Posted on 06/09/2009 5:33:16 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
June 9, 2009 — “The findings add to a growing body of evidence in the past two decades that challenge some of the most widely-held beliefs about animal evolution.” That statement is not being made by creationists, but by science reporters describing work at Oregon State University that cast new doubt on the idea that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. The main idea: their leg bones and lungs are too different.
Science Daily’s report has a diagram of the skeleton showing...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
NO? What if I said this:
Scientists: Global Warming has Already Changed Oceans (Need 8 Billion To Fix)
Heh, heh.
Yee hee hee.
Bwa ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa!!!!
That was my mad scientist laugh.
Check out theropod skeletons compared to birds - the difference in the legs is very very small. It’s hardly a “you can’t get there from here” scenario.
Compare the skeletons of MODERN birds with each other and you’ll see far more variation than you will between modern birds and the theropods.
Why thank you, GPM! Haven’t bumped into you in a while. Besides Obamanation, how is everything going in your life?
Why are then using a computer and electricity? For these are boons given to you from (cue ominous music) science!
Forsake your HEATHEN ways! Return to the faith of your fathers! End your vile associations with science and technology!
(IE - be Amish!)
Yes, I’m an OEC.
No, I don’t think YEC’s are “looney”.
They just need to quit pretending they’re able to interpret the age of the earth from the Bible.
They tend to be the same folks that believe they understand Revelations.
Neither were meant to be used in that way.
I like that analogy.
:-)
Because I like them. You scientist worshippers are weird.
You get your undies all wadded up just because someone refuses to toe the "Science is infallible" line.
The fact that I'm sitting here typing on a keyboard and the words appear all across millions of people's monitors around the world does not make me believe that the oceans can be saved by spending 8 billion dollars just because some dead scientist's daughter says so.
Nor does it prove that life began as some random process initiated in a stagnant pool of water.
But back to the ocean thing. Do you believe the effects of global warming on the oceans can be fixed by spending 8 billion dollars?
Not at all.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters...
6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.”...
9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so.
10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
Selective reading again?
Or didja miss the claim about modern birds evolving along a different path than some believe?
You mean like Archaeoraptor liaoningensis?
Or maybe all those “proto” feathers?
Right.
Actually, I suspect that you use them because they work. And if the science behind it works, then you accept that bit of science, for use of a thing is acceptance of a thing.
Which reveals you to be a hypocrite. As it was you who stated, "Tell me again why so many people place so much faith in scientists?"
This at the same time you are putting your faith in scientists. Classic hypocrisy - "do as I say, not as I do".
Well, yeah.
And if the science behind it works, then you accept that bit of science, for use of a thing is acceptance of a thing.
Exactly! You're starting to see the light.
Which reveals you to be a hypocrite.
Oh noooooo!!!!And we were so close! Oh, the huge manatee.
All I'm saying is that I don't accept everything scientists say just because my computer works and because an atom can be split.
Do you?
Do you believe that the damage to the oceans caused by "global warming" can be reversed by spending 8 billion dollars just because a "scientist" and a "scientist"'s daughter says to?
No doubt the plants were not happy about that, withered, died and disappeared from the Earth.
You have to stick with me on how we read the OT ~ revised timelines that deviate from the Hebrew text are a NO NO!
Umm....according to GGG...the poster of this latest batch is stuff he doesn’t understand....nearly 50% of Americans are Young Earth Creationutz.
It was a well studied science by that time. The dinosaur/bird hypothesis was not yet on the agenda.
Not a problem. He said let there be light all the way back on Day 1.
Pretty well, thanks. Just trying to prepare against the massive inflation and unemployment and general destruction of our standard-of-living. Other than that, I count my blessings and do feel blessed.
How’s everything on your end?
The implications of that timeline are stupendous ~ here's Genesis telling us that as far as Earth is concerned, CREATION took place somewhere else first.
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.