to be a singular example of a theory being pushed out to see if it stood up to review. Did it? I don’t think so. Haven’t seen anything else about it.
Regardless...I don’t know what you hope to gain from citing an article that claims dinosaurs and birds shared a common ancestor rather than direct descent. Because that is what it says.

Wow, you missed a lot during that time. I worked with the guy who drew Dilbert and he came out and said he questioned evolution.

Evolution started getting questioned around 2007 by the secular scientists and reached a high point around 2011. This, in addition to the creation scientists who were complaining since the 1850s. Much of their findings were disregarded. These are facts that do not fit the ToE. The birds to dinosaurs is a big deal because it is only the second example of macroevolution. The first was humans from monkeys. There isn't much disagreement on natural selection or microevolution. Others were how did asexual single-cell creatures become sexual reproducing creatures? How did amino acids form proteins outside the cell (they can't; this is physically impossible)? No experimental evidence for abiogenesis, but people kept coming up claims of experimental evidence as well as some wild hypotheses. How did the human eye evolve? The hypotheses of singularity, cosmic inflation, dark matter and dark energy were others that formulated during this time. I think the fine tuning parameters were found around this time, too, by the secular scientists studying the Big Bang (this included Stephen Hawking). You missed a lot .

It goes to show that birds did not come from dinosaurs, so no macroevolution. Macroevolution does not happen. We had another thread arguing about humans from monkeys. Same thing there. No macroevolution. Macroevolution does not happen.

 

[LittleNipper]

re is some contention that the Sphinx did go through the FLOOD of Noah and is much older than Egypt itself. Fascinating Facts About the Great Sphinx of Giza and How It Was Built

There is nothing in Egyptian records (the 5th Egyptian Dynasty) that indicates a global flood.

The Flood likely happened before Egyptian dynasties if you took even a little time to view the clips.

 

[LittleNipper]

Noah’s pleasure cruise can be relegated to myth and legend

And you "know" that how?

I know there is no evidence of a global flood that occurred 6,000 years ago. I know that the fable proposing that someone named Noah built a boat and gathered two of every species of animal is just nonsense.

You said what you want to BELIEVE. You present ZERO evidence.

My post doesn't include the term "believe". Further, I'm not claiming a global flood ever occured, therefore, I'm not tasked with presenting evidence for a positive claim.

You claim there was never a Global Flood, therefore you should prove your belief. You of course don't have to; however, you're not doing yourself a favor by playing naive or indifferent.

 

[bripat9643]

I don’t know that much about bird evolution but I do know they descend from dinosaurs without a doubt. The thing is I can’t make head or tails of your complaint about lungs.

See my post #687 about finding an earlier bird than archaeopteryx. These findings are not being widely publicized. As for the femur or upper leg of the bird, the full explanation is here.

Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links

I read that article. It is from 2009 and seems to be a singular example of a theory being pushed out to see if it stood up to review. Did it? I don’t think so. Haven’t seen anything else about it.
Regardless...I don’t know what you hope to gain from citing an article that claims dinosaurs and birds shared a common ancestor rather than direct descent. Because that is what it says.

Wow, you missed a lot during that time. I worked with the guy who drew Dilbert and he came out and said he questioned evolution.

Evolution started getting questioned around 2007 by the secular scientists and reached a high point around 2011. This, in addition to the creation scientists who were complaining since the 1850s. Much of their findings were disregarded. These are facts that do not fit the ToE. The birds to dinosaurs is a big deal because it is only the second example of macroevolution. The first was humans from monkeys. There isn't much disagreement on natural selection or microevolution. Others were how did asexual single-cell creatures become sexual reproducing creatures? How did amino acids form proteins outside the cell (they can't; this is physically impossible)? No experimental evidence for abiogenesis, but people kept coming up claims of experimental evidence as well as some wild hypotheses. How did the human eye evolve? The hypotheses of singularity, cosmic inflation, dark matter and dark energy were others that formulated during this time. I think the fine tuning parameters were found around this time, too, by the secular scientists studying the Big Bang (this included Stephen Hawking). You missed a lot .

It goes to show that birds did not come from dinosaurs, so no macroevolution. Macroevolution does not happen. We had another thread arguing about humans from monkeys. Same thing there. No macroevolution. Macroevolution does not happen.

I find it difficult to believe that you know Scott Adams. Furthermore, he has a dinosaur character in his comic.

I call bullshit.