Skip to comments.
Rat-Squirrel Not Extinct After All (Scientists off 11 Million years)
The AP via Yahoo! News ^
| March 9, 2006
| Lauran Neergaard
Posted on 03/09/2006 2:46:21 PM PST by new yorker 77
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 241-242 next last
To: WKB
Perhaps this verse will help. Jesus said it Himself.
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through me."
181
posted on
03/10/2006 11:33:46 AM PST
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: new yorker 77
The long-whiskered rodent made international headlines last spring when biologists declared they'd discovered a brand new species, nicknamed the Laotian rock rat. **************
Ah, well. Nice try.
Nobody's perfect.
182
posted on
03/10/2006 11:37:43 AM PST
by
trisham
(Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
Damned To Hell By A Troll Placemarker
183
posted on
03/10/2006 11:39:13 AM PST
by
ml1954
(NOT the disruptive troll seen frequently on CREVO threads)
To: All
I am impressed, almost 200 posts on a thread about prehistoric animals and not one picture of Helen Thomas. BRAVO!!!!
184
posted on
03/10/2006 11:43:20 AM PST
by
commish
(Freedom Tastes Sweetest to Those Who Have Fought to Preserve It)
To: js1138
It's interesting that Jesus was asked a couple of times exactly what is required to get to heaven, and rather than saying you must believe the earth is 6000 years old
Link me to the post where I said the earth is 6000 years old.
Or where I said that it was a part of the Salvation process
to believe that.
185
posted on
03/10/2006 11:45:24 AM PST
by
WKB
To: metmom
186
posted on
03/10/2006 11:46:18 AM PST
by
WKB
Troll Admits To Deliberately Trying To Be An "Antagonizing Troll" Placemarker.
187
posted on
03/10/2006 11:47:30 AM PST
by
ml1954
(NOT the disruptive troll seen frequently on CREVO threads)
To: WKB
Perhaps you haven't, but if you haven't why do you post here without arguing science. Your posts imply an incompatibility between the findings of science and the requirements of faith.
These kinds of misunderstandings seem to crop up when posters neglect to say exactly what they do believe the evidence indictes.
188
posted on
03/10/2006 11:52:21 AM PST
by
js1138
To: js1138
These kinds of misunderstandings seem to crop up when posters neglect to say exactly what they do believe the evidence indicates.
The evidence indicates that on July 20 1985
I was a "borderline atheist" myself.
On July 21 1985 I was born again by the Power
of The Holy Spirit through faith in Jesus Christ.
I KNOW FOR A FACT that God created and sustains
everything in the universe(s).
I don't need a lot facts and figures and mumble jumble
from a group of intectlualls to "prove" anything to me.
I do believe that there is Biblical evidence that
there is an gap in time between Genesis 1.1 and Genesis 1.2.
Where a lot of things could have happened.
BUT God was then and is still now in control of all things and will be throughout eternity.
189
posted on
03/10/2006 12:04:57 PM PST
by
WKB
To: js1138
relatively free of name calling
Except for that sophomoric 'evilone (evo)' thing (where 'evilone' = the biblical 'evil one').
190
posted on
03/10/2006 12:05:03 PM PST
by
ml1954
(NOT the disruptive troll seen frequently on CREVO threads)
To: Potowmack
There's no such thing as an apex predator, excluding only man. While some say there is on the basis of size or ferocity, that theory doesn't hold up agains informed common sense.
A person doesn't first think of viruses, bacteria, fungi, and such small attackers as bugs, worms, and barnacles when picturing some hypothetical "apex predator" such as T-Rex, polar bear or sharks -- but the small can and will take down the big.
Even the brain-dead Darwinistic "natural selection" would theorize that something must EVOLVE take advantage of the shark, at some point in under 10 million years or so -- bang -- the whole species is gone, eh? Of course, one way in Darwinism is brain dead is in its inability to understand statisical inference and probability, so -- okay, given that Stupids' view of the world, yes YOU ARE RIGHT!
191
posted on
03/10/2006 1:03:04 PM PST
by
bvw
To: Ichneumon
Have the paleontologists even said that this particular species was around 11 million years ago? All I can see from the article is that the family and genus was thought to be extinct; nothing that the species itself was around. I could have missed something though.
192
posted on
03/10/2006 1:05:53 PM PST
by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
To: Elpasser
If you removed evolutionary theory bias from the dating equation, there would have been no basis for the 11 million year age of the fossils in the first place. Yeah - they all lived in Bedrock along with Fred & Dino.
Something I don't understand about the 6000 age limit to the universe - how do you explain starlight reaching us from stars that are millions of light-years away. The light from these stars takes millions of years to reach the earth. But if nothing is older than 6000 years - how did it get here that quick?
193
posted on
03/10/2006 1:16:18 PM PST
by
Tokra
(I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
To: Potowmack
Sharks have remained relatively unchanged in tens of millions of years.So have cockroaches - Oops, I forgot they have only been around for 6000 years.
And I guess the petrified forest (which took tens of thousands of years for mineral deposits to replace the wood cells) must just be an illusion.
194
posted on
03/10/2006 1:20:34 PM PST
by
Tokra
(I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
To: WKB
Never had a duck samichI have, and I'm here to tell you its great! Sliced duck breast on rye bread with a bit of German stoneground mustard. Yum!!!
195
posted on
03/10/2006 1:25:39 PM PST
by
Tokra
(I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
To: Tokra
Sounds better than armadillo on the half shell
with vanilla wafers. :>)
196
posted on
03/10/2006 1:27:38 PM PST
by
WKB
To: Potowmack
The discovery that this species did not go extinct, like the discovery of the coelcanth, doesn't actually help or hurt the theory of evolution. Why do you think it would?
Because creationists are, by and large, ignorant dopes.
To: bvw
When intelligence and design are all around us, how the heck does any sensible intelligent person deny its role in creation?And why would anyone think that the two concepts are mutually exclusive?
I firmly believe that evolution is the reason for the thousands and thousands of different life forms on Earth. I also believe just as firmly that an intelligent God created and designed the evolutionary process - just like he created and designed our climate and weather process.
What is so hard to understand about that?
198
posted on
03/10/2006 1:32:00 PM PST
by
Tokra
(I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
To: bvw
A person doesn't first think of viruses, bacteria, fungi, and such small attackers as bugs, worms, and barnacles when picturing some hypothetical "apex predator" such as T-Rex, polar bear or sharks -- but the small can and will take down the big. Sure. But you know what I'm talking about when I say "apex predator." All species fall victim to viruses, bacteria etc., but that's not what we're talking about.
Even the brain-dead Darwinistic "natural selection" would theorize that something must EVOLVE take advantage of the shark, at some point in under 10 million years or so -- bang -- the whole species is gone, eh?
Why? Some species fill a niche incredibly well, so it is very difficult for other species to "jump ahead" of them on the food chain. Anyway, sharks do get preyed upon by Orcas, and young and juvenile sharks get eaten by a lot of things.
Of course, one way in Darwinism is brain dead is in its inability to understand statisical inference and probability, so -- okay, given that Stupids' view of the world, yes YOU ARE RIGHT!
So, you're saying every species needs to go extinct in ten million years?
199
posted on
03/10/2006 1:51:09 PM PST
by
Potowmack
("Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government")
To: WKB
I KNOW FOR A FACT that God created and sustains everything in the universe(s). You actually denigrate your own faith by reducing it to questions of facts and numbers.
Anyway, you're always going to lose the debate if you try to prove religion using facts.
200
posted on
03/10/2006 1:54:12 PM PST
by
Potowmack
("Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 241-242 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson