| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Banky Bruce" |
| Date: |
17 Dec 2003 05:58:37 PM |
| Object: |
CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
.
|
|
| User: "Dana Tweedy" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
22 Dec 2003 10:38:10 PM |
|
|
"P. Venkman" <pvenkman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:791aa995.0312221751.36175fd3@posting.google.com...
snipping
I haven't seen you state this directly, but I expect you also believe
all (or very nearly all) fossils we find today were created in the
Flood. Again, if this assumption of what you believe is incorrect,
please let me know.
So all this taken together means we shouldn't find any fossils of what
we would consider 'modern' reptiles, correct? By 'modern' I mean
reptiles that exhibit the 'adjustements' you mention above to adapt to
the post-Flood atmosphere. At the very least we shouldn't any of
these 'modern' reptile fossils mixed in with any dinosaur fossils,
right?
One of the things that makes RR's idea even more untenable is that lizards
the same size as modern ones, have been found in the fossil record from the
Mesozoic era. That means that somehow these lizards, with their different
body style and skeletal structure from dinosaurs lived at the same time as
dinosaurs. Why didn't those lizards balloon up to massive size as well?
http://24hour.startribune.com/24hour/healthscience/story/1032444p-7246944c.html
http://www.es.ucsc.edu/~pkoch/lectures/lecture19.html
http://www.caf.wvu.edu/~rwhitmor/wman224/Lectures/Reptilia%203.pdf
http://tolweb.org/tree?group=Diapsida&contgroup=Amniota
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579044_2/Reptile.html
DJT
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Harper" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
23 Dec 2003 09:16:21 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 04:38:10 +0000, Dana Tweedy wrote:
"P. Venkman" <pvenkman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:791aa995.0312221751.36175fd3@posting.google.com... snipping
I haven't seen you state this directly, but I expect you also believe
all (or very nearly all) fossils we find today were created in the
Flood. Again, if this assumption of what you believe is incorrect,
please let me know.
So all this taken together means we shouldn't find any fossils of what
we would consider 'modern' reptiles, correct? By 'modern' I mean
reptiles that exhibit the 'adjustements' you mention above to adapt to
the post-Flood atmosphere. At the very least we shouldn't any of these
'modern' reptile fossils mixed in with any dinosaur fossils, right?
One of the things that makes RR's idea even more untenable is that lizards
the same size as modern ones, have been found in the fossil record from
the Mesozoic era. That means that somehow these lizards, with their
different body style and skeletal structure from dinosaurs lived at the
same time as dinosaurs. Why didn't those lizards balloon up to massive
size as well?
http://24hour.startribune.com/24hour/healthscience/story/1032444p-7246944c.html
http://www.es.ucsc.edu/~pkoch/lectures/lecture19.html
http://www.caf.wvu.edu/~rwhitmor/wman224/Lectures/Reptilia%203.pdf
http://tolweb.org/tree?group=Diapsida&contgroup=Amniota
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579044_2/Reptile.html
DJT
Well they obviously just died as juveniles, before they had a chance to
grow so large.
--
....and it is my belief that no greater good has ever befallen you in this city
than my service to my God. [...] Wealth does not bring goodness, but goodness
brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and that state.
Plato, quoting Socrates, from The _Apology_
--Daniel Harper
(Change terra to earth for email)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:46:59 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:47:01 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:47:02 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:47:19 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:47:26 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:47:48 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:48:15 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:48:16 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:48:55 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:49:02 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:49:11 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 03:49:30 AM |
|
|
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:X1PEb.114$vq.63581240@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:p7CEb.39065$mU6.141055@newsb.telia.net...
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind
(one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large
following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
Why do you feel that evolution isn't science?
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
I think you need to read this entire page:
http://groups.msn.com/EvolutionVCreation/elementaryfaq.msnw
Hmm, membership pending....
Synaptic Synapsid helped me find the answer to that particular Hovind
claim.
"There are several anatomical differences between dinosaurs and lizards.
They're simply two different types of reptiles. For more information,
please
check out SynapticSynapsid's dinosaur evolution FAQ. While it's true that
a
lizard grows throughout its lifetime, there's no evidence that any lizards
ever grew to the gigantic proportions of sauropods.
Still sounds logical to me, if they grow throughout their lifetime and they
would live hundreds of years, they would get pretty big, won't they?
The difference in how lizards and dinosaurs grow is in the rate at which
they grow, and how they deposit bone.
Lizards, being unqualified ectotherms (without a way to make their own
heat), grow slowly, taking years to reach sexual maturity. They also do
not
deposit fibrolamellar bone, a dense, interwoven tissue indicative of fast
growth and high basal metabolism. Lizards also do not form large amounts
of
Haversian canals, (Channels running through a bone in which blood vessels
and nerves are located), which are another indicator, though not
unambiguous, of higher metabolism and growth rates."
