Enter your username and password below to sign in to your PewterReport account.
Unfortunately for Dal, most of his arguments are pretty well refuted, but he seems not to be aware of this. I was a disciple of the Darwinian religion at one time, but as the evidence was put in front of me, I could tell that it didn't match reality. Today that camp seems to just make up things left and right to put their theory on top. They should have learned from Piltdown man, but they can't seem to stop.
Quote from: ufojoe55 on April 08, 2007, 07:02:06 PMI am open to abiogenesis. Just not here. IMO, I don't think that's what happened here.Why not here, the same problems happen anywhere you want to have it happen. That's why your stand is so puzzling. You either gets the cooking primoral soup on Earth or on Glazxxon XIV. One way or the other you have to think it is possible so why is there better than here?You're right. Life had just as much a chance of popping up here as it did anywhere else. However,if I go by Crick, (as one example) then it seems like the timeframe doesn't make sense. He was..."uncomfortable with the narrow window of time between the date the earth cooled enough to be habitable and the first appearance of life in the fossil record."Maybe on some other planet with intelligent life (Planet Z), the timeframe DOES make sense.Dal wins some big points with an uppercut and his two latest posts. BucHarbour's mouthpiece fell out.Onto Round 13...
I am open to abiogenesis. Just not here. IMO, I don't think that's what happened here.Why not here, the same problems happen anywhere you want to have it happen. That's why your stand is so puzzling. You either gets the cooking primoral soup on Earth or on Glazxxon XIV. One way or the other you have to think it is possible so why is there better than here?
2000 years from now people will still be waiting for the second coming of Christ. The percentage of people who still believe will be considerably smaller and the rest of us will find more rational reasons to behave like human beings should. It is real simple. Treat others like you want to be treated. It's a very pleasant way to live. It really is.
Evolution is a proven fact. Any museum of natural history has evidence you can lay your hands on. You can touch it.If a man and his dog are killed by a roadside explosive device, their splattered remains rot together wherever they end up. They are both dead and will stay that way for eternity. Once life is over, it can't be restored. Not 2000 years ago. Not now. 2000 years from now people will still be waiting for the second coming of Christ. The percentage of people who still believe will be considerably smaller and the rest of us will find more rational reasons to behave like human beings should. It is real simple. Treat others like you want to be treated. It's a very pleasant way to live. It really is.
Second, hundreds of people, including those who despised Christ, saw him, alive, after his crucifixion. The disciples gave their lives to a lie that gained them absolutely nothing? I doubt that.
Quote from: BucHarbour on April 09, 2007, 07:36:30 PMSecond, hundreds of people, including those who despised Christ, saw him, alive, after his crucifixion. The disciples gave their lives to a lie that gained them absolutely nothing? I doubt that.What you meant to say was, "Hundreds of stories and accounts that were written years (and sometimes decades) after the death of Jesus claimed that they saw Jesus alive after his crucifixion."How many of those stories are first hand accounts? I still need to read that link you provided. I will.BucHarbour, what is your opinion of the hundreds of people who have come forward and claimedthat they were taken aboard a craft by a non-human?I am very curious about abduction stories but IMO, there isn't enough evidence to prove theirstories. But some of those accounts are written/shared on the same day or day after theevent when the memory of the person is clear. And psychiatrists who examine some of them say that these people are suffering from PTSD and have obviously experiencedsomething.
1. Ok Dal, time to take the gloves off and start pounding away at your information, starting with the transitionals you mention, all of which are avian, supposedly derived from Theropods.Here is an article from Science Mag 2. Then, of course, you start looking for a philosophic argument that could, in reality be explained by any number of reasons. Just because some atolls didn't have more advanced life...who cares? Big whoopdeedoo! Could be for any reason. Who says God had to populate those islands? And why would he have to, which is what you seem to suggest?3. Further, you clearly don't grasp message theory. I don't know why you do, but the bible stated God left messages in all of His creations. With me so far? Now if that is so, how do you send that message? I mean, really, while real Unguided Macro Evolution won't result in "perfect" animals, you'd think it would take care of some of the dead wood on them, yet these curiosities remain. 4. I mean, how did we just end up with domesticated species which are so different than the non-domesticated animals that are similar (wolves vs. dogs for example)? How did domesticated plants just pop up all of a sudden? What was the evolutionary reason behind that? Oh, and by the way, I know of the Discovery Institute and it's writings, but I haven't been to their site in about a year and a half, and I can find tons of research material completely separate from them, as well as material separate from creationists and ID'ers. Many of the most choice quotes about the huge problems in Macro Evolution come straight from some of Evolutions best scientists. Ironic, isn't it?
