Does his help you

[daws101]

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

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

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




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

It was a fossil I found in the Morrison Formation decades ago, that showed just how complex the blood vessels were in coelophysis. It is a beautiful cross section of a forearm. The internal detail is incredible. Bakker loved it!

was that the T-rex?

 

[daws101]

Evolution is a religion now?

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

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

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

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

since both lizard and bird survived and there is a direct line of evidence that birds evolved from reptiles then this had to survive.


as to cocktail forks in the eye believers do plenty of that all by themselves....

 

[daws101]

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

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

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




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

Do you want a lecture in evolution?

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

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

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

I almost gave your bullshit a pass...
not all dinosaurs were lumbering giants in fact there were many more small dinosaurs then large ones. and any body not trying and failing to be the smartest kid in the room would have inferred the obvious that birds evolved from small dinosaurs..

 

[daws101]

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

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

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

false ....why do you feel the need to make shit up!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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

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

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

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

Pointing out that you posted this thread in an area intended for discussions of religion, and that your title implies that it is a challenge to anything but unconditional support of your position, is not an ad hominem.

 

[daws101]

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

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

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

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

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

why? can't gaps just be gaps? it's simple, shit happens or it doesn't.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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

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




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

Do you want a lecture in evolution?

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

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

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

I almost gave your bullshit a pass...
not all dinosaurs were lumbering giants in fact there were many more small dinosaurs then large ones. and any body not trying and failing to be the smartest kid in the room would have inferred the obvious that birds evolved from small dinosaurs..

Again, Smedley said lumbering giants. I attacked his words, I didn't try to pretend I could read his mind, nor have you exhibited any ability to read mine. If he believes that birds are descended from dinosaurs, which is a valid, if inaccurate, position, he should not have used the words lumbering giants. If you want to keep defending him feel free, just stop pretending that defending an idiot that can't talk makes you smart.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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

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

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

why? can't gaps just be gaps? it's simple, shit happens or it doesn't.

Because, unlike you, scientists cannot just dismiss something without an explanation. Evolution is a constant thing, but there is evidence that it works faster at some times than others. There needs to be an explanation other than "Gaps are gaps."

 

[daws101]

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

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

why? can't gaps just be gaps? it's simple, shit happens or it doesn't.

Because, unlike you, scientists cannot just dismiss something without an explanation. Evolution is a constant thing, but there is evidence that it works faster at some times than others. There needs to be an explanation other than "Gaps are gaps."

EXCUSE ME O blathering one, it's not scientists that worry about the gaps, it's believers ..
to a scientist a gap is something that will be filled when evidence is found to fill it...
the god of the gaps nonsense is not evidence.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

why? can't gaps just be gaps? it's simple, shit happens or it doesn't.

Because, unlike you, scientists cannot just dismiss something without an explanation. Evolution is a constant thing, but there is evidence that it works faster at some times than others. There needs to be an explanation other than "Gaps are gaps."

EXCUSE ME O blathering one, it's not scientists that worry about the gaps, it's believers ..
to a scientist a gap is something that will be filled when evidence is found to fill it...
the god of the gaps nonsense is not evidence.

Oh Great and Mighty Daws, AKA the High Priest of Stupidity, if scientists don't worry about the gaps why do they have theories to explain them?

 

[daws101]

Because, unlike you, scientists cannot just dismiss something without an explanation. Evolution is a constant thing, but there is evidence that it works faster at some times than others. There needs to be an explanation other than "Gaps are gaps."

EXCUSE ME O blathering one, it's not scientists that worry about the gaps, it's believers ..
to a scientist a gap is something that will be filled when evidence is found to fill it...
the god of the gaps nonsense is not evidence.

