Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor

Posted in the Evolution Debate Forum

Comments (Page 3)

Showing posts 41 - 60 of90
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Cod

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Oct 1, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon Sub. You have to have an explanation.
These guys are people that pretend to be religious scholars but never read the religious texts.
These Discovery channel watchers that defend evolution on Topix are funny like that. Not haha funny, more like herp a derp funny.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Oct 1, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon Sub. You have to have an explanation.
That is old news. By "turning on" genes that have been "turned off" old traits can be reawakened. Since chickens are domesticated and plentiful they are used in this sort of genetic experimentation. They have also turned back on the genes for teeth, scales, and early feathers.

Why would chickens have these old genes if they were not the descendants of dinosaurs?
Cod

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Oct 1, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
That is old news. By "turning on" genes that have been "turned off" old traits can be reawakened. Since chickens are domesticated and plentiful they are used in this sort of genetic experimentation. They have also turned back on the genes for teeth, scales, and early feathers.
Why would chickens have these old genes if they were not the descendants of dinosaurs?
It's a supposition that they are "old" genes.
/pwned again Capt Latte. lol

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Oct 1, 2013
 
Cod wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a supposition that they are "old" genes.
/pwned again Capt Latte. lol
No, idiot, it is a reasonable deduction.

What a fool, he does not know the difference between a supposition and a deduction.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Oct 1, 2013
 
Cod, you need to understand the concept of scientific evidence. The short definition is that scientific evidence are facts, data, observations, etc that either supports or opposes a scientific theory or hypothesis. This definition was derived so that idiots could not deny obvious evidence.

For example it is an undeniable fact that every fossil found so far fit the evolutionary paradigm. That means that all fossils are evidence for evolution, by definition. If you found a fossil that did not fit the paradigm it would be evidence against evolution.

There is no scientific evidence for creationism simply because the creatards will not come up with even a testable hypothesis, much less a theory.
Cod

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Oct 1, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
Cod, you need to understand the concept of scientific evidence. The short definition is that scientific evidence are facts, data, observations, etc that either supports or opposes a scientific theory or hypothesis. This definition was derived so that idiots could not deny obvious evidence.
For example it is an undeniable fact that every fossil found so far fit the evolutionary paradigm. That means that all fossils are evidence for evolution, by definition. If you found a fossil that did not fit the paradigm it would be evidence against evolution.
There is no scientific evidence for creationism simply because the creatards will not come up with even a testable hypothesis, much less a theory.
Absolute drivel. Do you also wave your hands when typing double talk like that?

I wouldn't doubt that you are either a cut and paste shill or a bot. Not a very good one either.

Someone sent me this. You remind me of him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Oct 1, 2013
 
Cod wrote:
<quoted text>
So when are you going to evolve?
No more or less stupid than your other comments. At least you've got consistency going for you. Though I'd recommend an education as being more effective.

BTW, doofus (that means By The Way), individuals do not evolve. Populations do.

You're batting 000. Well done.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Oct 1, 2013
 
Cod wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolute drivel. Do you also wave your hands when typing double talk like that?
I wouldn't doubt that you are either a cut and paste shill or a bot. Not a very good one either.
Someone sent me this. You remind me of him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Blah, blah, blah. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

And what do you remind me of? Hmmm...

I got it!
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/f/e/b/9/1211761...

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Oct 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Cod wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolute drivel. Do you also wave your hands when typing double talk like that?
I wouldn't doubt that you are either a cut and paste shill or a bot. Not a very good one either.
Someone sent me this. You remind me of him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
I guess you shouldn't talk over his head like that, SZ. It seems to make him cranky.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Oct 1, 2013
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess you shouldn't talk over his head like that, SZ. It seems to make him cranky.
He is just another creatard idiot who has nothing and knows it.

Nothing ticks a creatard off more than the fact that all they have is a whole lot of nothing and the other side has all of the evidence.
Cod

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Oct 1, 2013
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess you shouldn't talk over his head like that, SZ. It seems to make him cranky.
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
He is just another creatard idiot who has nothing and knows it.
Nothing ticks a creatard off more than the fact that all they have is a whole lot of nothing and the other side has all of the evidence.
Hahaha, two unemployed ding a lings making erroneous assumptions about everything hahahahaha. I laugh at you. LOLz

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Oct 1, 2013
 
Cod wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Hahaha, two unemployed ding a lings making erroneous assumptions about everything hahahahaha. I laugh at you. LOLz
Cod is definitely employed. He pushes a broom for 8 hours a day after he gets his morning lattes.

He feels terribly threatened by even Starbucks employees since they all are clearly much more educated than he is.

Cod, it you wish to remain an idiot that is your business. If you want to learn something try to ask intelligent questions.
Cod

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Oct 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Cod is definitely employed. He pushes a broom for 8 hours a day after he gets his morning lattes.
He feels terribly threatened by even Starbucks employees since they all are clearly much more educated than he is.
Cod, it you wish to remain an idiot that is your business. If you want to learn something try to ask intelligent questions.
why would I ask a question of a lunatic that believes in the hoax known as AGW? If I want scientific fairy tales and propaganda I'll watch the discovery channel, nat geo or the weather channel.
'
I bet your so feminized that you believe in aquatic ape theory and believe that multi regional hypothesis is code for racism.
.
Like I said you two are ding a lings and wrong in all your assumptions.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
Oct 1, 2013
 
Cod wrote:
<quoted text>
why would I ask a question of a lunatic that believes in the hoax known as AGW? If I want scientific fairy tales and propaganda I'll watch the discovery channel, nat geo or the weather channel.
'
I bet your so feminized that you believe in aquatic ape theory and believe that multi regional hypothesis is code for racism.
.
Like I said you two are ding a lings and wrong in all your assumptions.
Since AGW is strongly supported by science I have come to accept it.

I know, if you do not like science you don't accept it. Fine, why don't you take a strong dislike to gravity and try walking off of a cliff.

So far you have not presented one iota of evidence supporting your idiocy. At best you have quoted a few uneducated bigots. AGW is not a problem today, it will be one in the future. You obviously have no children, or if you do you don't love them. That is even sadder.
Cod

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
Oct 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Since AGW is strongly supported by science I have come to accept it.
I know, if you do not like science you don't accept it. Fine, why don't you take a strong dislike to gravity and try walking off of a cliff.
So far you have not presented one iota of evidence supporting your idiocy. At best you have quoted a few uneducated bigots. AGW is not a problem today, it will be one in the future. You obviously have no children, or if you do you don't love them. That is even sadder.
What a clown. You want you want today's children to be culled from billions to a few hundred million feudal slaves of the psychopathic elites. BTW, no science supports AGW, you are obviously a bot or a shill and a scumbag for only a scumbag could be a shill.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
Oct 2, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh so this is false?
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/__7l69n0HOFA/TUeEt-v...
Yes. That is false.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
Oct 2, 2013
 
Cod wrote:
Hahaha, two unemployed ding a lings making erroneous assumptions about everything
Unemployed? I better let my school district know. They keep giving me paychecks.
Cod wrote:
hahahahaha. I laugh at you. LOLz
Nobody cares.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
Oct 2, 2013
 
Cod wrote:
<quoted text>
why would I ask a question of a lunatic that believes in the hoax known as AGW? If I want scientific fairy tales and propaganda I'll watch the discovery channel, nat geo or the weather channel.
'
I bet your so feminized that you believe in aquatic ape theory and believe that multi regional hypothesis is code for racism.
.
Like I said you two are ding a lings and wrong in all your assumptions.
What a brilliant scientific resp...

Wait a sec!

Never mind. It's just more blah, blah bullshit from codpiece.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#60
Oct 2, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
So this must be false too. Science rewinds evolution by tweaking chickens to having alligator snouts. Because there where some pretty big effin crocs back in the dino days.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/evolution/...
The picture is misleading, but the science seems valid. Chickens have the genes from their ancestors, but it is turned off. We have also made chickens grow teeth by stimulating the bone with reptile tissue (the tissue growing the teeth was chicken tissue, though). In this case, the genes for a 'snout' were turned back on.

“I'm Your Huckleberry ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

That's Just My Game

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61
Oct 2, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. That is false.
Poly I was just giving Sub a hard time. I do however find that picture amusing lol

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 41 - 60 of90
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••