"We've got a whole lot of these folks on this forum..."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#4
"Knowing gore3000, he'll take a look at your link and claim that evolutionists say coyotes are descended from whales. Do not underestimate the power of willful ignorance..."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#68
You didn't even read the freakin' article, you dolt, or you wouldn't have made the inane comment about whales evolving from coyotes, or vice versa. Do you ever read any of the stuff we give you, or do you glance at the pretty pictures, decide that nothing's going to change your mind and then post inanities on these threads?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#143
My theory has always been he's nothing more than a rather primitive computer algorythm.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#152
You are the only person I've met who suffered from Tourette's Syndrome of the keyboard.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#384
Face it, gore3000, your brain (or programming) has been trained to force a cognitive disassociation between the pariticulars of evidence and the sum total of evidence. You can't see the forest for the trees. You'll pick at individual pieces of evidence given you, but fail to understand the overall picture painted by the evidence coming in from dozens of scientific disciplines. And, you show an inherent inability to actually learn anything
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#632
except by creationists who cannot see the forest for the trees and refuse to accept any evidence unless in the form of a living, breathing critter (and then they'd probably claim it was ginned up by geneticists in some secret laboratory to mislead good, God-fearing Christians in an effort to damn their souls to Hell).
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#750
Gee, you get caught quote-mining red handed, and attempt to weedle out of it by bantering semantics. You haven't read any real science since that nice old guy down the street introduced you to Saturnism... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#978
Dear, dear, deluded g3k.... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#1073
What must God think of you that you are reduced to bantering semantics, twisting words, willful ignorance, and outright lies to support Biblical creation?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#1080
I never said that, you liar and twister of words. The serpent in the Garden of Eden could take tips from you.... Remember, God said, "Thou shall not bear false witness" (which means lying). Of course, you probably think lying for God makes you a saint, don't you?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#1082
Ahem, Mr. "I've got to lie for God,"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#1088
I'm wondering if my asking gore3000 how he believed God felt about his lying for Him is what caused him to clam up. Medved, you claim God hates idiots, but not one of the commandments states "Thou shalt not be stupid." However, there is a "Thou shalt not bear false witness." Now that you know that your quotes are, at best, disengenuous, shouldn't you attempt to distance yourself from them, or is it okay to lie as long as it's "for the children?" http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#1209
That is why PatrickHenry keeps publishing the list - so that y'all do not keep spouting the same, discredited drivel. http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3a68abe52d91.htm#147
I merely said that's what the Indians claim. And shortsighted politicians are more than willing to bend over and grab their ankles for these folks.
http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3a68abe52d91.htm#191
Ah... the "Static Cling Theory" of life, the universe and everything. Came to you one day while cleaning out the dryer lint trap, did it?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/636491/posts?q=1&&page=101#140
I figured it had to be you. Can't keep a tinfoil hatter down.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/634527/posts?q=1&&page=51#55
Your beliefs can't be proven scientifically so they must be forced on the populace through deception and the courtroom. Nice. In a few centuries America will have come to resemble the Islamic world in its backwardness and you can sit back in that special Hell God reserves for people who lie in His name, and gloat at your handiwork.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/634066/posts?q=1&&page=151#164
Proof positive you have absolutely no clue about that which you speak. Your creationist brethren have given up this argument as factually incorrect, but you persist in your ignorance as if it were some sort of talisman keeping the real world at bay.
The Sun does not "reverse" entropy, you muggle....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/626685/posts?q=1&&page=201#203
BTW, a mutation is simply a change in the genome. It happens all the time -- usually during the creation of the sex cells from transcription errors (there is a word for this, but I cannot remember it for the life of me). Sometimes it is caused by an external influence -- a stray particle of radiation might knock part of a gene out of kilter (the biggest source of such radiation, BTW, is the Sun), or environmental chemicals might play merry hell with one's genetic coding. It's quite common and happens all the time -- which you would know if you actually read something other than the Bible once in a while.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/626685/posts?q=1&&page=301#346
Oh, I forgot, the scientific community is conspiring to keep you silent, so just sit in your basement and brood...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/626685/posts?q=1&&page=351#356
A case could be made that you should alter your drinking...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/626685/posts?q=1&&page=351#372
You are more incoherent than usual. Have they upped the dosage on your meds?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/626685/posts?q=1&&page=551#556
Are you being dense, or what? A descendent species can coexist with its parent species. There is nothing precluding Homo Erectus, Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapien from occupying the planet at the same time. The fact that you cannot see this obvious situation indicates a lack of thought on your part.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts?q=1&&page=1370#1367
gore3000: God did it. I have special dispensation to lie for God. Besides, I'll ignore all your evidence so that I can complain you never give me any.
medved: God came from Saturn.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts?q=1&&page=1408
No one outside of the willfully obstinate questions the idea that new life forms evolved from older ones, a process conclusively illustrated in biology and the fossil record.
We've got a whole lot of these folks on this forum...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#4 in reply to cracker
It's a bit different when taken in context, isn't it?
>"As Pakicetus and Ambulocetus show."
