paleontology, for those who loves dinosaurs

[WheelieAddict]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

Origin of birds - Wikipedia

 

[james bond]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

Origin of birds - Wikipedia

Explain in your own words. You can't even rebut my comment. That's no answer because anyone can change it and wikipedia is biased.

 

[WheelieAddict]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

They didn't "descend" from dinosaurs, they are an evolutionary path different from other dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were on the Earth for millions of years, why would you think they all are supposed to evolve the same way?

 

[Grumblenuts]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

In reality, the "it" in "creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)" was referring to "evolution." Creationists idiotically trying to "disprove" evolution, i.e. the entire theory of biological evolution. If one could indeed scientifically "show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs" that would simply mean the evolution of birds differs from the established scientific consensus.. regarding the evolution of birds!

 

[Hollie]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

Origin of birds - Wikipedia

Explain in your own words. You can't even rebut my comment. That's no answer because anyone can change it and wikipedia is biased.

As is typical, the ID'iot creationists feel threatened by fossil / transitional species because that evidence displays immense time spans vs. the ID'iot creationist 6,000 year old earth.

CC214.1: Archaeopteryx as a Transitional Bird

 

[james bond]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

They didn't "descend" from dinosaurs, they are an evolutionary path different from other dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were on the Earth for millions of years, why would you think they all are supposed to evolve the same way?

What did they "descend" from then? What is the evolutionary path different from "other" dinosaurs? For that matter, what are the "other" dinosaurs haha?

 

[james bond]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

In reality, the "it" in "creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)" was referring to "evolution." Creationists idiotically trying to "disprove" evolution, i.e. the entire theory of biological evolution. If one could indeed scientifically "show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs" that would simply mean the evolution of birds differs from the established scientific consensus.. regarding the evolution of birds!

People who do not believe evolution use science to argue against it. One is the fact that femur of the bird is fixed while the theropod is moving. It means that birds could descend from theropods. The other argument is the fibers on the fossils are just fibers from the leathery skin as it aged. It isn't part of feathers. Furthermore, if they did "evolve" into birds, then we should have transitional fossils to see that they did.

I don't really follow your argument. On one hand, you are saying creationists are trying to "disprove" evolution by saying Archaeopteryx is simply a bird. How do you know what an Archaeopteryx is? Has anyone taken a pic of one? You do not present anything to show how this evolution happened and what the evidence is.

 

[progressive hunter]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

They didn't "descend" from dinosaurs, they are an evolutionary path different from other dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were on the Earth for millions of years, why would you think they all are supposed to evolve the same way?

there is not a single bit of evidence that they were here millions of yrs,,,

that is pure speculation based on poor assumptions,,,

 

[Hollie]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

They didn't "descend" from dinosaurs, they are an evolutionary path different from other dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were on the Earth for millions of years, why would you think they all are supposed to evolve the same way?

there is not a single bit of evidence that they were here millions of yrs,,,

that is pure speculation based on poor assumptions,,,

This is not the ID'iot creationist conspiracy theory forum.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

They didn't "descend" from dinosaurs, they are an evolutionary path different from other dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were on the Earth for millions of years, why would you think they all are supposed to evolve the same way?

there is not a single bit of evidence that they were here millions of yrs,,,

that is pure speculation based on poor assumptions,,,

This is not the ID'iot creationist conspiracy theory forum.

Exactly. Ignore bond's trolling. He is not asking honest questions.

 

[Grumblenuts]

People who do not believe evolution use science to argue against it.

Indeed. Ironically enough. They try. And fail. Time and again. Miserably. Because they don't know what they're doing, nor that evolution is well established scientific fact.

I don't really follow your argument.

Stephen Jay Gould also points out that "Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory—natural selection—to explain the mechanism of evolution."[20] These two aspects are frequently confused. Scientists continue to argue about particular explanations or mechanisms at work in specific instances of evolution – but the fact that evolution has occurred, and is still occurring, is undisputed.

Follow it now?

 

[progressive hunter]

"creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird)." - one can't "disprove" anything simply "by claiming" something else. However, using science, one theoretically could demonstrate flaws in a scientifically established theory which would likely result in the theory simply being amended, not deemed (entirely) "wrong" or disproven.

The facts disprove, i.e. show that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs, because dinos had moving femurs. Birds have fixed femurs to prevent their lungs from collapsing when they inhale. Their lung formations are different as discovered by Oregon State University researchers.

They didn't "descend" from dinosaurs, they are an evolutionary path different from other dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were on the Earth for millions of years, why would you think they all are supposed to evolve the same way?

there is not a single bit of evidence that they were here millions of yrs,,,

that is pure speculation based on poor assumptions,,,

This is not the ID'iot creationist conspiracy theory forum.

Exactly. Ignore bond's trolling. He is not asking honest questions.

in your opinion,,,but then again you think we all came from a rock,,,

 

[Grumblenuts]

Actually,

Highly energetic chemistry is thought to have produced a self-replicating molecule around 4 billion years ago, and half a billion years later the last common ancestor of all life existed.[11] The current scientific consensus is that the complex biochemistry that makes up life came from simpler chemical reactions.[284] The beginning of life may have included self-replicating molecules such as RNA[285] and the assembly of simple cells.

 

[alang1216]

in your opinion,,,but then again you think we all came from a rock,,,

Isn't that what Genesis says, that we came from dirt?

 

[james bond]

Indeed. Ironically enough. They try. And fail. Time and again. Miserably. Because they don't know what they're doing, nor that evolution is well established scientific fact.

Name one fact or else you are the one failing miserably. I know what I am doing.

Follow it now?

Not really. One argument against Darwin is he failed due to his racism. His theories led his cousin to come up with eugenics and he supported eugenics. We know that it led to Hitler's exterminations, social Darwinism, and genocide of blacks and today's Planned Parenthood. He also didn't have long-time. As for natural selection, that was also proposed by the Christians.

Now, explain one fact of evolution from Darwin. What facts of evolution did Stephen Jay Gould state?

 

[james bond]

Actually,

Highly energetic chemistry is thought to have produced a self-replicating molecule around 4 billion years ago, and half a billion years later the last common ancestor of all life existed.[11] The current scientific consensus is that the complex biochemistry that makes up life came from simpler chemical reactions.[284] The beginning of life may have included self-replicating molecules such as RNA[285] and the assembly of simple cells.

Since you brought it up, you should be able to explain highly energetic chemistry and answers questions on it. What observable evidence does it have? What is the self-replicating molecule? How do you know it was half a billion years later the last common ancestor of all life existed. What is the last common ancestor? If I ask a person on the street, then would they know of it haha? Go on, explain your RNA[285] and how assembly of simple cells relates to creation of life. Remember, I said only life begats life. Not chemistry.

 

[james bond]

Isn't that what Genesis says, that we came from dirt?

Haha. No. Adam was formed from dirt and we will return to dirt. If all it took was dirt, then we'd have humans popping up all over the place. What is missing from your post?

 

[progressive hunter]

in your opinion,,,but then again you think we all came from a rock,,,

Isn't that what Genesis says, that we came from dirt?

dont know cause I never read it,,,,

 

[alang1216]

Adam was formed from dirt

Proof? Evidence? Anything other than the hearsay of the Bible?

 

[progressive hunter]

Adam was formed from dirt

Proof? Evidence? Anything other than the hearsay of the Bible?

thats why they call it a religion based on faith,,,

but the evo's dont have any proof and claim it to be fact,,,and use tax payer money to have it taught in public schools