Science vs. Creationism

[One Brow]

...well, that birds came from reptiles!

Birds are indeed a specialized form of reptile, and that is the inescapable result of the evidence, so i accept it.

 

[One Brow]

...the fact of the matter is Darwins theory gave a strong impetus to a host of much godless thinking in the world!

Karl Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” actually fostered worship of the State. Charles Darwin’s “Origin of Species” deeply influenced the scientific and religious thinking of the time.

Communism was independent of evolutionary theory.

The concept of "survival of the fittest" also played a part in the most devastating wars of the 20th century, including the dropping of the 1st atomic bomb that vaporized 70,000 people instantly!

A favorite lie from the religious, that is not relevant at all to the truth of evolutionary theory,

Today the evolution theory is claimed to be an indispensable foundation of science.

Of biology, because it is.

 

[One Brow]

yah, well, compared to a lot of folks with their porn addictions, I'd call all that simple rules of modesty and conformance to readily understandable positions in the societal fabric.

Like most people railing against government interference, when the social fabric forces people to abandon their freedoms in ways you support, you come on board the government enthusiastically.

 

[carolinajazz]

Birds are indeed a specialized form of reptile, and that is the inescapable result of the evidence, so i accept it.

...."evidence?" Universally heralded as the one great "link" between all birds and reptiles is Archaeopteryx. Here is how evolutionists imagine Archaeopteryx may have been preserved as a fossil.

Imagine, says an ornithologist "a strange birdlike creature the size of a crow" gliding over an
ancient Bavarian lake.

"Or was it more reptile-like? We cannot be sure," continues the story- for "it appeared to have some of the features of both reptiles AND birds.

"Suddenly," goes the dramatic tale, "our birdlike
creature, with its feeble powers of flight, was
unable to cope with a sharp gust of wind and fell into the shallow waters below and drowned."
(Biology of Birds, Wesley Lanyon, page 1).

Evolutionists admit they must SPECULATE about the origin of birds. But they insist that the layman need not even question the validity of their theories!

Notice! "In attempting to reconstruct the early evolutionary history of many groups of animals a certain element of judicious speculation ... may be a valuable weapon" (Evolution, ed. by De
Beer, p. 321).

In most books on the subject, authors first
admit they are making "educated guesses," and
then follow with a broad, all-inclusive, sweeping
statement that such and such DID POSITIVELY
OCCUR!

They have already decided, on sheer faith, that birds evolved from reptiles! So they seem to imply: "Even though I must guess, imagine and speculate- you must assume my theory is so CORRECT that you needn't bother even thinking about it!"

But if our myriads of birds evolved from slimy
reptiles, is there any REAL fossil EVIDENCE of a
part-bird, part-reptile? Is there such a thing as a
HALF-scale, HALF-feather found?

The fossil "record" concerning the hazy
hypothesis that supposes birds came from reptiles
is much like dozens of feet of missing film! Where
are all the many HUNDREDS of VERY DIFFERENT creatures which would have represented the INTERMEDIATE stages of development?

And remember, IF these notions of evolution
could possibly be true - these "intermediate"
stages would be NOWHERE NEAR so well equipped to survive as the "fully developed" ones. That means that if it took only a "sharp gust" to bring down Archaeopteryx, his imaginary ancestors would have been falling out of the skies like bricks! And the fossil record, therefore, would contain FAR MORE "INTERMEDIATE" species than it does of the ones which were supposedly "better equipped" to survive!

But there ARE no "intermediate" species!

....yeah, you got TON'S of evidence!

 

[One Brow]

...."evidence?" Universally heralded as the one great "link" between all birds and reptiles is Archaeopteryx. Here is how evolutionists imagine Archaeopteryx may have been preserved as a fossil.

There are many links between birds and other reptiles, seen in fossils, DNA, sex-determination systems, body construction, etc.

Evolutionists admit they must SPECULATE about the origin of birds. But they insist that the layman need not even question the validity of their theories!

I could speculate about your parentage, but nonetheless you would have been born of a human. Speculations about some of the details of the origins of birds does not change the basic truths.

But if our myriads of birds evolved from slimy reptiles, is there any REAL fossil EVIDENCE of a
part-bird, part-reptile? Is there such a thing as a HALF-scale, HALF-feather found?

The presence of a half-scale, half-feather would be a miracle, not evolution.

Feathers and scales are made up of two distinct forms of keratin, and it was long thought that each type of keratin was exclusive to each skin structure (feathers and scales). However, a study published in 2006 confirmed the presence of feather keratin in the early stages of development of American alligator scales.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feather#Evolution

Where are all the many HUNDREDS of VERY DIFFERENT creatures which would have represented the INTERMEDIATE stages of development?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feathered_dinosaurs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fossil_bird_genera

And remember, IF these notions of evolution could possibly be true - these "intermediate" stages would be NOWHERE NEAR so well equipped to survive as the "fully developed" ones.

Compared to which other contemporaneous, partially flying vertebrates?

