Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2004 - 03:27pm PT
|
cocyx bone
|
|
can't say
Social climber
Pasadena CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:02pm PT
|
How can you open a beer without opposing thumbs...sheesh Jody..you sure know how to stir up a hornets nest of edumatcated homeboys who know what the f@#K they are talking about. Hey Jody..did you go to college, not that it matters, but just checking.
|
|
Jody
Mountain climber
CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:36pm PT
|
Dave, that was very nice, just call someone an idiot because they don't have your line of thinking. I would have expected better from you.
Archaeopteryx:You folks need to get up to date on your own evolutionary icons. Paleontologists and biologists now say that there are too many structural differences between Archaeopteryx and modern birds for the latter to be the descendants of the former. In 1985 University of kansas paleontologist Larry Martin wrote:"Archaeopteryx is not ancsetral of any group of modern birds, it is the earliest known member of a totally extinct group of birds." In 1996 paleontologist Mark Norell, of the American Museum of Natural History in New York(no bastion of Creationism), called Archaeopteryx a "very important fossil," but added that most paleontologists now believe it is not a direct ancestor of modern birds.
All that other stuff you guys mentioned is variation within a species, not transformation into another species.
BTW, went to Cal Poly SLO.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
SF Bay Area
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:46pm PT
|
how come you are so interested in the opinions of scientists that claim that individual is not the ancestor of modern birds, yet you are not interested in the opinions of the same scientists when they believe the evidence supports the theory of evolution?
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
SF Bay Area
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:46pm PT
|
how come you are so interested in proving creationism or disproving evolution?
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
SF Bay Area
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:48pm PT
|
kinda looks as if you are trying to compensate for something over there dood. i think you ought to seek some professional advice about the true motivations you have for this stuff.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
SF Bay Area
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:50pm PT
|
to me, the most bizarre part of you is that you are so into all of this stuff, but you are so closed off to anything but your own viewpoint, it's like a crossword puzzle or a logic game to you, you want to know all the rules n-stuff, but just so that you can win, not cause you are trying to learn or anything...
strange.
|
|
Jody
Mountain climber
CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:51pm PT
|
Not sure what your point is with your first post...as for your second post, I just like to argue.:)
Actually, the subject came up in another thread and I just continued it here. I want to know why, when someone has a differing opinion, he is an idiot as Dave called me, or they need professional help as you mentioned, etc. What is wrong with just trying to present a case for what you believe in and dealing with the presentation? Instead, you guys throw something out and when I don't agree with it, you just go on a name-calling tirade.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
SF Bay Area
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 04:54pm PT
|
btw- you perfectly illustrated the point i made earlier (thanks) when you gloat about that particular fossil not being representative of a "missing link" (i.e., therefore it must not be at all possible that evolution occurs, as you have not proven it w/ this fossil...)
|
|
anachronism
Trad climber
Yosemite, CA
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2004 - 04:58pm PT
|
Jody doesn't even realize when he contradicts himself. He wrote In 1985 University of kansas paleontologist Larry Martin wrote:"Archaeopteryx is not ancsetral of any group of modern birds, it is the earliest known member of a totally extinct group of birds...".
Related to the current birds or not you just stuck your big fat foot in your mouth by citing this. Please explain.... what does "earliest know member of.." mean? Sounds like "standard" evolutionary terms to me.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
SF Bay Area
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 05:01pm PT
|
it is a tad odd that the creationists try to argue about the fossil record at all, don't you guys believe that stuff is a "junk science" too?
|
|
Jody
Mountain climber
CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 05:17pm PT
|
Those were Martin's words, not mine. And how exactly does that contradict myself? I was just pointing out that it is no longer believed to be an ancestor to modern birds.
|
|
Josh Higgins
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2004 - 05:24pm PT
|
Here's a question for you Jody; What would prove evolution?
|
|
anachronism
Trad climber
Yosemite, CA
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2004 - 05:29pm PT
|
Neat article:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/info.html
I'll quote one piece just so it's here:
"Archaeopteryx is a bird because it had feathers. However, it retained many dinosaurian characters which are not found in modern birds, whilst having certain characters found in birds but not in dinosaurs. By virtue of this fact Archaeopteryx represents an example of a group in transition - a representative which, although on the sidelines in the dinosaur to bird transition, an echo of the actual event, still allows a brief glimpse into the possible mechanism which brought about the evolution of the birds and by its very existence shows that such a transition is possible."
|
|
anachronism
Trad climber
Yosemite, CA
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2004 - 05:32pm PT
|
An equally good question for Jody: What would disprove evolution?
|
|
Jody
Mountain climber
CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 05:34pm PT
|
"Here's a question for you Jody; What would prove evolution? "
You guys tell me, you're the ones that believe in it.
|
|
Jody
Mountain climber
CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 05:36pm PT
|
"An equally good question for Jody: What would disprove evolution? "
Why don't you answer that?:)
|
|
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2004 - 05:39pm PT
|
This is like watching one of those big dopey white guys they used to put in the ring with Larry Holmes. It just makes you feel embarrased for the outmatched slob.
|
|
Jody
Mountain climber
CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2004 - 05:43pm PT
|
"This is like watching one of those big dopey white guys they used to put in the ring with Larry Holmes. It just makes you feel embarrased for the outmatched slob. "
Another outstanding contribution by dufas!
P.S. How did you know I was a slob?
|
|
dirtbag
Trad climber
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2004 - 05:49pm PT
|
OK, so where is the "evidence" for creation (and I don't mean the bible or other religious texts)?
Most of what I have seen from creationists are attempts to refute evolution. I have only little bits of junk science cited to support creationism.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!