Oh really? SHOW ME THE BONES!
Right here. Was that so hard? No. It wasn't.
"Knowing gore3000, he'll take a look at your link and claim that evolutionists say coyotes are descended from whales. Do not underestimate the power of willful ignorance..."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#68
Followed by:
Now that the "proof" is right here for all to see, perhaps you can explain to us how the above prove the evolution of whales from a coyote!
87 posted on 2/20/02 9:49 PM Central by gore3000
As far as I can tell, I was simply making a prediction that came true. It's a bit different when taken in context, isn't it?
""Now that the "proof" is right here for all to see, perhaps you can explain to us how the above prove the evolution of whales from a coyote! -me-
Did I call that one, or what? gore3000, I've got you figured out!"
You and your buddy put this article as proof of evolution. It is up to you to show how it does so.
What is the point in those bones? What is the proof given in that article?
The answer is:
"THE ARTICLE PROVES NOTHING AT ALL"The evolutionists just put up a ton of links that they claim prove evolution but whenever I examine a link said to "prove" evolution it proves nothing at all.
You didn't even read the freakin' article, you dolt, or you wouldn't have made the inane comment about whales evolving from coyotes, or vice versa. Do you ever read any of the stuff we give you, or do you glance at the pretty pictures, decide that nothing's going to change your mind and then post inanities on these threads?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#143
Note that this is in response to the "whales evolved from coyotes" comment gore3000 made after glancing at a picture of a coyote skull being used as a scale for two whale skulls and blithely claimed that we said whales evolved from coyotes -- when the article itself made no such claim. It's a bit different when taken in context, isn't it?
My theory has always been he's nothing more than a rather primitive computer algorythm.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#152
You got me on that one. That came from frustration at gore3000's inability to process new data, instead claiming never to have seen the data in the first place.
So, your God is a trickster, hmmm? Interesting...
366 posted on 2/22/02 10:01 AM Hawaii-Aleutian by Junior
Do you think He would run his business like Las Vegas/chance-glitter...hollywood tinsel town---animal house...(evolution)?
Michaelangelo only signed the pieta because someone said a rock chopper did it...evolution is rock chopping---sand and dust!
The Bible says..."God's foolishness is more powerful than man's wisdom"...what wisdom-CLASS God has---
evolution has none...
wise men with elephant feces--afterbirth---yeah oracles!
Did you ever read about the last days of Leaky in California---beserk--sun-fossil stroke---pathetic!
Even the media couldn't believe it...raving delusional maniac!
374 posted on 2/22/02 2:53 PM Central by f.Christian
You are the only person I've met who suffered from Tourette's Syndrome of the keyboard.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#384
Considering the post I was replying to, you can see why I made the comment I did. It's a bit different when taken in context, isn't it?
"The earliest known whales, Himalayacetus and Pakicetus are presently known only from cranial material<.b>, so they are not much help. However, the position of the inner ear bones in Pakicetus are a perfect intermediate between those of land mammals and the rotated ones of cetaceans (Thewissen & Hussain, 1993), not to mention the fact that the tympanic bullae are composed of dense bone as those of cetaceans (Gingerich, et al, 1983).
Before I say anything else, your link goes to a personal page which the author did not even bother to assign his name to. It also does not have any examples of bones showing any proof for what he mentions in the text.
Aside from that, we have a very real problem with this article and I am surprised you did not notice it. Look at the bolded words, look at the bottom picture in post#87. The statement is false. We indeed have a lot of bones from Pakicetus besides the cranium. Those bones show a four legged animal.
So there we go Junior, another article "proving" whales came from land animals that does not show any such thing.
Let me just say one more thing about this matter. DNA analysis has shown that whales are in no way related to hippos and have not shown them to be related to any known land animal. So much for evolutionist fantasies.
Face it, gore3000, your brain (or programming) has been trained to force a cognitive disassociation between the pariticulars of evidence and the sum total of evidence. You can't see the forest for the trees. You'll pick at individual pieces of evidence given you, but fail to understand the overall picture painted by the evidence coming in from dozens of scientific disciplines. And, you show an inherent inability to actually learn anything
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#632
It's a bit different when taken in context, isn't it?
The scientific definition of a mammal is that it has mammary glands.
Not quite. Milk production is part of the definition of mammal, but it also includes all the other stuff mentioned earlier (dentition -- a biggie, hair or fur, number of holes in the skull, warm-bloodedness, single lower mandible and differentiated ear bones, etc.)
Now, the first two, milk production and fur do not fossilize, but as the others are all found in mammals and they do fossilize -- and this combination is not found in any other class of animals -- any fossils exhibiting the complete collection of stuff that does fossilize and denotes mammal, can be assumed to be a mammal -- except by creationists who cannot see the forest for the trees and refuse to accept any evidence unless in the form of a living, breathing critter (and then they'd probably claim it was ginned up by geneticists in some secret laboratory to mislead good, God-fearing Christians in an effort to damn their souls to Hell).
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/630185/posts#750
One of your more egregious examples of quote mining. It's a bit different when taken in context, isn't it?
He's modest, too.