Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Comments (Page 1,699)

Showing posts 33,961 - 33,980 of105,980
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35262
Jul 24, 2012
 
I *DID* find the following on 'BadArcheology':

<<begin cut/paste>>

"Siegfriedt was unable to persuade any palaeontologists that he had really discovered a fossil. In a letter of 12 January 1927, he expressed his frustration in terms that make clear his motivation:


“I was simply bringing my discovery to the public notice and from the attitude that was hurled at me, one would think I was trying to hold up a bank. However I have the tooth and the most beautiful specimen at that. Since my discovery I find several gaps in the Geologic Time Table, which have not satisfactorily been explained.”

From this letter, we can guess that Siegfried was what we would now term a Young Earth Creationist, who was keen to dispute evolution and geological assessments of the age of the earth."

<<end cut/paste>>

more at: http://www.badarchaeology.com/...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35263
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>
More BS of no substance. You aren't being directly relevant to my embarrassing - for you and your ilk - question.
I really am enjoying your excuses. "But, but, they were local yokels!. Please believe me! Er... actually, woops! Did I just admit that ToE is the hobby of "local yokels" - in addition to all others in the realm of the illogical and fraudulent? I guess I did? Soreeeeee for letting down the team, guys!:S."
Little snot? No, no, I don't resemble a "little snot" --- it's those who are aimlessly wandering through life crapping on about "Goddit and magic" that are the true "little snots." You see, I know you think it's "clever" and "cute" to use that nonsense. Well, "clever" and "cute" until someone comes along and points out how your ilk (i.e., the "local yokels")took a single tooth of a prehistoric pig, created an entire being out of it, using *magic*, gave it a fancy Latin scientific name, and who to this very day would have been calling it "Montana Man" had they not discovered the rest of the PIG. If a plane had crashed into the site, had an earthquake occurred or any other event that would have destroyed the site, you'd be claiming it as a link in the so-called evolutionary chain. That, my unworthy adversary, is the definition of a sloppy, fraudulent methodology.
4-0.
I totally agree that the pig-tooth case was fraudulent, sloppy methodology.

However you are deliberately avoiding the point which was that it was a local non-scientist who found the tooth, showed it to the local papers who publicized it as a "hominid fossil". Then ACTUAL scientists got ahold of the evidence and pointed out that it was wrong.

So at no point whatsoever was this taken seriously by the scientific community as evidence of evolution. Besides the fact that the entirety of evolution does not rest on one false claim from near a century ago.

Just I'm sure that you would not say that Christianity rests on each and every fake Ark or "real" Jesus-cross found.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35264
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
P.s, Dude, just admit that that motto of those who hold to ToE is, "No care taken, no responsibility accepted", as evidenced by you and the rest of the "local yokels" attempting to run away from all responsibility in the "Montana Man" disaster.
Actually, no need for an admission. It's apparently obvious.:D
In which case you are responsible for every creationist fraud from before you were born and Christianity as a whole has been invalidated all because some idiots claimed they found Noah's Ark.
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35265
Jul 24, 2012
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah! so you know you're full of shit and have nothing to back up your silly accusation.
<quoted text>
By the way, Mr Sloppy, the pig tooth story is Nebraska Man not Montana man. The Montana tooth was from a condylarth not a pig and no record of the rest of it being found. Once again,*that* was Nebraska Man. But don't let facts get in the way of pure bullshit, eh?
Guess what? You're are all bigger morons than I first perceived. YES, my outwitted prey, of COURSE it's "Nebraska Man", you doggone fool! Did you check it up on Wiki and discover that profound fact?:D Why didn't you point that out to me before, Mikey? You see, I caught all of you. I've been typing "Montana Man" over and over again and all of you "experts", the supremely knowledgeable gurus of ToE, didn't challenge it - Until a lone "genius" *actually* took the trouble to look it up. MikeF, you've played right into my hands, because this, again, proves my point. Not only is your methodology sloppy and unscientific, the majority of you are IGNORANT of your own,*cough cough* glorious history.:D
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35266
Jul 24, 2012
 
So while "Dude Destroyer" gains rank on his lies for Jesus score-card and braggs about it, his best attempt at debunking evolutionary biology has been a sad case of ad-hom. And in the meantime the evidence I presented to him unequivocally demonstrating evolution remains unaddressed as usual, as it has done for many many months.

