How about Boy Turtle? 
Posted on 11/05/2015 7:28:52 PM PST by springwater13
“What they’re doing is digging up statements made by Carson before he was ever even interested in running.”
Substitute Carson with Trump and it will be the same statement.
My decision not to support Carson for president has nothing to do with his wacky ideas on science and history and everything to do with his wacky ideas on taxes, foreign affairs, and Medicare/Medicaid. He could believe the earth was flat and the moon was made of green cheese for all I care.
Sorry. My comments were not directed at you personally. I understand what you were doing (just posting the article) and “yes” you are right about the media going after him. My frustration is with a lot of freepers drinking the media Kool Aid. This is like the 4th or 5th article I’ve seen like this one. We should be smarter and a lot wiser by now regarding the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party - especially on this site. Blessings!
When IS the “right time” that they pull themselves up,
turn into snakes and swim off? - I can’t dispute
that; there are strange things in those oceans!
(Do they turn into snakes before, or after they pull
themselves up?) :o)
How about Boy Turtle?
He isn’t a democrat, so MSM racism on parade
So true, they will march out a parade of experts though.
All except Cruz and Carson are terrible.
Carson is not terrible, but is a terrible choice.
As for the criticism of Trump, all who are at the top of their game have huge egos or they would not have the self confidence it takes to get to the top.
Patton, MacArthur or Muhamma Ali.......examples of those who flaunted it. All great athletes have it.
The real jerks are the people who think they are the best but have nothing to show for it.
No I did not, and how dare you make a stupid accusation like that in the dark? I'm a petroleum geologist and spent my career dealing with the findings of micropaleontologists and their basic data on occasion. I'm quite comfortable talking about the disappearance of Hyalinaea balthica from the Gulf of Mexico fossil record, and its significance.
I also saw a man from Woods Hole, a guy with terminal-degree and post-doc training, make a fool of creationist Henry Morrison at the 1996 annual convention of the Archaeological Institute of America during a presentation on geochronology, micropaleontology, and their significance for educating creationists about the futility of their stupid drivel.</off mustard -- which you started>
Jerk.
That is pretty good. Is that your book you are trying to sell? The selection of words you used make this the third Google entry which comes up when you put Hyalinea balthica in the search category.
So your are correct, I was wrong, it wasn’t a line from a blog somewhere. It was a line from a book someone is trying to sell. Nicely played.
You do not address the substance of any of my posts. So much for your contribution to the forum. <snick>
Well, this was from an old speech, so it might not have been 'out of date' when he made it.
It's interesting that you used the term "created". Kinda implies a "designer" and "creator" eh?
I'm not really a Carson supporter (Cruz Rules). However, I think this is a non-issue as far as his qualifications for president. The media is just digging things up to attack him with. With him not being a professional politician, there's probably plenty of fodder for more crap to be thrown at him in hopes that it sticks.
I'm so sick of out media. It's not even funny anymore.
What an uncle tom! Everyone knows that creationism was created by inbred white people to oppress the progressive, scientific, and modern Black churches, where evolution had been taught from the beginning of time. As a matter of fact, Charles Darwin was a Black man![/sarcasm]
The original Evolutionary Tree had blacks at the bottom so yes it was a racist theory.
When do caterpillars make a cocoon ?
Do they turn into snakes before, or after they pull themselves up
As they are pulling themselves out.
Of course. But, you didn't answer my question.
If butterflies didn't exist today, or hadn't existed for billions of years, and all we had was fossil records of butterflies and caterpillars, would scientists have concluded they were the same species ?
Unless they lied it would be the same species. Would they conclude an egg was a different species than a chicken?
There are no examples of transitionary fossils even though they have been looking for 150 years when there should be millions of examples over billions and billions of years.
Lie? They wouldn't be lying if they didn't make (what would probably be) a difficult assumption. It would simply be a case of them not knowing.
Would they conclude an egg was a different species than a chicken?
You really are stuck on this chicken thing, aren't you ?
The egg is only a shell that contains a chicken embryo. One might as well ask if they would conclude that a cocoon was a different species than a butterfly.
There are no examples of transitionary fossils even though they have been looking for 150 years when there should be millions of examples over billions and billions of years.
As I've already stated, I am not arguing that point at all.
Hey if you want to believe in evolution because of a butterfly it is your choice. I applaud your faith in scientists and settled science.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.