"This bone is nothing! Nothing at all!
Posted on 04/02/2004 4:25:18 PM PST by PatrickHenry
"with a different viewpoint", eh? Which viewpoint might that be, eh?
If you're saying that "creationist scientists will think up some excuse to hand-wave this away also", no doubt, but that's hardly the same as an actual refutation.
So don't jump the gun claiming victory.
Don't jump the gun claiming defeat, either, as seems to be your motivation here ("it'll go down, just you wait and see!")
And pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
Hunches are good. I have the strong feeling I'm about to hit Lotto, Mega-Millions, or Powerball. That I have so far failed to do any such thing despite perhaps a couple thousand wasted dollars over the last fifteen years of trying means nothing against the power of my hunch.
The scientists who announced this discovery are not pikers in paleontology, so don't look for them to be spanked and put to bed with no supper anytime soon. ICR may deign to write a rebuttal, maybe even the prestigious Discovery Institute of Seattle, but it won't be based on any more than doctrinaire opposition to progress in this particular direction.
Yes.
So you'd like to believe.
A real scientist knows that we don't know anything about anything,
Ooooookay..... Speak for yourself, son. Personally, I know quite a lot about many things.
and should readily discard the evolutionist claim when it doesn't fit.
Except that it fits just fine here, so...
A bone doesn't fit, no matter how you slice it.
You forgot the "because" part of your claim. Simply declaring that "the bone don't fit so you must acquit" just doesn't cut it among "real scientists".
Also devoid of substance.
There used to be a good site comparing the head bones of Eusthenopteron (lobe-finned fish) and Acanthostega (very early amphibian). Alas, it's gone now. Anyway, aside from genetic similarities, early amphibians had bone-for-bone practically the same heads as their immediate fish ancestors.
It's rather late to be that ignorant. A scientist who hopes to push the envelope in his lifetime has to come up to speed on what we do in fact know, which is quite a daunting body of literature.
Wow, the "I have no ability to refute the findings but I don't like them so I'll just broadly ridicule them" brigade is out in full force tonight, I see.
There's a great deal of difference between the sort of empty schoolyard sniggering you did which didn't address even a single word of the original article, and a substantive rebuttal.
Learn the difference.
Try again when you've got something resembling an actual contribution to a science discussion.
To save time, I direct you to my replies in posts #30, #35, #53, and #56, they're all entirely appropriate to your post as well.
If you guys keep this up at this rate, I'll have to compose a form letter or something.
With some fava beans and a nice chianti.
Better bookmark it, Pat. You'll need it later on other threads when they start talking about "no transitionals" for the umpteenth time.
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.