Newfound Dinosaur a Transitional Creature

Las Vegas Sun (AP) ^ | May 04, 2005 | Malcolm Ritter

[MeanWestTexan]

Caught in the act of evolution, the odd-looking, feathered dinosaur was becoming more vegetarian, moving away from its meat-eating ancestors.

It had the built-for-speed legs of meat-eaters, but was developing the bigger belly of plant-eaters. It had already lost the serrated teeth needed for tearing flesh. Those were replaced with the smaller, duller vegetarian variety.

[Elsie]

Don't them silly crevo's KNOW that only OUR side is allowed to QM????

--EvoDude

[Elsie]

You lyin, hatefilled TarBaby!!!

TALK to me and DEFEND yerself!

[Elsie]

You've gone from "possibly woefully ignorant" to "shameless liar".

Next stop: HateFilled

[Elsie]

 

 

Yeow!!!

 

[hosepipe]

[ I am curious as to WHY moral relativists (whose SELF-righteous "moral truths" change with the "situation") would even want to be here unless their goal is to UNDERMINE our Constitution as if it was a "living" document that should conform with their "current" beliefs. ]

Good point(s)..
I've wondered that myself in many threads on things not even remotely about evolution..
Maybe they are "moderates" thats can't make up their minds..
Many here don't know the difference between "democracy" and "A Democracy"..
rendering their knowledge of what a republic is skewed..
especially this very special and unique republic the United States..

But in my experience I know few that even knows what socialism "IS" either, even here on FR.. or by the way the difference between privileges given by government and "rights" given WHO.. some have no idea rights must be awarded by someone / something.. If not government then WHO / WHAT..

And Canada and the European countrys have ZERO rights merely privileges granted by their governments which can be rescinded on a whim.. democratically of course unless there is a Coup.. Any attack on the progenitor of "rights" is an attack on those rights..

Good point... maybe thats what the/some Evos are doing..
Attacking the progenitor of those rights.. in that sense Evolution is not Science but Agitprop..

[Elsie]

Imagine the endgame: the serial liar ends up in what he expects to be heaven, but he swiftly realizes he's in the deepest pit of hell.

 

 

Like this??

 

NIV Matthew 7:21-23
 21.  "Not everyone who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
 22.  Many will say to me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
 23.  Then I will tell them plainly, `I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

 

 

Ask yourselves folks:

 

"Are YOU doing the 'will of the Father'"?

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

http://www.fossilmall.com/index.htm

[Elsie]

1 Corinthians 13

4. Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
5. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
6. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.
7. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

[Elsie]

Mark of the Beast bump

[Elsie]

Quote:

---

” As science, Creationism is simply false. There is no evidence of a world-wide Flood (and much against it), there is no evidence of a short-aged earth (and much against it), there is no evidence of a single pair of human parents (and much against it). Moreover, as science, Creationism is simply not science.”

---

HMMMmmm...................

[balrog666]

What do you attibute to the almost constant use of the words lie, lying, liar.?

Don't overlook the obvious fun of hoisting a hypocrite on his own petard.

[Liberal Classic]

I should know better than to ask, but why, when shown that a quote has been taken out of context, or wrongly attributed altogether, why doesn't anyone simply admit they erred by saying "I stand corrected" and move on, instead of standing behind a quotation that has been shown to be false?

[MeanWestTexan]

"How does they know what ADAM's was to begin with?"

Again, the "Y-Chromosome Adam" is is the LAST shared ancestor of all males. Now, there could be an EARLIER shared ancestor (if the population looped back on itself, such as if a cousin married a counsin), but this shows the LAST person.

They can tell what "Y-Chromosome Adam's" DNA is because the male Y-Chromosome does not combine DNA with anything (it matches up against the X and does not swap DNA).

Because the Y-Chromosome is unmatched with a like Chromosome, the Y-Chromosome has passed largely unchanged through the ages, albeit with distint, and easy to spot changes.

By taking samples, of males throughout the world, they can compare the shared, unchanged, portions --- the DNA of the "Y-Chromosome Adam."

The only relevance here is to show that there was --- at least once ----- ONE MAN, per evolutionary theory ----- whom all living people are decended.

It's only relevance is to answer your concern that evolution is inconsistent with ORIGINAL SIN.

It's not inconsistent.

Indeed, if you read more, you'll find that evolutionary theory and the Bible work quite nicely together --- because --- it appear there were AT LEAST two shared male ancestors of all living humans.

Sounds a lot like Adam and Noah? Does it not?

"Speak truth in love." (Ephesians)

[js1138]

Beyond false and out of context quotes, there is no place to go.

What astonishes me is the ongoing psychosis that leads people to think they can massage a quote to make Darwin sound like he doesn't believe in evolution, or the equivalent with a modern scientist.

[hosepipe]

p ” As science, Creationism is simply false. There is no evidence of a world-wide Flood (and much against it), there is no evidence of a short-aged earth (and much against it), there is no evidence of a single pair of human parents (and much against it). Moreover, as science, Creationism is simply not science.” ] from js1138

What I want to know is where did the third(3rd) human on earth come from.?.
If not from the first two then where, who, what.?. There must be a first human too.. and a second..

Adam and Eve mud wresleing in slime for a million years or so does have a Jerry Springer Show quality about it but gets boring after about 5 minutes.. and is not even good "stand-up" comedy..

Humans.? are Always, Suckers for a good story.. as J.T. Barnum recounts.. "a sucker is born every minute".. pity that one of them is aborted about every two minutes in the United States..

[Dimensio]

So you think that it was acceptable for Matchett-PI to fabricate a quote?

[hosepipe]

[ Don't overlook the obvious fun of hoisting a hypocrite on his own petard. ]

Ewwwwweee.... that sounds nasty..

[hosepipe]

[ So you think that it was acceptable for Matchett-PI to fabricate a quote? ]

Post the quote and vet the fabrication..

[Dimensio]

What do you attibute to the almost constant use of the words lie, lying, liar.?

Let's see... Matchett-PI presented a fabricated quote. The quote was exposed as being fake. Matchett-PI insisted that the person who he had falsely quoted has actually expressed the sentiments of the false quote.

That would mean that, after being informed that he was passing misinformation, Matchett-PI continued to repeat false information. The term 'liar' might seem "mean" to you, but it is applicable. Matchett-PI lied, therefore Matchett-PI is a liar.

It's kind of like what you did when you denied ever claiming that fossil fakes were only exposed by "non-evo" scientists, even though I was able to quote two posts where you said exactly that.

I know that you like to whine and complain about us calling you liars, but what else are we to do when you repeat obvious falsehoods? I'm sorry that you don't think it fair to have your lies exposed, but claiming that we're just being mean-spirited by not going along with demonstratably false claims does not give your side any additional credibility. Believe it or not, the main reason that we shout "liar" in arguments with creationists is because they lie.

[PatrickHenry]

700?