I predict further Black Knight-esque lulz from The Destroyer, never getting much better than Piltdown or teh SLoT.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35267
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess what? You're are all bigger morons than I first perceived. YES, my outwitted prey, of COURSE it's "Nebraska Man", you doggone fool! Did you check it up on Wiki and discover that profound fact?:D Why didn't you point that out to me before, Mikey? You see, I caught all of you. I've been typing "Montana Man" over and over again and all of you "experts", the supremely knowledgeable gurus of ToE, didn't challenge it - Until a lone "genius" *actually* took the trouble to look it up. MikeF, you've played right into my hands, because this, again, proves my point. Not only is your methodology sloppy and unscientific, the majority of you are IGNORANT of your own,*cough cough* glorious history.:D
Um, Big D, we KNEW exactly what it was you were talking about as soon as you said the word "pig".

Believe me D, it's not your biggest mistake.
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35268
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I totally agree that the pig-tooth case was fraudulent, sloppy methodology.
However you are deliberately avoiding the point which was that it was a local non-scientist who found the tooth, showed it to the local papers who publicized it as a "hominid fossil". Then ACTUAL scientists got ahold of the evidence and pointed out that it was wrong.
So at no point whatsoever was this taken seriously by the scientific community as evidence of evolution. Besides the fact that the entirety of evolution does not rest on one false claim from near a century ago.
Just I'm sure that you would not say that Christianity rests on each and every fake Ark or "real" Jesus-cross found.
Dear Dude,

You're agreement is noted. Unfortunately, you proffered the usual excuses.

Again, nice try. I know the true story of "Nebraska Man." It's not in any wise how you are presenting it. "No care taken, no responsibility accepted."

You've, predictably, mouthed what I term as "Myth from the ToE apologists." Well, permit me to cite some facts, which if proven wrong will see me happy to admit their error, provided you can provide unassailable evidence proving that to be the case.

"In a 1922 issue of Illustrated London News, an article was published featuring a picture of Nebraska man drawn by Amedee Forestier saying the,“reconstruction is merely the expression of an artist's brilliant imaginative genius.” Imaginative was correct because this man and his mate were concocted from a single tooth. It turns out that the tooth was that of a pig.

In 1917, Harold Cook, a rancher and geologist from Nebraska, unearthed one molar tooth in Pliocine deposits in western Nebraska. In 1922, he sent the tooth to **Dr. Henry Osborn of Columbia University, head of the American Museum of Natural History, who claimed that it belonged to an early hominid and determined that the tooth had characteristics of chimpanzee, Pithecanthropus (Java man), and man.** He wrote Cook saying:**"I sat down with the tooth and I said to myself:'It looks one hundred per cent anthropoid'"**(Osborn, Henry Fairfield, 1922, "Hesperopithecus, the first anthropoid primate found in America," American Museum Novitates, 37, p. 2 ). One month later, Osborn announced that Hesperopithecus haroldcookii was the first anthropoid ape from America; a missing link in human evolution.

Sir Grafton Elliot Smith, F.R.S., Professor of Anatomy of Manchester, England, supported Osborn saying, "I think the balance of probability is in favour of the view that the tooth found in the Pliocene beds of Nebraska may possibly have belonged to a primitive member of the Human Family" (Smith, The Evolution of Man 1927)"
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35269
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, Big D, we KNEW exactly what it was you were talking about as soon as you said the word "pig".
Believe me D, it's not your biggest mistake.
Believe me, it was no "mistake." And I know your "type." You criticise *anything*- all it's all usually irrelevant to the point. If what you're saying is true, one of you would have literally jumped on it. Sucked in. My version makes sense, yours doesn't. Me = logical. Your ilk = illogical.:D
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35270
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear Dude,
You're agreement is noted. Unfortunately, you proffered the usual excuses.
And you're offering the usual ad-homs from the fundie YEC playbook.

Did this find demonstrate evolution? No.

Did it falsify evolution? No.

Got anything relevant that seriously challenges what we know call the modern evolutionary synthesis? Do you have an alternative scientific explanation that explains biodiversity at least as good as or even better than evolution? Still waiting.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35271
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>
Believe me, it was no "mistake." And I know your "type." You criticise *anything*- all it's all usually irrelevant to the point. If what you're saying is true, one of you would have literally jumped on it. Sucked in. My version makes sense, yours doesn't. Me = logical. Your ilk = illogical.:D
It is not logical to attack established scientific concepts with ad-hom.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35272
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess what? You're are all bigger morons than I first perceived. YES, my outwitted prey, of COURSE it's "Nebraska Man", you doggone fool! Did you check it up on Wiki and discover that profound fact?:D Why didn't you point that out to me before, Mikey? You see, I caught all of you. I've been typing "Montana Man" over and over again and all of you "experts", the supremely knowledgeable gurus of ToE, didn't challenge it - Until a lone "genius" *actually* took the trouble to look it up. MikeF, you've played right into my hands, because this, again, proves my point. Not only is your methodology sloppy and unscientific, the majority of you are IGNORANT of your own,*cough cough* glorious history.:D
What a bunch of lying crap! There is BOTH a Montana Man AND a Nebraska Man. YOU are the stupid shit that confused the two. Now you want to act like you've set some sort of trap. You're just one more, ignorant, fundie fraud.

And, no, I didn't have to go look it up. Unlike yourself, I am knowledgeable on the subject.

Now why don't you go back to your fundie sites and drag out something else that was shown BY SCIENTISTS! to be fraudulent a hundred years ago. We'll wait. It's a slow morning and I get a laugh out of the ignorant making a fool of himself.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35273
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear Dude,
You're agreement is noted. Unfortunately, you proffered the usual excuses.
Again, nice try. I know the true story of "Nebraska Man." It's not in any wise how you are presenting it. "No care taken, no responsibility accepted."
You've, predictably, mouthed what I term as "Myth from the ToE apologists." Well, permit me to cite some facts, which if proven wrong will see me happy to admit their error, provided you can provide unassailable evidence proving that to be the case.
"In a 1922 issue of Illustrated London News, an article was published featuring a picture of Nebraska man drawn by Amedee Forestier saying the,“reconstruction is merely the expression of an artist's brilliant imaginative genius.” Imaginative was correct because this man and his mate were concocted from a single tooth. It turns out that the tooth was that of a pig.
In 1917, Harold Cook, a rancher and geologist from Nebraska, unearthed one molar tooth in Pliocine deposits in western Nebraska. In 1922, he sent the tooth to **Dr. Henry Osborn of Columbia University, head of the American Museum of Natural History, who claimed that it belonged to an early hominid and determined that the tooth had characteristics of chimpanzee, Pithecanthropus (Java man), and man.** He wrote Cook saying:**"I sat down with the tooth and I said to myself:'It looks one hundred per cent anthropoid'"**(Osborn, Henry Fairfield, 1922, "Hesperopithecus, the first anthropoid primate found in America," American Museum Novitates, 37, p. 2 ). One month later, Osborn announced that Hesperopithecus haroldcookii was the first anthropoid ape from America; a missing link in human evolution.
Sir Grafton Elliot Smith, F.R.S., Professor of Anatomy of Manchester, England, supported Osborn saying, "I think the balance of probability is in favour of the view that the tooth found in the Pliocene beds of Nebraska may possibly have belonged to a primitive member of the Human Family" (Smith, The Evolution of Man 1927)"
YOU should start looking things up jackass. Even Osborn said the drawing was crap. From Wiki.

Henry Fairfield Osborn in 1922, on the basis of a tooth that rancher and geologist Harold Cook found in Nebraska in 1917. An illustration of H. haroldcookii was done by artist Amédée Forestier, who modeled the drawing on the proportions of "Pithecanthropus" (now Homo erectus), the "Java ape-man," for the Illustrated London News. Osborn was not impressed with the illustration, calling it: "a figment of the imagination of no scientific value, and undoubtedly inaccurate."

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35274
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>
Believe me, it was no "mistake." And I know your "type." You criticise *anything*- all it's all usually irrelevant to the point. If what you're saying is true, one of you would have literally jumped on it. Sucked in. My version makes sense, yours doesn't. Me = logical. Your ilk = illogical.:D
Liar. You didn't know one from the other until I pointed it out to you. Easy to pretend to know about it *now*.
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35275
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude wrote:
So while "Dude Destroyer" gains rank on his lies for Jesus score-card and braggs about it, his best attempt at debunking evolutionary biology has been a sad case of ad-hom. And in the meantime the evidence I presented to him unequivocally demonstrating evolution remains unaddressed as usual, as it has done for many many months.
I predict further Black Knight-esque lulz from The Destroyer, never getting much better than Piltdown or teh SLoT.
Thank you for the opportunity to destroy you, yet again.

a)I don't see your "unassailable evidence" that those "heavy weights" of the time didn't make those statements? GET REAL,BABY, "Nebraska Man" was widely accepted by the evolution community of the time. Your "lies for Darwin" are very cute, but nonetheless lies.

b)Due to your "lies and propaganda for Darwin", you are looking like a fool, yet again.

c)Your extremely nasty habit of trying to deflect and widen the debate, due to your obvious embarrassment over my "point", is rather pathetic and transparent.

d) Are you a delusional psychotic? You've presented nothing previously to me, nor at present? Didn't I inform you before that I'm not bothering to look at your tripe? You can't defend ToE on this point, do you think I'm going to engage a disingenuous shifter-of-goal-posts on something else?

e) Where does Jesus come into this equation? Oh! I know, that's your "standard line" that you *think* saves you from these..er..rather touchy and embarrassing situations. Honestly, I think Jesus is more of a "personal savior" to you than to any "Fundamental Christian." :D

You are constipated, let's face it. You're Dragging out the "same old, same old", so consider this as an invaluable service to you, i.e. "ripping you a new one" to...er...free things up down there.:D


I believe it's 6-0?:)
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35276
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
In which case you are responsible for every creationist fraud from before you were born and Christianity as a whole has been invalidated all because some idiots claimed they found Noah's Ark.
*Noted. Deflection due to desperation.:D
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35277
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
And you're offering the usual ad-homs from the fundie YEC playbook.
Did this find demonstrate evolution? No.
Did it falsify evolution? No.
Got anything relevant that seriously challenges what we know call the modern evolutionary synthesis? Do you have an alternative scientific explanation that explains biodiversity at least as good as or even better than evolution? Still waiting.
Noted: FAILED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THOSE DISTINGUISHED experts from the time didn't make those statements. STILL FAILING to address my point. More DEFLECTION. TRYING TO WIDEN the debate because you cannot answer my point.:D

8-0
Walter Harold Marlin

Mount Holly, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35278
Jul 24, 2012
 
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35279
Jul 24, 2012
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Liar. You didn't know one from the other until I pointed it out to you. Easy to pretend to know about it *now*.
A dismayed MikeF, who had to resort to "Wiki" to learn about ToE, is an apparently "unhappy" MikeF.:D

MkeF, I perceive a certain adversarial tone in you? WHY, O WHY didn't you point it out before? I gave you all fair warning --- I'm smarter than all of you put together.:)

P.s. This is great! One person ripping all of you new ones!

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35280
Jul 24, 2012
 
I still think we should WELEASE WODWEWICK!!!
The Dude Destroyer

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35281
Jul 24, 2012
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU should start looking things up jackass. Even Osborn said the drawing was crap. From Wiki.
Henry Fairfield Osborn in 1922, on the basis of a tooth that rancher and geologist Harold Cook found in Nebraska in 1917. An illustration of H. haroldcookii was done by artist Amédée Forestier, who modeled the drawing on the proportions of "Pithecanthropus" (now Homo erectus), the "Java ape-man," for the Illustrated London News. Osborn was not impressed with the illustration, calling it: "a figment of the imagination of no scientific value, and undoubtedly inaccurate."
FAIL, you insolent little snot!

Why? Well, JACKASS, anyone can SEE you didn't address this:

"In 1917, Harold Cook, a rancher and geologist from Nebraska, unearthed one molar tooth in Pliocine deposits in western Nebraska. In 1922, he sent the tooth to Dr. Henry Osborn of Columbia University, head of the American Museum of Natural History, who claimed that it belonged to an early hominid and determined that the tooth had characteristics of chimpanzee, Pithecanthropus (Java man), and man. He wrote Cook saying: "I sat down with the tooth and I said to myself:'It looks one hundred per cent anthropoid'" (Osborn, Henry Fairfield, 1922, "Hesperopithecus, the first anthropoid primate found in America," American Museum Novitates, 37, p. 2 ). One month later, Osborn announced that Hesperopithecus haroldcookii was the first anthropoid ape from America; a missing link in human evolution.

Sir Grafton Elliot Smith, F.R.S., Professor of Anatomy of Manchester, England, supported Osborn saying, "I think the balance of probability is in favour of the view that the tooth found in the Pliocene beds of Nebraska may possibly have belonged to a primitive member of the Human Family" (Smith, The Evolution of Man 1927)"

9-0, I believe?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 33,961 - 33,980 of105,980
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

156 Users are viewing the Weird Forum right now

Search the Weird Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 3 min Alexis_B 131,616
OFFBEAT.keepAword.DropAword.2011edition (Oct '11) 7 min CJ Rocker 16,422
"2" TWO word FUN game*** (Mar '13) 8 min CJ Rocker 1,233
*add A word / drop a word* (Nov '12) 13 min Camilla 7,785
+=Keep 1 Drop 1=+ 3 STACK (Mar '13) 15 min night machine 5,161
Describe how you are feeling in just ONE word... (Feb '09) 26 min Tucson Dave 6,445
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 27 min Tucson Dave 11,640
Lets Ask Billy R! (May '12) 1 hr FTW Forever 2,248
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! 1 hr Independent 871
clark county nevada rancher facing tyranny from... 2 hr Jacob 263
•••
•••
•••
•••