(October 28, 2010 at 10:43 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:(October 22, 2010 at 3:35 pm)Loki_999 Wrote: Thanks SW. Its great I now know your position on the Dinosaur/Ark business. I would respond now, but I am incredibly drunk (its my birthday today!) so I'll save my response for later this weekend or early next week.
In the meantime, the floor is open for anyone else to comment on Dinosaurs being on the ark.... all i can say, is who had the job of cleaning up the T-Rex's shit?
Happy Birthday
You really didn't prove much with this post. A few quick points. If we had found fossils of bigfoot and people who had never seen these fossils accurately described the creature based off of sightings I would most likely take their word for it. The fact that we can show tribesman in Australia a fossil of a duck-billed dinosaur leg and they can draw exactly what that animal looked like is pretty amazing. You would have been one of those guys laughing at the reported sightings of Coelacanth in the early 19th century. Then you would have looked like a fool after the 1930s. The ark actually could have been built very easily given the amount of time Noah was given and the help and technology he had. It didn't have to sail, just float. It's actually a very sturdy design. Actually there are temple carvings of stegosaurus, long before its fossils were every discovered. What does the fact that there were dinosaurs as small as chickens and as large as sauropods have to do with AIG? If you do not believe this then maybe you need to read up on your dinosaurs.
P.S. AIG knows that brontosaurus never existed, maybe you guys should read their work more.
(October 23, 2010 at 2:24 pm)HeyItsZeus Wrote:(October 21, 2010 at 2:20 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:(October 21, 2010 at 1:54 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Evolutionists stuck them in that group based on their Evolutionairy ideas. Based on the overwhelming mountain of evidence.
Fixed that for ya. my bold
Just to point out that was a deliberate missquote for humerous effect.
Just learnt that is against the rules. #slaps own wrist#
He's a creationist...evidence means nothing in this thread.
No, I just know that evidence doesn't actually "talk". It requires interpretation. I am just more intellectually honest than you are. I can interpret all the evidence to fit my worldview, you can only interpret some of it to fit your's.
Have you ever heard of oopart? If you have, then you aren't being intellectually honest. If you haven't, then perhaps you should learn more about it before you make claims of stegosaur drawings on temple walls.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero