To: Junior
Evolutionists do not use the terms micro- or macro-evolution! Couple things. Here the response is so? You know what he means. He means natural selection for micro and initial origens of life and speciation for macro.
Don't proselytize, address the topic he brings up.
VadeRetro has posted the series showing the modification of the jaw bones of reptiles to be ear bones of mammals.
Stuff like this is one of the reasosn people are quite rightly skeptical of evolution. So much of it has been junk science. (Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny -- not even logical).
The behavior of the religious evolutionists is quite apalling as well and turns people off to the subject as well and harms the reputation of science.
It is unfortunate these religious fanatics have tried to hijack science.
To: tallhappy
Don't proselytize, address the topic he brings up. If you read the rest of the post, I did address the questions he brought up. Do you do anything but carp at the way the game is played? Do you ever actually add anything to the debate on either side?
To: tallhappy
VadeRetro has posted the series showing the modification of the jaw bones of reptiles to be ear bones of mammals. Stuff like this is one of the reasosn people are quite rightly skeptical of evolution. So much of it has been junk science.
How is the sequence of reptile to mammal skulls "junk science"? It is exactly what Creationists claim has never been found-- a full series of fossils which show gradual modifications, each one only slightly different from the predecessor, but eventually leading to a whole new type of animal.
To: tallhappy, Junior
It is unfortunate these religious fanatics have tried to hijack science.What takes place on these threads is not always about science, even if, at times, it is. It's not always about religion either. But it can be fun. The creationists on the threads are, for the most part, not interested in science and the discussions repeatedly lead to the same irreconcilable arguments.
Junior is particularly recalcitrant about issues which I have pointed out to him as scientifically incorrect. He carries on with statements like "Evolutionists do not use the terms micro- or macro-evolution!", pictures of humans with "vestigial tails", incorrect definitions of speciation, etc.
When I first started on these threads, I sang somewhat the same tune you do. This isn't science, I'm a molecular biologist, and so forth. But, so what! The creationists are even less about science than the evolutionists here are. I try to infuse a little current scientific knowledge, but I realize that the simpler, pedestrian version of the evolutionary narrative is more than the creationists can handle.
To: tallhappy
You need to read the thread before shooting your mouth off, pal!
Junior: VadeRetro has posted the series showing the modification of the jaw bones of reptiles to be ear bones of mammals.
slaphappy: Stuff like this is one of the reasosn people are quite rightly skeptical of evolution. So much of it has been junk science. (Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny -- not even logical).
Junior refers to the following:
Please explain how "recapitulation" applies here. Where's the ontogeny? You do not know what you are talking about.
You are slipping in your avowed role of word-twister and useage police. I have made two posts lately, one of which could be interpreted to mean I don't know a gene from an allele. The other could be interpreted to mean that I don't know an intron from functional DNA.
The more you post, the more you show you can't read.
To: tallhappy
The behavior of the religious evolutionists is quite apalling as well and turns people off to the subject as well and harms the reputation of science. The behavior of Joe Cheapshot tallhappy is quite appalling and turns people off to any thread he pollutes with his venomous presence.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson