Question about Noah.

[Hollie]

You actually don't age anything to declare.

Failed English too, I see.

That won't support your lack of a defendable argument.

Where's your half-man - half-bird again? Actually, if the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, the population would be more than the earth could hold. The population actually supports an earth age of 6,000 years.

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

There are lots of them. Do a search.

 

[Taz]

What are you talking about? Please explain.

?

You can't even explain your own answer?

You asked me to explain. What part do you not understand: 'people', 'different', 'races', 'look', 'different'? You want a link to a dictionary or something?

I see you are taking a while. To save you some time searching: Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online

obviously its the 'why' that's giving him the most trouble.....

Randy asked a question that he couldn't answer himself. Why do people look different? Without looking it up scientifically, I'd say that a) evolution, and b) some kinds of variables in each species genes? Is there another answer?

 

[RandomVariable]

(Wow. Talk about your serendipitous timing.)

This is from National Geographic May 19th 2009, five years ago:
"MISSING LINK" FOUND: New Fossil Links Humans, Lemurs?
(Bolding mine)
Yep, there it is. Five years ago 47 million year old lemur fossil was found that cleared up all that evolutionary assuming stuff. If religion tried to pull a rabbit out of a hat like this we would get laughed out of the room but when 'science' does it, well, that is deductive reasoning.

Trust me, I went through the exact same process of believing but at some point common sense will simply tell you there is a God. Anything other explanation just gets to difficult to justify.

[What ever happened to our 'quote' button and preview post ability?]

Trust me. I have no reason to trust you.

Did you happen to miss that the silly "missing link" terminology was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1960's?

That line obviously was not for you and sorry, I missed the memo.

Did you miss the memo that your "Missing Link" is no such thing?

Don't you find it interesting that the peer review process provides the means for examination by independent agents?

But, as we know, this is why the Fundamentalist Christian ministries do not publish in the Journal Nature

Controversial Ida Fossil No Missing Link - CBS News

Experts protested that Ida wasn't even a close relative. And now a new analysis supports their reaction.

In fact, Ida is as far removed from the monkey-ape-human ancestry as a primate could be, says Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York.

He and his colleagues compared 360 sapecific anatomical features of 117 living and extinct primate species to draw up a family tree. They report the results in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

Wait, so you are saying that the best/only missing link evidence was thrown out five months after it was announced? So you are saying there no candidate for a missing link whatsoever in a day and age where supposedly we pretty much know everything? Taz must be feeling so abandoned.

Read what I provided to you. There was no "missing link".

As opposed to religious dogma that unchanging even when it shown to be false, the process of science is open to modify and adjust as new data becomes available.

Did you know that rattling bones and reading tea leaves will not cure a bacterial infection but modern medicine can?

Did you just use the term 'missing link'? Did you not get the memo either? I am all for science and everything it can show, and not show. Some people like to use religion for personal gain, true.

I would greatly appreciate it if you never again bring up witchery and the like when discussion God with me.

 

[RandomVariable]

?

You can't even explain your own answer?

You asked me to explain. What part do you not understand: 'people', 'different', 'races', 'look', 'different'? You want a link to a dictionary or something?

I see you are taking a while. To save you some time searching: Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online

obviously its the 'why' that's giving him the most trouble.....

Randy asked a question that he couldn't answer himself. Why do people look different? Without looking it up scientifically, I'd say that a) evolution, and b) some kinds of variables in each species genes? Is there another answer?

PostmodernProph, he directed that question at you so the that line of questioning is all yours if you want it. There is really no pleasure in besting Taz.

 

[jillian]

You actually don't age anything to declare.

Failed English too, I see.

That won't support your lack of a defendable argument.

Where's your half-man - half-bird again? Actually, if the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, the population would be more than the earth could hold. The population actually supports an earth age of 6,000 years.

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

I don't have to defend science to a religious zealot. you should really stop putting religion and science on the same level. they are not comparable. the only "proof" you have of your beliefs is your belief. that's circular reasoning.

