New Dinosaur Species Found in India

AP ^ | August 13, 2003 | RAMOLA TALWAR BADAM

[DittoJed2]

What was that all about?

Sacred column?

Sacred? OMG, what a bizarre concept and totally laughable.

The column is sacred to the theory of evolution. Try to suggest it is invalid and see the response. Actually, just read your own asinine comments. Evolutionists look like this


whenever refuting evidence is pointed out because if the column falls, so does the theory.

[Da_Shrimp]

objects from one age found in another, etc.,

Citations?

Could you explain why elephant fossils are NEVER EVER found with dinosaur fossils?

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your agreement! And I agree with you that none of the recently-accused posters are trolls.

Would you kindly post our mutual agreement on the voluntary shunning (or not) interpretation over to the main thread so that the next mediator will be sure to bring it to a consensus and/or vote in the review?

[StolarStorm]

"Actually, just read your own asinine comments."

Does this sort of statement comply?

[Alamo-Girl]

Er, if any of the three of you in your above post had signed-on to the agreement, then compliance might be more relevant.

[BMCDA]

LOL!! So many strawmen, so little time...

But I also like those extrapolations a lot ;)

[DittoJed2]

Nessie is not a necessary example, but shouldn't be readily thrown out either. 11,000 witnesses (including a member of parliament) can't all be kooks. Also, I know that the BBC recently trolled Loch Ness with sonar equipment, but their research does not prove that Nessie does not exist. Loch Ness was given a thorough workover by, I believe, the Japanese several years ago and they note that the bottom of it is full of canyons and large caves. With a bunch of boats going overhead, it's possible the creature was hiding.

Nessie-type animals have been seen on almost every continent. Champ is one such creature (could also be a zeugolodon (sp?) or some yet unidentified species. Ogopogo is another. While these "sightings" do not 100% confirm that the plesiosaur still exists, the evidence is intriguing.

This site has a lot of information (not all supportive of the plesiosaur theory, but not all discounting either) regarding the existence of such creatures. Remember, names like "dinosaur" are of recent origin.

[StolarStorm]

I wasn't worried about any comments directed my way... just amused. I was just suprised that Andrew didn't address this post as he has others.

[Junior]

Don't forget jedigirl, though she was banned for a posting on a non-crevo thread.

[AndrewC]

Thank you very much. Your clarification is.

[DittoJed2]

I didn't sign an agreement, and the statement regarding his attacks was appropriate.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for the clarification!

[DittoJed2]

With or without discussing the Wooly Mammoth????

[VadeRetro]

Don't forget jedigirl ...

I'll bet I never do again!

[DittoJed2]

First of all, the flood wasn't 40 days. It was over a year. The rain fell 40 days, but Noah was on the boat for a year. Second, I'm not sure what GC you are referring to here, the Canyon or the Column.

[StolarStorm]

So you reserve the right to be nasty? :) I haven't signed it yet either. But I may. However, I typically just lurk on science threads, and let others more informed then myself pontificate.

[AndrewC]

Does this sort of statement comply?

Not if stated without cause. Peruse the thread.-- this came before that.Sacred? OMG, what a bizarre concept and totally laughable.

[VadeRetro]

More Woodmorappe fans:

Hiding the Numbers to Defame Radiometric Dating A Few Examples of the Many Misused References in Woodmorappe (1999) , Dr. Kevin R. Henke.

More Classic Misquotations in Woodmorappe (1999), Dr. Kevin R. Henke.

Geochronology kata John Woodmorappe, by Steven H. Schimmrich.

Woodmorappe Replies (with name-calling)

Schimmrich Dissects.

[Aric2000]

The column is a fact, not a scared anything.

To try to explain it with a worldwide flood is ridiculous and absolutely laughable.

You wish to believe it though, it's OK with me, but to try and make science take such a thing seriously will be quite impossible.

Science has the evidence, and no amount of whining on your part will change that.

Again, there is absolutley NO credible evidence of a worldwide flood catastrophy, there is absolutely NO credible evidence that the earth is 6-10,000 years old.

Any such claims on your part is to help you fulfill your faith that the bible is unerring, nothing more.

[DittoJed2]

No. I reserve the right to give back what has been given to me. You read the comments to which I was referring as well as Aric's other comments directed my way and judge for yourself if the comments were or were not asinine in nature. They are derisive in nature and do not contribute to the discussion at hand.