This is gloves off?1. Science article from 1997 mentions that the author is cited in:http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/279/5358/1915partial skeleton of a primitive bird, Rahona ostromi, gen. et sp. nov., has been discovered from the Late Cretaceous of Madagascar. This specimen, although exhibiting avian features such as a reversed hallux and ulnar papillae, retains characteristics that indicate a theropod ancestry, including a pubic foot and hyposphene-hypantra vertebral articulations. Rahona has a robust, hyperextendible second digit on the hind foot that terminates in a sicklelike claw, a unique characteristic of the theropod groups Troodontidae and Dromaeosauridae. A phylogenetic analysis places Rahona with Archaeopteryx, making Rahona one of the most primitive birds yet discovered.http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/40/4/486Recent fossil finds of Late Cretaceous feathered dinosaurs in China have demonstrated that feathers appear to have originated in taxa that retained a significant number of primitive nonavian features. Current evidence strongly suggests that birds are theropod dinosaurs, and that the most primitive known feathers are found on non-flying animals. http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/96/9/4740Article deals with the 1-2-3 shift in theropods to the 2-3-4 of avians.Are all later articles that confirm the evolutionary pathway. Gotta keep up on what is happening in the field. Frankly the fact that the transitions aren't the same as theropods nor avians isn't a problem for evolution, it shows the change in progress.2. You think biogeogpraphy is a philosophical argument? really? Interesting. Once more all you've got is "god didn't have to" and yet god did have to everywhere else. Very, very strange. My theory explains it, yours makes excuses.3. I get message theory, I think the message is "We're desperate for an argument". Evolution doesn't need to clean up anything. You continue to prove you don't get it. Any trait that doesn't affect your ability to survive (vestigal traits) and reproduce is meaningless in evolutionary terms. Imperfect features (eyes) are also acceptable in evolutionary terms since they don't have to be perfect, just marginally better than what came before or else marginally better suited for their environment. You still can't explain why god's message is built around these useless and flawed traits or why he built man in his image and his perfection has an enlarged prostrate and a blind spot at the optic nerve but he chose to gift the octopus without such a flaw. Maybe the octopus was built in his image.4. Domestication isn't even really an issue. In wild wheat the seeds fall off automatically. this sucks for making bread since your seeds are all over. Some plants have a mutuation where the seeds don't fall off. The latter trait is obviously more desirable for cultivation so when people are harvesting they use the non-dispersing seeds as the basis for the next generation. Human selection combined with a natural mutation to create a domesticated version of the crop. DNA makes it easy to tie wild wheat to domestic wheat and even to locate domestication in the Near EastAs for dogs, Dmitri Belyaev (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitri_Belyaev) did a nifty experiment with foxes where he bred foxes that liked humans, barked, licked their humans and had flopy ears. All traits of domestic dogs that vary from wild animals. Now, rather humans began breeding programs or, more likely, some animals have less fear of humans and so, for example, fed at human garbage piles and became part of human society. Those individuals as they bred would also reproduce the Belyaev experiment. Cats are much the same story as wild cats moved into grain silos to hunt the rodents that followed grain there. While rodents were a pest cats were a welcome invaders and the selection for tolerance of humans would have continued apace.
I read the information at the link BH. Very similar to what I read in "The Case for Christ."Question: If the Romans felt that Jesus had overcome death, why isn't it written aboutin Roman records?In that article, they end it with...On the basis of all the evidence for Christ's resurrection, and considering the fact that Jesus offers forgiveness of sin and an eternal relationship with God, who would be so foolhardy as to reject Him? Christ is alive! He is living today.I guess I'm a fool. Not a good way to end an attempt at presenting evidence for a resurrection.
As far as the evidence is concerned, the Romans weren't about to acknowledge that Christ arose from the dead.
All the physical evidence is pretty well documented in a number of places, and pretty much undisputed.
The sheer number of eye witness accounts is pretty large, but the physical evidence backing the eyewitness testimony is what does it for me.
The abductions don't really have any physical evidence that can be confirmed and linked to the testimony.
Not too mention that in our technologically advanced civilization, it's easy to drug someone up and fake this stuff and have them utterly convinced.
Not too mention that these are piecemeal accounts, while the observation of Christ was one in which a number of groups of people saw the same thing at the same time. Little harder to dismiss that.
1. Let's start with the "feathered" dinosaurs from Liaoning province. 2. As far as point 2 on your list, you are continuing to argue a point that can fit ID, Creation, Intervention, and Evolution all in one. That's what I keep trying to tell you. 3. As to point 3, as I sit here chuckling, you just proved my point. In evolution traits that are hindrances and serve no useful function should be weeded out by evolution. 4. I clearly over-simplified the domesticated species. Just think about Dolphins as an example of what I am talking about. Dolphins just happen to fight all instincts of survival, on a regular basis, to protect humans from sharks. I'm sure we had some brethren somewhere running around breeding dolphins many centuries ago (doubt that!).