 

[MVP]

...."evidence?" Universally heralded as the one great "link" between all birds and reptiles is Archaeopteryx. Here is how evolutionists imagine Archaeopteryx may have been preserved as a fossil.

Imagine, says an ornithologist "a strange birdlike creature the size of a crow" gliding over an
ancient Bavarian lake.

"Or was it more reptile-like? We cannot be sure," continues the story- for "it appeared to have some of the features of both reptiles AND birds.

"Suddenly," goes the dramatic tale, "our birdlike
creature, with its feeble powers of flight, was
unable to cope with a sharp gust of wind and fell into the shallow waters below and drowned."
(Biology of Birds, Wesley Lanyon, page 1).

Evolutionists admit they must SPECULATE about the origin of birds. But they insist that the layman need not even question the validity of their theories!

Notice! "In attempting to reconstruct the early evolutionary history of many groups of animals a certain element of judicious speculation ... may be a valuable weapon" (Evolution, ed. by De
Beer, p. 321).

In most books on the subject, authors first
admit they are making "educated guesses," and
then follow with a broad, all-inclusive, sweeping
statement that such and such DID POSITIVELY
OCCUR!

They have already decided, on sheer faith, that birds evolved from reptiles! So they seem to imply: "Even though I must guess, imagine and speculate- you must assume my theory is so CORRECT that you needn't bother even thinking about it!"

But if our myriads of birds evolved from slimy
reptiles, is there any REAL fossil EVIDENCE of a
part-bird, part-reptile? Is there such a thing as a
HALF-scale, HALF-feather found?

The fossil "record" concerning the hazy
hypothesis that supposes birds came from reptiles
is much like dozens of feet of missing film! Where
are all the many HUNDREDS of VERY DIFFERENT creatures which would have represented the INTERMEDIATE stages of development?

And remember, IF these notions of evolution
could possibly be true - these "intermediate"
stages would be NOWHERE NEAR so well equipped to survive as the "fully developed" ones. That means that if it took only a "sharp gust" to bring down Archaeopteryx, his imaginary ancestors would have been falling out of the skies like bricks! And the fossil record, therefore, would contain FAR MORE "INTERMEDIATE" species than it does of the ones which were supposedly "better equipped" to survive!

But there ARE no "intermediate" species!

....yeah, you got TON'S of evidence!

You are grabbing straws my friend. Any time any of your ridiculous arguments is destroyed you drop it and look for something different. Enough already.
To remind you - once you argued that birds do not have scales. You know it makes you look really really stupid?

 

[carolinajazz]

To remind you - once you argued that birds do not have scales. You know it makes you look really really stupid?

I never said that some birds didn't have scales! Obviously, some bird legs have scale like skin, unique to there environment. However, GENERALLY speaking, birds have feathers, hollow bones, light weight organs so they can fly long distances and at fast speeds! Reptiles, on the other hand, are just the opposite! Large bone structure, large organs and much heavier body parts....that make the statement that birds are the closest living things to Reptiles sounds like you've been smoking dope and doing drugs for years, maybe decades, perhaps centuries! Who, in there right mind, would come to such a conclusion....when the powers of observation, deduction, and common sense make that statement LUDICROUS!

 

[PearlWatson]

Pearl, to her credit, is getting more educated about the science and has been able to raise some valid points in the discussion, as well.

Yeah I learned a bunch of useless boring **** about bacteria growing dicks "out of nowhere" to share their immunity. Thanks dalamon!

 

[MVP]

GENERALLY speaking, birds have feathers, hollow bones, light weight organs so they can fly long distances and at fast speeds! Reptiles, on the other hand, are just the opposite! Large bone structure, large organs and much heavier body parts....that make the statement that birds are the closest living things to Reptiles sounds like you've been smoking dope and doing drugs for years, maybe decades, perhaps centuries!

You are so stupid I am starting to feel sorry for you. It looks like you never studied biology and have absolutely no clue about variety of life forms on Earth. To sum every bird and reptile in your ridiculous definition is beyond stupid. Just for starters compare Ostrich or some other nonflying birds to some gliding reptiles and see how stupid your above statement is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIYAYuuv2qQ

 

[MVP]

I never said that some birds didn't have scales! Obviously, some bird legs have scale like skin, unique to there environment. !

Some? Scale like skin? Can you get any more uneducated/false statements here please, I have good laugh anytime I read this nonsense.

 

[carolinajazz]

Some? Scale like skin? Can you get any more uneducated/false statements here please, I have good laugh anytime I read this nonsense.

...look it, numbnuts! I don't know if your a guy or a girl, but I'm sick and tired of your insults and use of the word "stupid" in reference to my posts! Now if you want to slap one of those "jailhouse tats" on your face that your buddy Klinko has on his back, that's find with me! For you to even suggest that Klinko is MVP of anything makes you the clown fool of this board! Peace?

 

[MVP]

For you to even suggest that Klinko is MVP of anything makes you the clown fool of this board! Peace?

He is official MVP of Eurobasket 2007 and Euroleague 2012. Uneducated again?