Alright we actually do not know exactly how dinosaurs were bodywise, we have
some skeletons and some eggs as well I believe. Atmospheric it is not the
same either, this can have caused some adjustments to the environment (micro
evolution). Also do not forget that evolutionists HAVE to question the
creational view to continue upholding that they are right. So they will
always find something to fight back with, what I mean is that this is hardly
objective premises.
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: ??? |
20 Dec 2003 06:50:43 AM |
|
|
Hmm, no idea what happened here! 10 times the same message, is my
newsreader playing tricks?
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: ??? |
20 Dec 2003 10:47:57 AM |
|
|
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:nGXEb.43002$dP1.168421@newsc.telia.net...
Hmm, no idea what happened here! 10 times the same message, is my
newsreader playing tricks?
It's possible. Could be your main server, too.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
19 Dec 2003 11:08:32 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:20:02 +0000, Roadrunner wrote:
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large following.
I think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather pityful.
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
-Rubystars
"True Science": That which confirms the Holy Scriptures.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Mad Doctor" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 12:27:30 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:20:02 +0000 (UTC), "Roadrunner"
<pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote:
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large following. I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this rather
pityful.
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
This sentence alone shows you wouldn't know science if it bit you in
the ***** and said, "Hi, I'm Science, who the hell are you"
Grant Kinsley MD
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 04:14:24 AM |
|
|
"The Mad Doctor" <sawbones@uniserve.com> wrote in message
news:3fe5ec39.18863409@shawnews.cg.shawcable.net...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:20:02 +0000 (UTC), "Roadrunner"
<pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote:
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
This sentence alone shows you wouldn't know science if it bit you in
the ***** and said, "Hi, I'm Science, who the hell are you"
No, that means that I can think independently and you can not question that
what has been accepted as being correct.
Grant Kinsley MD
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Mad Doctor" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
21 Dec 2003 07:40:57 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 10:14:24 +0000 (UTC), "Roadrunner"
<pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote:
"The Mad Doctor" <sawbones@uniserve.com> wrote in message
news:3fe5ec39.18863409@shawnews.cg.shawcable.net...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:20:02 +0000 (UTC), "Roadrunner"
<pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote:
"Rubystars" <windstorm@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:R09Eb.163$5G4.81399963@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
Baxter - ABD
It would be even more comical if he didn't have such a large following.
I
think it's really sad that so many people are lured in by his promises
of
creationism being compatible with science.
This is why evolution would be so comical, however I would find this
rather
pityful.
It's also sad that he can use some really strange explanations such as
"Dinosaurs were just big lizards in the garden of Eden because lizards
never
stop growing." and people eat it up.
Does not sound strange to me, scientifically he reasoning can not be
questioned. But then evolutionists have not much in common with true
sceince.
This sentence alone shows you wouldn't know science if it bit you in
the ***** and said, "Hi, I'm Science, who the hell are you"
No, that means that I can think independently and you can not question that
what has been accepted as being correct.
No, it shows you have no idea of how the concepts of fact, hypothesis
and theory work. If your idea of thinking independantly regarding
science is to lie down and have a dream and wake up and say I have a
theory....then I know of some fine antipsychotics that may help you.
If you can figure out that science works on taking facts, formulating
a hypothesis, putting the hypothesis to the test and showing that the
hypothesis is either valid or invalid, and then if shown to be valid,
creating a theory, and then using that theory for predictive value.
Then we can talk about independant thought.
You on the other hand are incapable of creating a hypothesis for
creation science/id, testing it and providing a theory that offers
predictive value from it.
Since your comments in this thread suggest that you thin CS/ID should
be taught in a science classroom, you would need to understand that
CS/ID has not come up with a hypothesis (let alone a theory), you
have failed to understand that very basic scientific process, so once
again, I would state that you wouldn't know science if it bit you in
the *****.
Grant Kinsley MD
BTW Roadrunner, just what science is it that you think that "Dr." Kent
Hovind knows?
Grant Kinsley MD
-Rubystars
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
17 Dec 2003 07:41:40 PM |
|
|
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
It's been covered a lot here and several have attempted it.
The bad news is that I suspect if anyone won the challenge would find out
that the 250k is a myth.
The good news is that they would get Randi's million. There is no way you
could win with science.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
19 Dec 2003 06:17:44 AM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote in message
news:xG7Eb.209517$Ec1.7571876@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
It's been covered a lot here and several have attempted it.
The bad news is that I suspect if anyone won the challenge would find
out
that the 250k is a myth.
The good news is that they would get Randi's million. There is no way you
could win with science.
In your dreams! Randi is definitely not an individual I would trust. He is
magician by trade.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Grinder" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
19 Dec 2003 05:08:08 PM |
|
|
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:f5CEb.39064$mU6.141337@newsb.telia.net...
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote in message
news:xG7Eb.209517$Ec1.7571876@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
It's been covered a lot here and several have attempted it.
The bad news is that I suspect if anyone won the challenge would find
out
that the 250k is a myth.
The good news is that they would get Randi's million. There is no way
you
could win with science.
In your dreams! Randi is definitely not an individual I would trust. He
is
magician by trade.
So take a lawyer with you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
20 Dec 2003 04:41:19 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:08:08 +0000 (UTC), "Grinder"
<grinder@no.spam.maam.com> wrote:
"Roadrunner" <pegasus@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:f5CEb.39064$mU6.141337@newsb.telia.net...
In your dreams! Randi is definitely not an individual I would trust.
He is magician by trade.
Unlike Creationists, Randi tells his audience up-front that he is a
professional deceiver.
So take a lawyer with you.
Randi and his honesty (or lack) isn't an issue regarding his
US$1,000,000 challenge: the tests he and the JREF design are built so
that the result is immediately and clearly obvious, requiring no
judging at all---- and the result is defined by the person making the
claim, which leaves Randi and the JREF out of that part of the
process. Funny how paradoxers such as MouthRunner here fear James
Randi so much. Sylvia Brown is still running in terror away from the
JREF and Randi's challenge.
--
http://desertphile.org
The I.C.R. Cult Exposed: http://holysmoke.org/icr-cult.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
19 Dec 2003 11:14:24 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:17:44 +0000, Roadrunner wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote in message
news:xG7Eb.209517$Ec1.7571876@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
It's been covered a lot here and several have attempted it. The bad news
is that I suspect if anyone won the challenge would find
out
that the 250k is a myth.
The good news is that they would get Randi's million. There is no way
you could win with science.
In your dreams! Randi is definitely not an individual I would trust. He
is magician by trade.
Yea, he insists on things like "evidence". Obviously, he is out to fool
people into thinking that things like mind reading, talking to the dead,
telekinesis, remote viewing, numerology, astrology, reflexology,
aromatherapy, homeopathy, ghosts, palmistry, astral projection, etc. are
all scams.
I can't even tell you how hard it is to get thru the day when people all
around me can read my mind, predict my future, know what the lottery
numbers are going to be, etc. What's a skeptic to do?
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
19 Dec 2003 01:30:08 PM |
|
|
"MarkA" <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.12.19.17.19.18.353529@stopspam.net...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:17:44 +0000, Roadrunner wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote in message
news:xG7Eb.209517$Ec1.7571876@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My
$250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
It's been covered a lot here and several have attempted it. The bad
news
is that I suspect if anyone won the challenge would find
out
that the 250k is a myth.
The good news is that they would get Randi's million. There is no way
you could win with science.
In your dreams! Randi is definitely not an individual I would trust.
He
is magician by trade.
Yea, he insists on things like "evidence". Obviously, he is out to fool
people into thinking that things like mind reading, talking to the dead,
telekinesis, remote viewing, numerology, astrology, reflexology,
aromatherapy, homeopathy, ghosts, palmistry, astral projection, etc. are
all scams.
In fact, they are not.
I've seen him at work against Jacques Benveniste. Randi is a scam himself!
I can't even tell you how hard it is to get thru the day when people all
around me can read my mind, predict my future, know what the lottery
numbers are going to be, etc. What's a skeptic to do?
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
19 Dec 2003 09:14:34 AM |
|
|
Roadrunner wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote in message
news:xG7Eb.209517$Ec1.7571876@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
It's been covered a lot here and several have attempted it.
The bad news is that I suspect if anyone won the challenge would find
out
that the 250k is a myth.
The good news is that they would get Randi's million. There is no way you
could win with science.
In your dreams! Randi is definitely not an individual I would trust. He is
magician by trade.
It sometimes takes a professional magician to catch a thief pretending to
be a prophet. What you trust, you've already made *more* than abundantly
clear.
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roadrunner" |
|
| Title: Re: CSE - Has anyone seen this crap? |
19 Dec 2003 10:15:08 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen_drop@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:brv500$7uvtb$1@ID-137900.news.uni-berlin.de...
Roadrunner wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote in message
news:xG7Eb.209517$Ec1.7571876@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Banky Bruce" <bankybruce@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8jq1uv8oq00eju4gkgj4jiuhnqnha2905n@4ax.com...
My apologies if this has been posted previously, but I just finished
listening to the debate between Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind (one
of them) and had to take a look at this crap.
The main page has a standing offer of $250k to "anyone who can give
any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000
offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more
than a religious belief. "
This ***** is comical...
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=3
It's been covered a lot here and several have attempted it.
The bad news is that I suspect if anyone won the challenge would find
out
that the 250k is a myth.
The good news is that they would get Randi's million. There is no way
you
could win with science.
In your dreams! Randi is definitely not an individual I would trust.
He is
magician by trade.
It sometimes takes a professional magician to catch a thief pretending to
be a prophet. What you trust, you've already made *more* than abundantly
clear.
I also requires a professional magician to fool the people. You agree with
his ideas about life etc, and so you approve of him, there is no other
reason. so much for objectivity.
Seppo P.
.
|
|
< | | | |
