Which evolved first --- FRUIT BEARING TREES or FRUIT EATING CREATURES?

[Ouroboros]

Evolution’s Faults Shielded
Unfortunately for the creationists, their efforts in the trial to expose the weak points of evol...

Did you write this? No, you didn't. Very nice quote mining, without giving proper credits either. It's called plagiarism to copy someone's text and pretend it's your own. Besides, JW's texts are filled with factual errors and complete misconstrued statements about other beliefs and people. I don't take them seriously at all anymore. It's even worse than AiG.

 

[Ouroboros]

There is nothing that I can post that you will accept, so stop now. References are within the text I posted. No more debate, since you are unable to debate, only to contradict. That isn't debate.

Which issue of the watch tower is it from, and who's the author?

You didn't write that barrage of text and didn't give the source at all. The references in the text are for those specific quotes within the text. But where did you get the whole text from?

 

[Ouroboros]

No, I did not. I thought I said we are done. Do you not understand? Shall I spell it out in all caps and bold it? Okay. WE ARE DONE. STOP COMMENTING TO ME.

He's right. You posted it without giving the source. Which issue of Watchtower did it come from? And who's the author?

 

[Ouroboros]

Well, if you aren't going to fix it, I will have to report you for plagiarism.

And I'll join you.

 

[dust1n]

Which issue of the watch tower is it from, and who's the author?

You didn't write that barrage of text and didn't give the source at all. The references in the text are for those specific quotes within the text. But where did you get the whole text from?

I didn't have much luck finding anything. It's one of those things that's been copy and pasted so many times that it's more hassle than it's worth trying to find it.

 

[dust1n]

Your assertion about transitional fossils is totally without any merit, as no such fossils exist. In fact, now the majority of such scientists hold to intelligent creation over accidental evolution, and such accidental evolution is the thinking of an unintelligent mind using wishful thinking instead of logic.

List of transitional fossils - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sapiens]

truthofscripture, you can ignore everyone that you want, but you have identified yourself as a plagiarist and as a teller of untruths. Despite your pious airs, you have no credibility what-so-ever. I suggest that you apologize to all here that you have insulted and wronged and try to start again.

I find the unacknowledged and uncredited source of your plagiarized material to have been: Awake! 1983 3/8 & 22.

 

[Ouroboros]

I didn't have much luck finding anything. It's one of those things that's been copy and pasted so many times that it's more hassle than it's worth trying to find it.

I saw some reference to a JW's watchtower issue, but didn't pursuit it further. I think it's his responsibility to properly source it. It's not worth finding, agree, it's just the principle (as I know you agree to as well).

 

[truthofscripture]

Did you write this? No, you didn't. Very nice quote mining, without giving proper credits either. It's called plagiarism to copy someone's text and pretend it's your own. Besides, JW's texts are filled with factual errors and complete misconstrued statements about other beliefs and people. I don't take them seriously at all anymore. It's even worse than AiG.

You make a lot of stupid claims. Debate evades you. Stop replying to any of my posts. You have no idea of proper behavior. I have no desire to discuss anything with someone of such a low calibre. The only pretense here is you pretending to be an adult. I am putting you too on the ignore list.

 

[Ouroboros]

I am putting you too on the ignore list.

Likewise. Good luck proselytizing the world with that attitude.

 

[David M]

Your assertion about transitional fossils is totally without any merit, as no such fossils exist. In fact, now the majority of such scientists hold to intelligent creation over accidental evolution, and such accidental evolution is the thinking of an unintelligent mind using wishful thinking instead of logic.

Many transitional fossils exist. Notable ones have also been found that illustrate some quite major transitions such as that from sea to land.

The vast majority of scientists who work in relevant fields agree that the Theory of Evolution is valid. To claim otherwise is just silly.

And, little man, I make nothing up and do not post things that are in error, as I ensure they are true long before they get posted. You, however, certainly appear to be relying on the word of others for your beliefs, and certainly appear to not have any originating with you.

So would you like to explain how DNA testing has been used to disprove the status of transitional species in the fossil record? Considering that, at best, only fragments of DNA have ever been recovered from any fossil and then only from fairly recent ones. DNA testing on transitional fossils is impossible for that reason.

Edit: But at least we got one thing sorted out, you are getting your information from a creationist site full of falsehoods.

 

[truthofscripture]

Many transitional fossils exist. Notable ones have also been found that illustrate some quite major transitions such as that from sea to land.

The vast majority of scientists who work in relevant fields agree that the Theory of Evolution is valid. To claim otherwise is just silly.



So would you like to explain how DNA testing has been used to disprove the status of transitional species in the fossil record? Considering that, at best, only fragments of DNA have ever been recovered from any fossil and then only from fairly recent ones. DNA testing on transitional fossils is impossible for that reason.

Not real ones, only falsified ones.

 

[David M]

Not real ones, only falsified ones.

I notice you are avoiding the question of how DNA testing was used on things with no DNA.

 

[truthofscripture]

I notice you are avoiding the question of how DNA testing was used on things with no DNA.

Look, if you choose to believe in a bunch of rationalized made up crap, it's your right. I choose the truth.

 

[David M]

Look, if you choose to believe in a bunch of rationalized made up crap, it's your right. I choose the truth.

I don't believe your rationalized made up crap. But as you seem unable to provide any evidence for your claim I do wonder why you believe its true?

 

[truthofscripture]

I don't believe your rationalized made up crap. But as you seem unable to provide any evidence for your claim I do wonder why you believe its true?

How could you believe something that I didn't post anyway. I've never posted any rationalized made up crap, and never will.

 

[David M]

How could you believe something that I didn't post anyway. I've never posted any rationalized made up crap, and never will.

How about the claim that DNA testing has been used to prove that transitional fossils were fake? Still waiting for an answer on how DNA testing was used on things with no DNA.

This one here:

What does "see bold test for reference" mean? What is bold test?

And yes, all such "transitional" species ever presented have been proven fakes using mostly dna testing. It could be said that you post the opposite of the truth.

 

[Ouroboros]

I don't believe your rationalized made up crap. But as you seem unable to provide any evidence for your claim I do wonder why you believe its true?

Hey! You got 666 posts! You've finally entered the dark side.

 

[truthofscripture]

How about the claim that DNA testing has been used to prove that transitional fossils were fake? Still waiting for an answer on how DNA testing was used on things with no DNA.

This one here:

All living things contain dna. Most dead things contain dna. Many fossils contain dna, as parts of the cells are encased in such things as amber. Many prehistoric creatures are frozen in permafrost and their cells are remarkably well preserved also. Many bones, unfossillized and ancient are recovered every day. Many of them are falsely assembled and claimed to have been transitional creatures. Take Lucy, the prehistoric female. Inserted were the modern bones of a primate. It was one of the more famous fakeries proven to be so. Are you unaware of scientific methods?

 

[David M]

All living things contain dna. Most dead things contain dna.

True.

Many fossils contain dna, as parts of the cells are encased in such things as amber.

Wrong. Creatures encased in amber are not fossils. Fossils are creatures whose remains have been mineralised. Tiktalik for example is not encased in amber and is definitely a transitional species.

Many prehistoric creatures are frozen in permafrost and their cells are remarkably well preserved also.

Firstly they are not fossils, secondly they are not that old and lastly I am unaware of any such specimens being claimed as transitional species (in the sense of showing a transition of significance).

Many bones, unfossillized and ancient are recovered every day

True.

Many of them are falsely assembled and claimed to have been transitional creatures.

False. A libelous accusation as well that needs backing up if you want it taken seriously.

You do realise that in many cases we have multiple specimens of transitional species?

Take Lucy, the prehistoric female. Inserted were the modern bones of a primate. It was one of the more famous fakeries proven to be so. Are you unaware of scientific methods?

False. No modern primate bones were inserted. All of the bones of Lucy (and of the many other examples of Australopithecus) are fully fossilised, being around 3 million years old.

Seriously, what site are you getting this garbage from? It would be interesting to see what other nonsense they have.