Posted on 11/09/2009 9:44:55 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Hey, Cupcake, the issue had nothing to do with the sound, only the shape of the tail. Besides, attacking the messenger isn't working for you with Darwin and it won't work on me either. Here is another unoriginal quote that you ought to heed before you post more speculative rhetorical drivel; "One experiment is worth 1,000 expert opinions."
I notice that you have another creationist scientist on your profile page...one of the greats, as a matter of fact...good for you!
When’s that book due out? Some of us can’t wait ...
Which book would that be, underscore Jim?
You need to read "Wiki for Dummies" so you can understand that anyone, even you, can contribute to a wiki topic. The person who cited the Discovery Magazine article thought the study to be “dubious” but had to invite comment. Note: There was NO additional postings to refute or deter from the original hypothesis. It appears you again stop reading and thinking the moment you find a snippet that supports your presumptions.
Your book. Nothing is quite as fulfilling or as lasting or can advance one’s goals as producing a work that describes one’s beliefs, ideas and ideals.
With supporting arguments, rationale, and cites of course.
You need to read Plagiarism on the Internet for Dummies. IIRC, you have a habit of doing this. Be sure to read Chapter 3 on how when you get caught plagiarizing over and over, it destroys your credibility.
What does my future book have to do with this thread, underscore Jim?
I didn't plagiarize, I cited the Discover magazine. You are changing the subject to attacking me, like you do with Darwin, because you have lost the argument on the facts. I actually expected one of your tantrums about three posts earlier. Are you getting soft or has the burden of getting your butt handed to you on a daily basis taken the edge off?
What would Radner and Radner say about that, I wonder?
You lifted your response word for word from Wikipedia. Well not quite word for word: you cut out the part that warns readers that the 200 dB claim you plagiarized is “dubious” in order to stengthen your dishonest reply.
To quote Bugs Bunny; "What a maroon!". How do you think information gets into the wiki, from the Burning Bush? The wiki lifted one of my contributions to a posting in the following website: http://schools-wikipedia.org/wp/a/Apatosaurus.htm
Yet another action that bears a high correlation with the mouflon learning curve.
Excellent! Who was it that kept saying something about Ex. 20 to you?
This is what your excuse was the last time I caught you plagiarizing:
“You can call me names if you like, but plagiarism would only apply had I claimed works as my own. In a chat room like discussion brevity does not always permit full footnoting and disclosure.”
Hey GGG
Great thread, thanks for posting. The true believers can’t seem to grasp the fact that soft tissue has been found multiple times in dinosaur bones.
Ira trying to understand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmsuYeztVbs
LOL...I totally remember that episode!
PS Believe it or not, the Simpsons helped me get through college. It was my favorite show at the time, and I literaly took the show away from myself if I didn’t live up to my study goals for the day :o)
Done!!!! Would a well funded study help?
I know its easier to try to attack my credibility than to directly refute the contents of my posts. You don't have to lie and insult to protect God from his own creations. If you had any personal integrity you would simply say you are basing your beliefs on faith alone and not try to fabricate a veil of artificial science.
Have you ever open up a really old jar of preserves?
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.