Posted on 06/09/2009 5:33:16 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
June 9, 2009 — “The findings add to a growing body of evidence in the past two decades that challenge some of the most widely-held beliefs about animal evolution.” That statement is not being made by creationists, but by science reporters describing work at Oregon State University that cast new doubt on the idea that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. The main idea: their leg bones and lungs are too different.
Science Daily’s report has a diagram of the skeleton showing...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
That's not a definition, that's theological/philosophical speculation on how it works. As such, it doesn't contradict the definition I posted above.
Evolution is not God's tool since God doesn't exist...
Same thing.
Man evolved from apes...
That's not a definition, that's an imprecise description of one aspect.
man evolved from ape-like creatures...
man evolved from "common ancetors" of apes...
man evolved from common ancestors of ape-"like" creatures...
Same thing, but increasingly more precise.
Source?
For which part?
It'll be easier to take you seriously when you start going after the creationists for murdering the language. Remember, they're using the term the same way I am.
Do try to remember that the creationists at creationist.org, creationists.org, and creationism.org, as well as the author of Evolution of a Creationist, define "creationist" the same way I do. You yourself recently wrote, "Belief in creation is still ahead of belief in evolution," explicitly defining a "belief in creation" as something opposed to a "belief in evolution." It seems like you're happy with my definition of creationist until you see a chance to score rhetorical points.
Geee, that seems as good a place to start as any metmom, perhaps we could add they smear anyone that disagrees with them as anti-science bible thumpers or koran thumpers, as anyone that dares not agree with them is a religious zealot and we can work from there.
Not that it makes much difference as the definition is subject to change on a whim anyway.
And just think with this ying/yang lunacy approach they can define creation everytime they define evolution with relative ease!
dark/light
night/day
good/evil
black/white
smart/dumb
educated/stupid
science/anti-science
just ignore the conservative/liberal elephant in the room huh? :)
Good luck with that!
Can’t even get the OEC’s to say they think that the Geocentrics are loons.
They take umbrage at properly being placed in the same category; but they won’t say why they think it is an insult.
Uh-huh....so how does that work with Chrissy-Fit Matthews and other pro-evolution liberals bashing on Christianity and creationists working out for you fellow libs?
Oh wait...it doesn’t count then does it?
Well of course not, can’t “properly place” you liberals in “correct” the liberal camp because that would expose your position and hypocrisy now wouldn’t it.
Come to think of it, is there such a thing as a pro-creation liberal sunshine? LOL!
But evos insist on the clear meanings of words.
I guess that that just means individual words, by themselves, just not the clear meanings of words when they’re grouped together in sentences to say things like *God created man from the dust of the earth*.
Then when it says that God created man from the dust of the earth, but the *real* clear meaning is *God created man through evolution from the dust of the earth*.
ColdWater can you think of any pro-creationist liberals?
Especially a liberal like your fellow evo Chrissy-Fit Matthews spewing his idiocy on camera-lenses about "settled science".
Do you think the Hissy-fit is looney ColdWater?
Don’t forget punctuated equilibrium vs. phyletic gradualism.
The Cambrian Explosion where species appeared suddenly, except that suddenly doesn’t really mean suddenly suddenly, but over millions of years suddenly, just relatively suddenly.
And when they said *junk DNA* they didn’t really mean junk junk, just *we don’t know what it’s for* junk. We were just joking....
And then there’s this little posting history on the definition of lemur, I mean monkey, er ah lemur, well nevermind.....
Lemur? I thought it was a monkey?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2256937/posts
No wait, you were right, a lemur:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2256335/posts
Oops, I meant to say monkey:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2256998/posts
Did I say monkey? Meant to say lemur:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2254732/posts
MONKEY!!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2253963/posts
LEMUR!!!!!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2254719/posts
Bah, let’s just go with lemur-monkey:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2254888/posts
People have confidence in science because its findings are replicable, subject to peer review, and revision in light of new data.
The irony. Just....wow. So says algore and chrissy-fit matthews when they dictate (and spittle-spew) the very same things "the debate is over" and "that's settled science" respectively.
Oh wait...there is that "the Pope doesn't believe in creation" thingy.
And as if that's not enough there's this little gem:
The good thing about being a creationist is you can keep repeating the same untruths and ridiculous assertions and nobody seems to care.
I can no longer in good faith recommend a cult deprogrammer as any sane person would sprint in the opposite direction from sir-project-alot-allmendream. LOL!
AMD: People have confidence in science because its findings are replicable, subject to peer review, and revision in light of new data.
People have confidence in science because it works and has a demonstrated record of success.
**********************************************************
As opposed to.....
Piltdown Man, Lucy, archaeoraptor, cosmological constant, global cooling, er, no, make that global warming, nope, global cooling again. Pluto’s a planet. No, it isn’t. Yes it is. I don’t care what YOU say, I still think it’s a planet.
Studies examine withholding of scientific data among researchers, trainees
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1565120/posts
It May Look Authentic; Here’s How to Tell It Isn’t
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1563746/posts
Most scientific papers are probably wrong
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1473528/posts
Most Science Studies Appear to Be Tainted By Sloppy Analysis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1896333/posts
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124&ct=1
One in seven scientists say colleagues fake data
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2264439/posts
You Can Trust a Scientist – Can’t You?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2262237/posts
Lemur? I thought it was a monkey?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2256937/posts
No wait, you were right, a lemur:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2256335/posts
Oops, I meant to say monkey:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2256998/posts
Did I say monkey? Meant to say lemur:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2254732/posts
MONKEY!!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2253963/posts
LEMUR!!!!!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2254719/posts
Bah, let’s just go with lemur-monkey:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2254888/posts
Oh, brother. First Pluto is a planet, and then it’s not a planet. First, the Andes mountains are 6 million years old and then they’re 12 million years old. And now this.
Tell me again why so many people place so much faith in scientists?
Well, some people place their faith in God, and some people place their faith in scientists. It’s pretty much exactly that simple.
Good point about Pluto...Pluto is still Pluto...it never changes, only classification(s) changed here back on earth, but no explanations how we taught kids 9 planets in the solar system existed in our solar system one day and the very next day Pluto was demoted; but apparently some astronomers met and decided to remove it from planethood. Once again, science by concensus.
It could still be a “mini-planet”, but not all astronomers agreed with this, indeed some were pretty vocal about the powers that be meeting and a few making these changes and speaking for all astronomers on one weekend junket.
Of course anyone that approaches science with the same evo-fascism calls the astronomers making these changes “real astronomers” and those that don’t march lockstep with the changes: dumb, zealots, anti-science and what have you.
I would go into peer review of medications, food, etc and the obvious myriad conflicts of interests when human beings submit their findings from studying everything from wine to tobacco to their Daddy-in-law owning a winery in California but non-cultists understand this anyway. NO WONDER red wine is great for you in moderation one day and is practically lethal in moderation the next.
And once again, no one appointed liberals the gate-keepers to anything, above all science. It just didn’t happen.
That's right and as long as the ACLU, the NEA, and the rabid atheists maintain their stranglehold on public education, kids will be taught that Christianity is no different than islam and that, with the blessings of the evos, that addressing creation in public schools will result in the inception of a theocracy and return to the Dark Ages.
Why is it that evos object to lying by creationists again when they do their share of spreading mindless hysteria?
If the Pope isn't a creationist, then he must be an evolutionist.
And that makes a difference to me for what reason again?
Do try to remember that the creationists at creationist.org, creationists.org, and creationism.org, as well as the author of Evolution of a Creationist, define “creationist” the same way I do.
Complete with all the unstable observations? How laughable...this reminds me of allmendream saying there’s essentialy no difference between him and the Pope!
You guys on DC should come up with some new tactics...this idea that we’re going to surrender the keys of science, the lexicon whatever to liberals, isn’t working too well.
That’s right and as long as the ACLU, the NEA, and the rabid atheists maintain their stranglehold on public education, kids will be taught that Christianity is no different than islam and that, with the blessings of the evos, that addressing creation in public schools will result in the inception of a theocracy and return to the Dark Ages.
Why is it that evos object to lying by creationists again when they do their share of spreading mindless hysteria?
Moreover, how many Christians do you know metmom, don’t get this? Conservatives?
Yes it most certainly is, one I've seen used on here many many times.
Same thing.
No it's not.
That's not a definition, that's an imprecise description of one aspect.
Yes it is, and that's just your opinion.
You really do need to get your head around the fact that not only are you not Daniel Webster, but that you're not closely enough related and no one gave you the keys to anything, excpet perhaps your own car and your own house.
How about a source period, for any part?
There you go again, defining creationism as something opposed to evolution. And I'm not supposed to do that why again?
No, it's not. I supposed I shouldn't be surprised that you don't know what a definition is. A definition says what the thing is--it's not a comment on the thing. "An explosion is a rapid expansion of gas" is a definition; "an explosion is usually loud" is not. "A car is a motorized four-wheel vehicle" is a definition; "the car gave Americans unprecedented mobility" is not. "Evolution is a change in allele frequency over time" is a definition; "evolution is one of God's tools" is not. If you don't get that, well...
I'm on the road and have a spotty Internet connection. I'll look for sources when my connection is more reliable.
[[NO WONDER red wine is great for you in moderation one day and is practically lethal in moderation the next.]]
That’s why I never drink in moderation- it’ll kill ya!
Liberals unhinged to the point they demand to define the definition of definition! LOL
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.