 

[jillian]

Trust me. I have no reason to trust you.

Did you happen to miss that the silly "missing link" terminology was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1960's?

That line obviously was not for you and sorry, I missed the memo.

Did you miss the memo that your "Missing Link" is no such thing?

Don't you find it interesting that the peer review process provides the means for examination by independent agents?

But, as we know, this is why the Fundamentalist Christian ministries do not publish in the Journal Nature

Controversial Ida Fossil No Missing Link - CBS News

Experts protested that Ida wasn't even a close relative. And now a new analysis supports their reaction.

In fact, Ida is as far removed from the monkey-ape-human ancestry as a primate could be, says Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York.

He and his colleagues compared 360 sapecific anatomical features of 117 living and extinct primate species to draw up a family tree. They report the results in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

Wait, so you are saying that the best/only missing link evidence was thrown out five months after it was announced? So you are saying there no candidate for a missing link whatsoever in a day and age where supposedly we pretty much know everything? Taz must be feeling so abandoned.

Read what I provided to you. There was no "missing link".

As opposed to religious dogma that unchanging even when it shown to be false, the process of science is open to modify and adjust as new data becomes available.

Did you know that rattling bones and reading tea leaves will not cure a bacterial infection but modern medicine can?

Did you just use the term 'missing link'? Did you not get the memo either? I am all for science and everything it can show, and not show. Some people like to use religion for personal gain, true.

I would greatly appreciate it if you never again bring up witchery and the like when discussion God with me.

stop pretending your faith-based nonsense is science.

you don't like the history of your beliefs being put before you? i'd suggest that's too bad since witch burnings, crusades, the inquisition and imprisonment and murder of scientists is part of that belief system.

you should probably get over it.

 

[jillian]

That won't support your lack of a defendable argument.

Where's your half-man - half-bird again? Actually, if the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, the population would be more than the earth could hold. The population actually supports an earth age of 6,000 years.

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

(Wow. Talk about your serendipitous timing.)

This is from National Geographic May 19th 2009, five years ago:
"MISSING LINK" FOUND: New Fossil Links Humans, Lemurs?

...
The fossil, he says, bridges the evolutionary split between higher primates such as monkeys, apes, and humans and their more distant relatives such as lemurs.

"This is the first link to all humans," Hurum, of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, Norway, said in a statement. Ida represents "the closest thing we can get to a direct ancestor."

Ida, properly known as Darwinius masillae, has a unique anatomy. The lemur-like skeleton features primate-like characteristics, including grasping hands, opposable thumbs, clawless digits with nails, and relatively short limbs.
...

(Bolding mine)
Yep, there it is. Five years ago 47 million year old lemur fossil was found that cleared up all that evolutionary assuming stuff. If religion tried to pull a rabbit out of a hat like this we would get laughed out of the room but when 'science' does it, well, that is deductive reasoning.

Trust me, I went through the exact same process of believing but at some point common sense will simply tell you there is a God. Anything other explanation just gets to difficult to justify.

[What ever happened to our 'quote' button and preview post ability?]

Trust me. I have no reason to trust you.

Did you happen to miss that the silly "missing link" terminology was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1960's?

i'm pretty sure if it isn't in his bible, he isn't aware of it.

 

[Hollie]

Trust me. I have no reason to trust you.

Did you happen to miss that the silly "missing link" terminology was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1960's?

That line obviously was not for you and sorry, I missed the memo.

Did you miss the memo that your "Missing Link" is no such thing?

Don't you find it interesting that the peer review process provides the means for examination by independent agents?

But, as we know, this is why the Fundamentalist Christian ministries do not publish in the Journal Nature

Controversial Ida Fossil No Missing Link - CBS News

Experts protested that Ida wasn't even a close relative. And now a new analysis supports their reaction.

In fact, Ida is as far removed from the monkey-ape-human ancestry as a primate could be, says Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York.

He and his colleagues compared 360 sapecific anatomical features of 117 living and extinct primate species to draw up a family tree. They report the results in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

Wait, so you are saying that the best/only missing link evidence was thrown out five months after it was announced? So you are saying there no candidate for a missing link whatsoever in a day and age where supposedly we pretty much know everything? Taz must be feeling so abandoned.

Read what I provided to you. There was no "missing link".

As opposed to religious dogma that unchanging even when it shown to be false, the process of science is open to modify and adjust as new data becomes available.

Did you know that rattling bones and reading tea leaves will not cure a bacterial infection but modern medicine can?

Did you just use the term 'missing link'? Did you not get the memo either? I am all for science and everything it can show, and not show. Some people like to use religion for personal gain, true.

I would greatly appreciate it if you never again bring up witchery and the like when discussion God with me.

Have you forgotten already? It was you who posted the article

Trust me. I have no reason to trust you.

Did you happen to miss that the silly "missing link" terminology was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1960's?

That line obviously was not for you and sorry, I missed the memo.

Did you miss the memo that your "Missing Link" is no such thing?

Don't you find it interesting that the peer review process provides the means for examination by independent agents?

But, as we know, this is why the Fundamentalist Christian ministries do not publish in the Journal Nature

Controversial Ida Fossil No Missing Link - CBS News

Experts protested that Ida wasn't even a close relative. And now a new analysis supports their reaction.

In fact, Ida is as far removed from the monkey-ape-human ancestry as a primate could be, says Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York.

He and his colleagues compared 360 sapecific anatomical features of 117 living and extinct primate species to draw up a family tree. They report the results in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

Wait, so you are saying that the best/only missing link evidence was thrown out five months after it was announced? So you are saying there no candidate for a missing link whatsoever in a day and age where supposedly we pretty much know everything? Taz must be feeling so abandoned.

Read what I provided to you. There was no "missing link".

As opposed to religious dogma that unchanging even when it shown to be false, the process of science is open to modify and adjust as new data becomes available.

Did you know that rattling bones and reading tea leaves will not cure a bacterial infection but modern medicine can?

Did you just use the term 'missing link'? Did you not get the memo either? I am all for science and everything it can show, and not show. Some people like to use religion for personal gain, true.

I would greatly appreciate it if you never again bring up witchery and the like when discussion God with me.

Have you forgotten what you posted? It was you (post #666), who linked to the National Geographic article regarding the silly "missing link" fossil.

 

[RandomVariable]

Failed English too, I see.

That won't support your lack of a defendable argument.

Where's your half-man - half-bird again? Actually, if the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, the population would be more than the earth could hold. The population actually supports an earth age of 6,000 years.

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

I don't have to defend science to a religious zealot. you should really stop putting religion and science on the same level. they are not comparable. the only "proof" you have of your beliefs is your belief. that's circular reasoning.

Science has repeatedly proved religion and there are many scientists who will admit it. Take Sir Isaac Newton for example.

 

[Taz]

You can't even explain your own answer?

You asked me to explain. What part do you not understand: 'people', 'different', 'races', 'look', 'different'? You want a link to a dictionary or something?

I see you are taking a while. To save you some time searching: Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online

obviously its the 'why' that's giving him the most trouble.....

Randy asked a question that he couldn't answer himself. Why do people look different? Without looking it up scientifically, I'd say that a) evolution, and b) some kinds of variables in each species genes? Is there another answer?

PostmodernProph, he directed that question at you so the that line of questioning is all yours if you want it. There is really no pleasure in besting Taz.

Besting me? You can't even answer your own question.

 

[Taz]

That won't support your lack of a defendable argument.

Where's your half-man - half-bird again? Actually, if the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, the population would be more than the earth could hold. The population actually supports an earth age of 6,000 years.

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

I don't have to defend science to a religious zealot. you should really stop putting religion and science on the same level. they are not comparable. the only "proof" you have of your beliefs is your belief. that's circular reasoning.

Science has repeatedly proved religion and there are many scientists who will admit it. Take Sir Isaac Newton for example.

Link? Proof?

 

[RandomVariable]

Where's your half-man - half-bird again? Actually, if the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, the population would be more than the earth could hold. The population actually supports an earth age of 6,000 years.

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

(Wow. Talk about your serendipitous timing.)

This is from National Geographic May 19th 2009, five years ago:
"MISSING LINK" FOUND: New Fossil Links Humans, Lemurs?

...
The fossil, he says, bridges the evolutionary split between higher primates such as monkeys, apes, and humans and their more distant relatives such as lemurs.

"This is the first link to all humans," Hurum, of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, Norway, said in a statement. Ida represents "the closest thing we can get to a direct ancestor."

Ida, properly known as Darwinius masillae, has a unique anatomy. The lemur-like skeleton features primate-like characteristics, including grasping hands, opposable thumbs, clawless digits with nails, and relatively short limbs.
...

(Bolding mine)
Yep, there it is. Five years ago 47 million year old lemur fossil was found that cleared up all that evolutionary assuming stuff. If religion tried to pull a rabbit out of a hat like this we would get laughed out of the room but when 'science' does it, well, that is deductive reasoning.

Trust me, I went through the exact same process of believing but at some point common sense will simply tell you there is a God. Anything other explanation just gets to difficult to justify.

[What ever happened to our 'quote' button and preview post ability?]

Trust me. I have no reason to trust you.

Did you happen to miss that the silly "missing link" terminology was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1960's?

i'm pretty sure if it isn't in his bible, he isn't aware of it.

What other things are you 'pretty sure' about. You 'pretty sure' there is no God.

 

[Ellipsis]

If there was a flood and Noah didn't have any asians or blacks on his boat, where did all the asians and blacks come from?

There was a flood but it was regional, not global, so asians and blacks were never endangered to begin with.

 

[RandomVariable]

Where's your half-man - half-bird again? Actually, if the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, the population would be more than the earth could hold. The population actually supports an earth age of 6,000 years.

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

I don't have to defend science to a religious zealot. you should really stop putting religion and science on the same level. they are not comparable. the only "proof" you have of your beliefs is your belief. that's circular reasoning.

Science has repeatedly proved religion and there are many scientists who will admit it. Take Sir Isaac Newton for example.

Link? Proof?

Highlight "Sir Isaac Newton" and right click "Search Google for 'Sir Isaac Newton'", or whatever your option is. Click the first link, in the table of contents of the page it is section 3. The second link from the search is a whole page dedicated to the subject. F* man, give me your street address and I will drop by for lunch and spoon feed you.

 

[Taz]

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

I don't have to defend science to a religious zealot. you should really stop putting religion and science on the same level. they are not comparable. the only "proof" you have of your beliefs is your belief. that's circular reasoning.

Science has repeatedly proved religion and there are many scientists who will admit it. Take Sir Isaac Newton for example.

Link? Proof?

Highlight "Sir Isaac Newton" and right click "Search Google for 'Sir Isaac Newton'", or whatever your option is. Click the first link, in the table of contents of the page it is section 3. The second link from the search is a whole page dedicated to the subject. F* man, give me your street address and I will drop by for lunch and spoon feed you.

You got a link or not? Geez, for a guy of the bible, you sure aren't very friendly or helpful. What did Newton prove about religion? Anything?

 

[Taz]

If there was a flood and Noah didn't have any asians or blacks on his boat, where did all the asians and blacks come from?

There was a flood but it was regional, not global, so asians and blacks were never endangered to begin with.

The bible says otherwise. Please try again.

 

[RandomVariable]

people who don't believe in or understand science really shouldn't pontificate about it.

now let's pretend that the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs existed with man.

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

I don't have to defend science to a religious zealot. you should really stop putting religion and science on the same level. they are not comparable. the only "proof" you have of your beliefs is your belief. that's circular reasoning.

Science has repeatedly proved religion and there are many scientists who will admit it. Take Sir Isaac Newton for example.

Link? Proof?

Highlight "Sir Isaac Newton" and right click "Search Google for 'Sir Isaac Newton'", or whatever your option is. Click the first link, in the table of contents of the page it is section 3. The second link from the search is a whole page dedicated to the subject. F* man, give me your street address and I will drop by for lunch and spoon feed you.

That is because apparently because you know next to nothing off the top of your head and are too lazy to look anything up. This is why it is not even besting you. You just get annoying after a while.

 

[Taz]

While people who can't defend their beliefs should cast no stones at others. Where's your transitional specimen?

I don't have to defend science to a religious zealot. you should really stop putting religion and science on the same level. they are not comparable. the only "proof" you have of your beliefs is your belief. that's circular reasoning.

Science has repeatedly proved religion and there are many scientists who will admit it. Take Sir Isaac Newton for example.

Link? Proof?

Highlight "Sir Isaac Newton" and right click "Search Google for 'Sir Isaac Newton'", or whatever your option is. Click the first link, in the table of contents of the page it is section 3. The second link from the search is a whole page dedicated to the subject. F* man, give me your street address and I will drop by for lunch and spoon feed you.

That is because apparently because you know next to nothing off the top of your head and are too lazy to look anything up. This is why it is not even besting you. You just get annoying after a while.

You make a claim then can't even back it up with a link? Man, you're pathetic. So no, science hasn't proven religion or god. You just made that up.

 

[Ellipsis]

If there was a flood and Noah didn't have any asians or blacks on his boat, where did all the asians and blacks come from?

There was a flood but it was regional, not global, so asians and blacks were never endangered to begin with.

The bible says otherwise. Please try again.

Well no, the bible doesn't say that. Christians just don't know how to read, and Atheists are to caught up trolling Christians to consider the truth. Here's a point-by-point breakdown of what the bible says: Yes Noah s Flood May Have Happened But Not Over the Whole Earth NCSE

Anyway, I think this is a bait thread so since I'm not your target audience a link to the truth is all I have to say about this topic.

 

[the_human_being]

(Wow. Talk about your serendipitous timing.)

This is from National Geographic May 19th 2009, five years ago:
"MISSING LINK" FOUND: New Fossil Links Humans, Lemurs?
(Bolding mine)
Yep, there it is. Five years ago 47 million year old lemur fossil was found that cleared up all that evolutionary assuming stuff. If religion tried to pull a rabbit out of a hat like this we would get laughed out of the room but when 'science' does it, well, that is deductive reasoning.

Trust me, I went through the exact same process of believing but at some point common sense will simply tell you there is a God. Anything other explanation just gets to difficult to justify.

[What ever happened to our 'quote' button and preview post ability?]

Trust me. I have no reason to trust you.

Did you happen to miss that the silly "missing link" terminology was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1960's?

That line obviously was not for you and sorry, I missed the memo.

Did you miss the memo that your "Missing Link" is no such thing?

Don't you find it interesting that the peer review process provides the means for examination by independent agents?

But, as we know, this is why the Fundamentalist Christian ministries do not publish in the Journal Nature

Controversial Ida Fossil No Missing Link - CBS News

Experts protested that Ida wasn't even a close relative. And now a new analysis supports their reaction.

In fact, Ida is as far removed from the monkey-ape-human ancestry as a primate could be, says Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York.

He and his colleagues compared 360 sapecific anatomical features of 117 living and extinct primate species to draw up a family tree. They report the results in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

Wait, so you are saying that the best/only missing link evidence was thrown out five months after it was announced? So you are saying there no candidate for a missing link whatsoever in a day and age where supposedly we pretty much know everything? Taz must be feeling so abandoned.

Read what I provided to you. There was no "missing link".

As opposed to religious dogma that unchanging even when it shown to be false, the process of science is open to modify and adjust as new data becomes available.

Did you know that rattling bones and reading tea leaves will not cure a bacterial infection but modern medicine can?

We have found the missing link. It is Hollie.