Evolution debate vote

[The Dude]

FossilBob wrote:

<quoted text>
Are you SURE about the remaining "9"?

Nope.(shrug)

[The Dude]

Dogen wrote:

<quoted text>
I suggest you not use those terms in that particular order unless you want to be laughed at.

The order doesn't matter, it's still bollox. The kitten-hating sockpuppet was merely quoting himself.

[Dogen]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
The order doesn't matter, it's still bollox. The kitten-hating sockpuppet was merely quoting himself.

Oh, I know. Just a friendly reminder to him.

[tradro]

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

[Kong_]

tradro wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =rVeBn7Fw9Tc
watch the debate

Very interesting (not).

Did you do that yourself in your Moms basement?

[Glenn]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
Go jump off a cliff and go join all the cats I've had to sacrifice because of your foolishness!!!

Tell us what you mean by this.

[The Dude]

http://www.topix.net/forum/news/evolution/TMS...

[Tyler]

Dogen wrote:

<quoted text>
Look in a mirror and say that with a straight face.

sarcasm is not a substitute for your lack of evidence for evolution

[The Dude]

Tyler wrote:

<quoted text>
sarcasm is not a substitute for your lack of evidence for evolution

Lying and preaching is not a substitute for your lack of evidence against evolution.

[Darwins Stepchild]

Tyler wrote:

<quoted text>
sarcasm is not a substitute for your lack of evidence for evolution

A couple of sites that have a layman's presentation of evolution.

(Warning: Both of these sites are HUGE.)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

NO more BS about evidence not having been provided, OK.

BTW...you should check out the critiques of Hovind's claims.(I think I have already provided this site to you, but doing it again doesn't hurt.) Use the "find" function on your browser to locate the particular argument, then look at what science REALLY has to say about the topic.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

[Dogen]

Tyler wrote:

<quoted text>
sarcasm is not a substitute for your lack of evidence for evolution

Tis not I, nor the science of evolution, that is plagued by lack of evidence.

[Tyler]

Darwins Stepchild wrote:

<quoted text>
A couple of sites that have a layman's presentation of evolution.
(Warning: Both of these sites are HUGE.)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
NO more BS about evidence not having been provided, OK.
BTW...you should check out the critiques of Hovind's claims.(I think I have already provided this site to you, but doing it again doesn't hurt.) Use the "find" function on your browser to locate the particular argument, then look at what science REALLY has to say about the topic.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Thank you.

[Darwins Stepchild]

Tyler wrote:

<quoted text>
Thank you.

You are welcome.

[Tyler]

http://www.icr.org/index.php...

[The Dude]

Tyler wrote:

http://www.icr.org/index.php...

Henry Morris, Ph.D, engineer. He thinks the craters on the moon were caused in a battle between Satan and the Archangel Gabriel. Morris wrote that the descendants of Ham "possibly" include "all of the earth's 'colored' races". Morris wrote that they have been "[p]ossessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters" compared to the "Japhethites" who have a comparatively "intellectual and philosophical acumen".

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/racism.html

No New Species.

No Known Mechanism of Evolution.

No Fossil Evidence.

No Order in the Fossils.

No Evidence That Evolution Is Possible.

No Evidence From Similarities.

All those claims by Morris - false. It also seems that ICR isn't capable of objectivity, since it rests on some baseless assumptions:

http://www.icr.org/tenets/

[Lil Ticked]

Darwins Stepchild wrote:

<quoted text>
A couple of sites that have a layman's presentation of evolution.
(Warning: Both of these sites are HUGE.)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
NO more BS about evidence not having been provided, OK.
BTW...you should check out the critiques of Hovind's claims.(I think I have already provided this site to you, but doing it again doesn't hurt.) Use the "find" function on your browser to locate the particular argument, then look at what science REALLY has to say about the topic.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Not PBS! PBS is a liberal atheistic organization dependent on public funding and tax money to brain wash children away from conservative fundamentals. They promote their atheistic views by debunking the bible and pushing the evolutionist agenda.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/bible/program.ht...
(word girl is of the devil)
;D
(insert maniacal laughter)
At least that is something that I saw mentioned in the christian forums......

[Darwins Stepchild]

Tyler wrote:

http://www.icr.org/index.php...

Ooooo...IRC.

Knowing a fair amount about science, I am not impressed.

[The Dude]

Darwins Stepchild wrote:

<quoted text>
Ooooo...IRC.
Knowing a fair amount about science, I am not impressed.

Apparently no-one's made them do this yet:

http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/strollerderby/...

[FossilBob]

Tyler wrote:

http://www.icr.org/index.php...

Did you think any of that page of "quote mines" was true?

There are certainly many transitional fossils!(in truth...ALL fossils are remains of transitional creatures).

When we start a rock layers of the Paleozoic Era, we find a fauna of "sea shells" (really many different groups of animals), but no vertebrates. within a few 10's of millions of years, the first vertebrates (very primitive fish) are found.

Over the next 150 million years (roughly) some fish groups look more and more like amphibians...and then amphibians are present in the fossil record. Some "critters" are virtually half Fish\half Amphibian.

Over the next 50 million years, some amphibian groups look more and more like reptiles... and then reptiles are found in the fossil record.

And then....over the next 150 million years, a group of reptiles looks more and more like mammals (one group is called "mammal-like reptiles). After this time, Mammals are found in the fossil record.

By that time, Dinosaurs are found in the rocks; after 100 million years, there are Dinosaur groups that look so much like Birds (bird-like features like hollow bones, "wish bones", feathers) that one can hardly tell the Dinosaurs apart from the Birds! Birds have been present since then...

Then, of course, since about 70 million years ago, Mammals have spread across the globe and "took over". We have many fossils showing small, toed, horses; whales with 4 legs; Human-like primates and primate-like Hominids...

The geologic\fossil record is exactly what we would EXPECT to see as a record of evolutionary change; it's as if we took pictures at random places every few million years. We would get a sense of the massive changes, but it wouldn't be like a movie sequence!

Sure sounds like evolution...

[LowellGuy]

FossilBob wrote:

<quoted text>
Did you think any of that page of "quote mines" was true?
There are certainly many transitional fossils!(in truth...ALL fossils are remains of transitional creatures).
When we start a rock layers of the Paleozoic Era, we find a fauna of "sea shells" (really many different groups of animals), but no vertebrates. within a few 10's of millions of years, the first vertebrates (very primitive fish) are found.
Over the next 150 million years (roughly) some fish groups look more and more like amphibians...and then amphibians are present in the fossil record. Some "critters" are virtually half Fish\half Amphibian.
Over the next 50 million years, some amphibian groups look more and more like reptiles... and then reptiles are found in the fossil record.
And then....over the next 150 million years, a group of reptiles looks more and more like mammals (one group is called "mammal-like reptiles). After this time, Mammals are found in the fossil record.
By that time, Dinosaurs are found in the rocks; after 100 million years, there are Dinosaur groups that look so much like Birds (bird-like features like hollow bones, "wish bones", feathers) that one can hardly tell the Dinosaurs apart from the Birds! Birds have been present since then...
Then, of course, since about 70 million years ago, Mammals have spread across the globe and "took over". We have many fossils showing small, toed, horses; whales with 4 legs; Human-like primates and primate-like Hominids...
The geologic\fossil record is exactly what we would EXPECT to see as a record of evolutionary change; it's as if we took pictures at random places every few million years. We would get a sense of the massive changes, but it wouldn't be like a movie sequence!
Sure sounds like evolution...

But, Bob, you didn't SEE all those changes actually happen with your own eyes! Therefore, there's no evidence that any changes ever occurred. Why don't we see snails turning into cheetahs today? Why were snails able to turn into cheetahs millions of years ago but not now?