Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Banana Boobs as Darwin's Clock (a response "Ten Politically Incorrect Truths About Human Nature")
FRED Columns ^ | July 8, 2007 | Fred Reed

Posted on 07/09/2007 4:46:53 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: JHBowden; GodGunsGuts; Aetius; Alamo-Girl; AndrewC; Asphalt; Aussie Dasher; AnalogReigns; ...
" For example, with the dinosaurs, catastrophism is plainly used, given an asteroid finished them off 63 million years ago"

If they were finished-off 63M years ago, how did the Inca know what they looked like 1500 years ago to etch them on stones?

21 posted on 07/09/2007 5:53:41 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
"Why does that woman have 5 yellow breasts on her head?"

Because the bunny with the pancake on its' head is still on an extended 4th of July holiday...

22 posted on 07/09/2007 5:56:51 PM PDT by chief_bigfoot (Welcome to America. Please leave your hyphenation at the border.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
“Nevertheless, many people act as if Darwin is the Messiah, genes are our Gods, and natural selection is the all-pervasive Holy Ghost.”

Darwinists will spare no expense and go to great lengths to make monkeys of themselves.

Its my guess that if evolution worked they would be too stupid to do it.

23 posted on 07/09/2007 5:58:45 PM PDT by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super Walmart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Well hello there ES! Just out of curiosity, have you read Dr. Humphreys book “Starlight and Time.” I’ve been researching it on the Net and as far as I can tell nobody (and I mean NOBODY!) has been able to refute his theory. I just ordered it and I am very much looking forward to reading it. Any thoughts on his refreshingly controversial theory?
24 posted on 07/09/2007 5:59:03 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

Most men don’t care about the color of women’s eyes and hair. They prefer women who when they say sit down, they lay down.


25 posted on 07/09/2007 6:00:54 PM PDT by EdArt (free to be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
PS I would be remiss if I failed to acknowledge that it was one of your replies to Coyoteman that brought my attention to the book. To be honest, I had never heard of it before you mentioned it—GGG
26 posted on 07/09/2007 6:08:57 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Yes, I’ve read it.

It’s a good, clear explanation of the illusion of age of the universe. I don’t reccomend it to evo-believers; they’ll burst an anurism and go directly to their ultimate destination without passing ‘Go’ and without collecting eternal life :o(


27 posted on 07/09/2007 6:09:05 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

That’s what I said. “Childish”.


28 posted on 07/09/2007 6:15:08 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sig226

Do you have a point?


29 posted on 07/09/2007 6:15:56 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
LOL! So to your knowledge it has not been refuted? I’m just curious, because from what I have read, Dr. Humphreys has easily shot down every so-called refutation thus far. But I have only been looking into it for the last couple of days. At any rate, I’m very much looking forward to reading it...if for no other reason than just to aggravate the local League of Militant Godless chapter on FR.
30 posted on 07/09/2007 6:18:16 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
"Any thoughts on his refreshingly controversial theory?"

It's not really controversial. Most cosmologists see that it differs from the 'big bang' only in four key respects:

1. The assumption that Earth is at or near the center (supported mathematically)

2. It is a finite, bounded, rather than unbounded universe.

3. It doesn't gratuitously and deliberately mock God's word as a basis of it's promulgation.

4. It doesn't need the artificial constructs that the unbounded universe needs to work.

31 posted on 07/09/2007 6:20:48 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I like big boobs. I like small boobs. I like boobs.


32 posted on 07/09/2007 6:20:57 PM PDT by Proud_USA_Republican (We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican

“...I like boobs.”

Be careful with the open ended statements. One could conceivably understand that you are in effect saying that you like Al Gore.


33 posted on 07/09/2007 6:32:47 PM PDT by Nik Naym (If Republicans are your problem, Democrats aren't the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny

“There were a few aspects of the original article I found questionable but this article is downright childish.”

Welcome to academia in the Twenty-first Century.


34 posted on 07/09/2007 6:36:40 PM PDT by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“If they were finished-off 63M years ago, how did the Inca know what they looked like 1500 years ago to etch them on stones?”

Discovery channel?

/sarc


35 posted on 07/09/2007 6:42:50 PM PDT by driftdiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Wow.


36 posted on 07/09/2007 6:43:23 PM PDT by tupac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Thanks, I’ll keep that in mind when I read it. I have been very impressed with Dr. Humphreys’ ability to defend his theory thus far. To say the least, I have a feeling we have not heard the last of his theory...not by a long shot.


37 posted on 07/09/2007 6:45:05 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny

This article is written by a moron. A downright childish moron.


38 posted on 07/09/2007 6:45:17 PM PDT by tupac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny

Are you being sarchasmic?


39 posted on 07/09/2007 6:46:19 PM PDT by LilAngel (No blood for quislings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

That article was especially ridiculous, unscientific and a vaporous concoction of foolish social deconstructionist whimsy presented as “science”. Eminently suited for a publication with the augustness and reliability of Psychology Today.


40 posted on 07/09/2007 6:52:02 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson