Posted on 08/02/2004 3:58:04 PM PDT by Renfield
Sigh. I'm beginning to think that there is NO animal you would consider a transitional, other than a pegasus, griffin or manticore. Unless an animal is a freak from a bad b-horror movie, it wouldn't qualify as a transitional.
Hell, you don't even consider an animal that has both reptilian and bird characteristics as transitional. In your world, it would also need gills and a scorpion tail.
I hope you have kids because I look forward to seeing your tax money used to indoctrinate them with the TOE.
At the end of the day, hick school boards full of inbred morons will make inroads against the teaching of the TOE. Fine with me, to tell you the truth. That just means there will be less competition for my kids when they're applying for good colleges.
After all, the world will always need fast food cashiers.
Spoken like a envious table cleaner.
Darwin was not an atheist.
Why would a loving God keep his creation in the dark about their origin till thousands of years after Genesis was written?
Because explaining the TOE to a people barely out of the stone age would be a waste of time. You try and explain to people in Afghanistan today how a computer works and see how much success you have.
I figure, God gave us a rough sketch as to how the world began, then he moved on to explaining more important stuff, such as moral codes. He knew we would eventually reach a level where we could fill in the details of Genesis.
Which is why Rome abrogated responsibility to science with regard to homosexuality so that it could blame someone else, presumably for the impact of pedophiles in her pulpits around the world (not just here in the united states as some would have us believe). I'm sure they appreciate your assistance, as a Roman Catholic, in defending science. Tomorrow, if it suits their purposes, they'll roast you alive for Gallileo's sake. Really, Rome does need to learn the difference between science and quackery. Imprison Gallileo and let the homos run rampant and destroy kids. Can I count on you to expound on your remarks and give them more "credibility". LOL
BTW, Fury starts many of his posts "Havoc writes:" because he was put on a leash by the mods on request because of his behavior elsewhere. Just so everyone's aware.
The TOE does not have an agenda, and neither do people who study it other than trying to explain all of the evidence before us.
If, however, you can come up with an alternate testable theory that fits the available evidence better than the TOE, there is a Nobel Prize with your name on it.
We'll wait while you work on that.
It hasn't panned out and you guys have been changing your story to respond to the problems you've encountered since Darwin.
Talking to you is like talking to a stubborn 5 year-old. You really don't understand the nature of science, do you? Let me just repeat: all theories are open to changes over time as new evidence comes to light.
Somebody needs a bottle and a nap.
Naw. I was making six figures at age 24. How about you?
So then, you really don't know what you're talking about then - right. Bat wings function like hands. Were their wings covered in feathers, it would require a different configuration that would disallow them to function like hands. They hang upside down and use their wings to hold their young in tight to them. Birds do not do this. As Science stipulates that behavior is inherent. How would bird wings aid the inherent behavior of Bats. They would not. Which suggests the wing design for a purpose.
Birds and Bats aren't like trucks and lamborghinis.
Yes, they are. I'm sorry; but, they operate differently, live differently, etc. They have different functions just as cars and trucks have different functions though they both are vehicles and have four wheels. They are obviously not ink pens, buildings, vaults, etc from the list of men's creations. They are creations of a specific type - automobiles. Semis fit the class of automobile - engine, wheels, etc. You probably would prefer I just said "dump truck" or "pickup". The analogy stands. Bats have different type of wings because they are used for nesting purposes. Bats don't make nests. Birds do. Birds therefore don't require articulate wings which they can use for grasping their young. All they need do is sit on the nest and cover their young with their wings when they feel it necessary.
I didn't say bats don't make sense, I'm just pointing out that it doesn't make sense to take everything that works on birds and then try to re-invent it.
No, you're saying it doesn't make sense to you. But then you haven't shown that you're really thinking about it from a science standpoint and applying what is known. Rather, you appear to be ignorant of the subject - that or trying to avoid the truth of the subject in hopes that people who don't know any better will buy your argument..
This is not correct. You made a request that I not reply to any messages from you. I have complied with that request. I was not "put on a leash" by the mods. You've made this claim before - and I believe you've been asked to provide a citation for the claim - none has ever been provided.
I was defending my country, as I am now. How about you?
Did you know John Kerry served in Vietnam? So did Al Gore.
I am not a fast food cashier.
Oh, and Kerry has a six figure income like you.
This is good timing! I was *just* reading this article earlier today:
Science more creative and less 'true' than many believe, educator says
Well, if you wanted to go into a career involving any type of biological science, or want your kids to do the same, I hope you or they went to a school that taught the TOE.
And creationism doesn't?? Thanks for the laugh.
I'd rather have them taught at a school that teaches them how to logically think for themselves. BTW, my Biology professor went to Cuba with the Venceremos Brigade.
I don't think we're talking about malformed freaks, are we. How do you suppose critters without wings evolve wings over large periods of time if it doesn't happen in stages or bits at a time? Oh, right, It's invisable. It happens; but, not so you could really tell or ever see it. It all just cooks together inside the critter really knowing the critter needs to fly then one day, wings pop out it's butt and it commences to flapping.. Right. Do we get a toaster with that. Something intelligent and useful should come from this conversation. We already know it takes long periods of time for these things to happen gradually over time and it's invisable. The time, obviously, because it's never been observed to ever happen. So if we say it takes millions of years (though we can't prove that anything has actually been around that long) then people will have to drop their expectation of ever seeing it happen and we can claim any bloody thing we like.. Yep. Snake oil. I thought this was supposed to be science. It's nothing more than a different religion trying to disprove God apparently. I don't see much science in it. There's a lot there pretending at science. But this is more like a debate between protestants and Catholics than a debate on science.
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.