Oh Great and Mighty Daws, AKA the High Priest of Stupidity, if scientists don't worry about the gaps why do they have theories to explain them?

worry is the wrong term, science must be accurate the "gaps" interfere with that accuracy..
btw that's THE GREAT AND POWERFUL DAWS... TRY TO KEEP YOUR SHIT STRAIGHT

 

[SmedlyButler]

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

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

Pointing out that you posted this thread in an area intended for discussions of religion, and that your title implies that it is a challenge to anything but unconditional support of your position, is not an ad hominem.

without the name-calling and cursing and we could have talked about it. Evolution debates take place in lots of religious venues, even in churches. I may have framed my position in the debate awkwardly but did it really warrant your invective?
A little back-story; I've watched quite a few creationist-evolutionist and long-term short-term Genesis debates on YouTube lately. As I said in another post they can be educational and entertaining.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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

Pointing out that you posted this thread in an area intended for discussions of religion, and that your title implies that it is a challenge to anything but unconditional support of your position, is not an ad hominem.

without the name-calling and cursing and we could have talked about it. Evolution debates take place in lots of religious venues, even in churches. I may have framed my position in the debate awkwardly but did it really warrant your invective?
A little back-story; I've watched quite a few creationist-evolutionist and long-term short-term Genesis debates on YouTube lately. As I said in another post they can be educational and entertaining.

The use of profanity is not a personal attack, it is a method used to keep fuckwads from controlling my speech. In other words, if you don't like my ******* language, leave.

 

[daws101]

Pointing out that you posted this thread in an area intended for discussions of religion, and that your title implies that it is a challenge to anything but unconditional support of your position, is not an ad hominem.

without the name-calling and cursing and we could have talked about it. Evolution debates take place in lots of religious venues, even in churches. I may have framed my position in the debate awkwardly but did it really warrant your invective?
A little back-story; I've watched quite a few creationist-evolutionist and long-term short-term Genesis debates on YouTube lately. As I said in another post they can be educational and entertaining.

The use of profanity is not a personal attack, it is a method used to keep fuckwads from controlling my speech. In other words, if you don't like my ******* language, leave.

wow you do have issues!

 

[SmedlyButler]

I wonder why he's hanging around this "pathetic thread" anyway? Just to nip at my heels? Seems rather petty. His issues certainly run deeper than I can fathom.

 

[daws101]

I wonder why he's hanging around this "pathetic thread" anyway? Just to nip at my heels? Seems rather petty. His issues certainly run deeper than I can fathom.

I may be wrong but is the thread's title "Does his help you" supposed to be "does this help you?"

 

[SmedlyButler]

Yes, Typo

 

[SmedlyButler]

In a previous post you link to Dinobuzz.com. The first paragraph in that link says;
"the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of birds being the descendants of a maniraptoran dinosaur, probably something similar (but not identical) to a small dromaeosaur."

In this post you say:
"If he believes that birds are descended from dinosaurs, which is a valid, if inaccurate, position,..."

Can't make up your mind if birds are really descended from dinosaurs?

 

[daws101]

In a previous post you link to Dinobuzz.com. The first paragraph in that link says;
"the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of birds being the descendants of a maniraptoran dinosaur, probably something similar (but not identical) to a small dromaeosaur."

In this post you say:
"If he believes that birds are descended from dinosaurs, which is a valid, if inaccurate, position,..."

Can't make up your mind if birds are really descended from dinosaurs?

sb it's unclear who you are addressing....
here's the full statement "Ask your average paleontologist who is familiar with the phylogeny of vertebrates and they will probably tell you that yes, birds (avians) are dinosaurs. Using proper terminology, birds are avian dinosaurs; other dinosaurs are non-avian dinosaurs, and (strange as it may sound) birds are technically considered reptiles. Overly technical? Just semantics? Perhaps, but still good science. In fact, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of birds being the descendants of a maniraptoran dinosaur, probably something similar (but not identical) to a small dromaeosaur."

 

[SmedlyButler]

I agree.

Great and Powerful has a much better ring. Somebody should use that in a....
I also agree that sometimes a gap is just a gap, until a piece of evidence (in this case probably a fossil) is found to fill it. And in some cases there will always be a gap. A paleontologist can't just say " Okay I think today I'll go find a transitional fossil between species A and species B". Unfortunately the fossil record will never be complete, to you and I that's more than obvious. It sure must make every day of hunting for that elusive bone exciting though. Say, have you heard of "The Valley of the Whales" in the Sahara desert?