Posted on 05/04/2005 12:32:23 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan
Caught in the act of evolution, the odd-looking, feathered dinosaur was becoming more vegetarian, moving away from its meat-eating ancestors.
It had the built-for-speed legs of meat-eaters, but was developing the bigger belly of plant-eaters. It had already lost the serrated teeth needed for tearing flesh. Those were replaced with the smaller, duller vegetarian variety.
(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...
I just asked if you read the link?
I really did take the effort to figure out how to post a link for you because it's that good.
And I'm quite serious, only the OJ Jury could doubt evolution if they read and understood that link.
Let me reiterate that. Only the OJ Jury could doubt evolution if they read and understood that link.
It's just as simple as that. Evolution is cold, hard, fact, and the link demonstrates it.
Someone must've dropped a joint in the sandwich I was eating while on this thread. My IQ has dropped to room temperature and I can't focus my eyes.
took me two readings of your post to catch the sarcasm, so I'll make you the same offer I made dimensio. I'll go get the book and get the exact quote, and the page number to boot.
ID ping list! (Cause I'm always up for new info and discussions)
"Here's something else that bothers me, dinosaurs as birds rather than reptiles becomes fashionable and suddenly we're up to our necks in feathered dinosaurs. How did we miss the feathers before?"
Yes that bothers me too. Anyone know the answer to this?
I refer to it as "scientific religious mythology" and the stories keep being passed down and never end.
What a lovely, lovely, lovely picture... :-)
How many scientists are normally involved in peer review? How diversified are they or all they are employed by the same sponsors? Who has the final say?
I suppose the same question could be asked: how many fake scriptures made past the peer review process? There is certainly the Apocrypha to worry about. Pretty good idea that it's not real. But the Roman Church accepts it. Does that make the Gospel of John worthless?
And does the fact that the Shroud of Turan is probably a fake disprove the existence of Jesus?
The answer to both, is, OF COURSE NOT.
There are frauds and fakes in everything.
"Who has the final say?"
No one.
That is, in part, the beauty of science --- the ability to go back and test the accepted with new methods, information, and ideas.
Peer review.
Another service of Darwin Central, the conspiracy that cares.
Especially after some grilling over hickory.
Thank you. I guess Dimensio wasn't sure about this.
No, he's very knowledgeable. It's just that not everyone has the time or inclination to respond to very basic questions that you could look up yourself. I suggest you bookmark that Wikipedia website.
"Of course, I can't help but notice how folks who hate religion find a home in their theory of evolution. Coincidence?"
Huh. That's a pretty broad brush.
I am a firmly Bible-believing Christian. Coverted from Judaism, in fact. I know my Bible well and believe it.
I also happen to believe that evolution and Genesis will square just fine, once all the details are worked out.
The problem, IMHO, are two: (1) close-minded people who are "too smart" for the Bible and (2) close-minded people who are so pharsitical in the manner they interpret very vague and confusing scriptures that they cannot bear to part with pre-conceived notions.
For the first group, I pray.
For the second group, I remind them of the Jews who were looking for a military conquering messiah 2,000 years ago. They had pretty good scriptural arguments for that concept. They also had collective agreement.
And they were collectively damn wrong.
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.