Look, this all started because you made a claim about horse fossils. All this bluster about TalkOrigins is just a distraction from the fact that you apparently can’t back it up. They at least made an effort to find out the basis for the claim—you haven’t even bothered to do that. I’m not going to get sidetracked into a discussion of TO’s credibility, because it’s not relevant. If you come back with an alternate source that can be checked, I’ll look at it. Otherwise, I’m done with this thread.
[[Look, this all started because you made a claim about horse fossils. All this bluster about TalkOrigins is just a distraction from the fact that you apparently can’t back it up.]]
I backed it up just fine by showing how deceiving TO is- regardless of his ‘intentions’-, he failed by engaging in nothign more than further assumptions as I pointed out
[[I’m not going to get sidetracked into a discussion of TO’s credibility, because it’s not relevant.]]
I’f you’re goign to cite TO as your reference, and hteir article is nothign but fluff and bias and a character assasination because the evidence conflicts with his belief in horse evolution, then I’m sorry- but it IS relevent.
Horse fossils were found, TO tries to downplay it with assumptions, by telling us what Rimmer must have thought and doen- and he shows no evidence to support his claim- only assumptions- I’m sorry, but TO’s credibility is on the line here because it was you who brought it up in the first place- if you can hsow horse bones were not found- then fine- but for Barnes to suggest that they weren’t old without any proof, and to accuse Rimmer of grossly misunderstanding geology without any proof that Rimmer did, is nothign but a baseless mischaracterization and a petty character attack that has NO evidence to back the accusation up with. The end amen brother Ben.