Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
Great. You should have no trouble then naming 100 living, working Biologists who reject ToE. We'll wait.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What does the fossil record say?
- Thread starter Youtellme
- Start date
Great. You should have no trouble then naming 100 living, working Biologists who reject ToE. We'll wait.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
newhope101
Active Member
You are another one that has not got a clue about bird ancestry and can make no credible comment either, other than asides and degradation.
No Paintedwolf, you most certainly have not replied with a response, illustrating what bird ancestry you favour and why. You cannot, as you have no clue. The best you can do is pretend you did to save yourself embarrassment
In fact none of you have, nor are any prepared to have a shot. So you are all able to shove your crap down creationists throats as evidence. However you are unable to defend your own position, when it comes down to it. :slap:
Such are the defenders of the TOE faith. :areyoucra
Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links
Bird-from-dinosaur theory of evolution challenged: Was it the other way around?http://au.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0S0zu...lo&sigb=12rj7gkbv&type=JPG&.crumb=k9niHOn9u9J
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Really? We've covered this in several threads... and even you mentioned that I brought up the non-avian theropod ancestors... and I've provided refutations several times to your links... and you don't think I've addressed your question?
Seriously...?
wa:do
Seriously...?
wa:do
outhouse
Atheistically
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Yea but the difference is Evolution works just fine without the fossil record. Additionally there's a big difference between Morphology and Evolution. They can work hand in hand as well as separate. I'm interested in your understanding as to why birds have the gene for making teeth but have never grown them. Personally I suspect it's due to certain dinosaurs lines evolving to become birds and the teeth gene is now inactive. What's your take on it? Why would a "creator" "design" birds with the gene for making teeth if birds are their "own kind" and have never needed teeth..?
newhope101
Active Member
Here we go again Paintedwolf. Seriously, do you not have anything better to do that peddle your nonsense. I am not referring to other threads. What you have not done is told us which bird ancestry you throw your hat behind and why. People here have seen you repeat your self on numerous occasions and this is not a problem for you when you actually have provided a response to any challenge, which you haven't in this case.
I can assure everyone that with Paintedwolf and my history, PW enjoys to shove it up me...and most certainly would have re quoted anything I missed. As one can see all she says now is that she has already answered but she certainly hasn't articulated her answer to this challenge, here or anywhere else. One of her replies was to paste up a shark or something as the best response she could provide pages and pages ago.
Your cohorts likewise, were they to read a reply from you to this question, would also shove it up me again and again. They didn't and haven't, why? Because there has been no answer from PW, as yet. PW will not want to back a side in case she is incorrect. The alternative is to back neither meaning, she is unable to discern a difference in the robustness of the evidence for either hypothesis.
You PW, cannot articulate a reply, and have not done so. Such is the nature of parrot fashion replies you generally provide, without understanding.
Looking from the outside in, it is like watching a circus. You PW, and your cohorts, do not care if birds came from dinos or from gliders. In fact you will roll with whatever you are told regardless of your lack of understanding of the science or evidence behind it.
I can assure everyone that with Paintedwolf and my history, PW enjoys to shove it up me...and most certainly would have re quoted anything I missed. As one can see all she says now is that she has already answered but she certainly hasn't articulated her answer to this challenge, here or anywhere else. One of her replies was to paste up a shark or something as the best response she could provide pages and pages ago.
Your cohorts likewise, were they to read a reply from you to this question, would also shove it up me again and again. They didn't and haven't, why? Because there has been no answer from PW, as yet. PW will not want to back a side in case she is incorrect. The alternative is to back neither meaning, she is unable to discern a difference in the robustness of the evidence for either hypothesis.
You PW, cannot articulate a reply, and have not done so. Such is the nature of parrot fashion replies you generally provide, without understanding.
Looking from the outside in, it is like watching a circus. You PW, and your cohorts, do not care if birds came from dinos or from gliders. In fact you will roll with whatever you are told regardless of your lack of understanding of the science or evidence behind it.
Gunfingers
Happiness Incarnate
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
You know....this supposed battle back and forth as to what researchers say is common in all fields of science.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Well, don't speak for me because I believe she's made herself perfectly clear throughout this thread.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Sorry Newhope, I'm not playing your games anymore. I've grown bored with endlessly repeating myself as you continue to ignore what I say and then claim "no one can respond".
And yes, several people have said that you are wrong about my not responding.... you seem to be ignoring them as well.
wa:do
And yes, several people have said that you are wrong about my not responding.... you seem to be ignoring them as well.
wa:do
newhope101
Active Member
So there you have it. PW does not know how to defend her bird ancestry. Another throw off. So whenever she puts arch and her fossils up remind her she has really no idea if these fossils are evidence of anything other than an example of what belongs in the garbage bin of irrefuteable, delusional, evidence past.
Remember she is unable to defend her stance and that is all we need to know.
Last edited:
Gunfingers
Happiness Incarnate
Fixed that for ya.
newhope101
Active Member
The fact that no one has pointed to any stance shows no one has answered anything.
Do please show me where anything more than a shark picture has been offered as a stance in redress to the posted article.
It doesn't matter how many of you say otherwise. There has been no reply re a stance taken on bird ancestry, and your precious PW has not got a clue about this and neither have any of you others, as evidenced by the last pages and pages of nothing but denial and shame!
Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links
.
Do please show me where anything more than a shark picture has been offered as a stance in redress to the posted article.
It doesn't matter how many of you say otherwise. There has been no reply re a stance taken on bird ancestry, and your precious PW has not got a clue about this and neither have any of you others, as evidenced by the last pages and pages of nothing but denial and shame!
Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links
.
outhouse
Atheistically
yes i agree, there are two people here that dont have a clue and fight reality on a daily basis and at every turn they are corrected for their daily mistakes
newhope101
Active Member
Again we see the lone Outhouse staging his stand on asides as usual.
OUTHOUSE is also unable to defend any bird ancestry and has not got a clue about this stuff just like PW and Autodidact, as can be evidence by his constant asides, and nothing more.
These are all people that post evidence that they are unable to defend like parrots, rattling off words without meaning.
Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links
OUTHOUSE is also unable to defend any bird ancestry and has not got a clue about this stuff just like PW and Autodidact, as can be evidence by his constant asides, and nothing more.
These are all people that post evidence that they are unable to defend like parrots, rattling off words without meaning.
Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links
Last edited:
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Again, questioning whether birds are from some lineages of dinosaurs or vice versa is not a new debate. It's been going on for years. If they didn't investigate or question their findings then no progress to understand the natural world even history would ever be made. You know....
This site presents both sides in a more fair manner Developmental Biology 9e Online: Did Birds Evolve from the Dinosaurs?. One thing these scientist have in common is while they disagree with the current understanding that birds came from dinosaurs they hold that they (share a common ancestor) and that it is unanimously agreed that they share reptilian traits. But arguing over morphology will get us nowhere.
The idea that some dinosaurs and modern day birds share a common ancestor seems exactly like what we know about humans. In this case I see nothing wrong by saying birds didn't evolve from dinos rather they share a common ancestor. The difference between you and me is you want it one way or the other and scientist just don't work this way.
Have you figured out yet why birds have the genes for making teeth considering your bible says they were created fully formed?
Last edited: