Scientists find missing link between whale and its closest relative, the hippo

UC Berkeley News ^ | 24 January 2005 | Robert Sanders, Media Relations

[shubi]

If you have to go back to 1625 to find someone who you think is an authority on young earth, it really boggles the mind that you think this is pertinent. Darwin didn't discover evolution until about 200 years later.

Do you not see the problem with your thinking?

[shubi]

Give it up. Give us any fact that refutes evolution, instead of the fallacy of appeal to authority.

Just because some pastor tells you that the Bible means something other than it does and you must follow it or go to the nether world, doesn't mean it is true.

[shubi]

The Meyer article is not science. You are using the fallacy of authority again. ID will be using this one irrelevant article to scream that they are published from now on. It is pathetic.

[shubi]

The only conclusion one can draw from Hague's paper is Genesis is not authoritative.

I don't agree with that conclusion, but that is what his premises require.

[KneelBeforeZod]

[King Prout]

Carbon dating only goes back 50,000 years

excuse me?

[shubi]

They are really doing some amazing things in genetics.

I wonder why ID hasn't taken this up. They could take their vocal genes out and give us some peace from their nonsense.

[shubi]

"If I drink to much beer today I'll have to swallow some Aspirin tomorrow."

I recommend washing it down with Scotch.

[shubi]

"I do not believe my sainted mother is just as much an animal as the beetle scurrying in my garden."

What about your mother-in-law? Beetle? Cockroach? Snake?

[King Prout]

I note that it has now been 9 hours since I answered a specific fallacy, and though the one to whom I replied has been activer on the thread since that time he has not seen fit to attempt rebuttal OR admit his error.

I am beginning to detest these people.
They give religiosity a very bad name, and through the promulgation of their charicature of an understanding of science they tarnish the reputation of science itself among the general population.
They also, as noted by others, stain the public perception of the GOP and conservatism.

[shubi]

"I do notice people on here do really get their beards' in a knot defending evolution, must mean a lot to them."

Actually, we can't defend evolution from your kind of attacks. The attacks have no merit. It is only by repetition of stuff like 24 hr day and the global flood caused all the dino bones to stratify in chronological order that creationist nonsense gets accepted. Along with the peer pressure to believe nonsense under threat of damnation, it would be laughable if it were not such a serious threat to the survival of Christianity.

[shubi]

You refuse to believe what the Bible means.

Face it.

Is it really necessary to threaten everyone with hellfire if they don't believe your silly take on the Bible?

[shubi]

C14 dating only is accurate to at most 50,000 years.

Other dating methods are used to date fossils.

[shubi]

"I am beginning to detest these people.
They give religiosity a very bad name, and through the promulgation of their caricature of an understanding of science they tarnish the reputation of science itself among the general population.
They also, as noted by others, stain the public perception of the GOP and conservatism."

To me they are just evil. The harm they do is incalculable.

[King Prout]

hrmn.
news to me.
I do not dispute, but seek citation of source w/ table of halflife etc...

thanks.

[King Prout]

"evil" is a word I am loath to use without pressing need and ample evidence.

however, I do see evidence of a great deal of sinfulness in their modes of conduct.

[HankReardon]

Now we are disputing the facts concerning Noah's ark. What is about all this you feel threatened by? Do you have very much invested in your desire that there is no God?

[MHalblaub]

It's there, you just refuse to accept it.

Not my fault you want to believe in some Jewish fairy tales


Science is not about truth or believe, that is for Sunday school, it is about explanations, experiments and discoveries. With ID or something like that you can't explain anything. A superior being is not a valid scientific explanation until you got a repeatable experiment to reveal something that is beyond our current scientific illustration.

A gap in the history of development of our planet is not a logical argument for a superior being. Maybe we can close these gaps. Maybe we can not. If you can't withstand gaps keep out of science.

Some years ago Erich von Däniken claimed the pyramids in Egypt must have been built by aliens because he was not capable of imagine how they could have done it.

[stremba]

Sometimes the scientist may come to the conclusion that the supernatural exists, but he does so by means other than the practice of science.

[HankReardon]

So many people here think way too much! Being able to distinguish between right and wrong, a liar and an honest man, corruption and honor does not require agreeing with reams of paper from scientists full of 9 syllable words that have been compliled after a theory has been announced in order to support the said theory. Those of you who WANT evolution to be a proven fact all have something that must bother you about the theory. Honestly, in your mind, what is the flaw in evolution? I'm not asking the creationist, anti-evolution, complete and intact species people. I mean, you must have a problem with evolution some where, something doesn't seem right in your minds.