Coil Posted August 12 #176 Share Posted August 12 On 8/11/2024 at 1:52 AM, Alter2Ego said: Coil: When are you going to present the rest of us with credible evidence that says any of that occurred? The ten avatars represent the stages of evolution from fish to man: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashavatara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rlyeh Posted August 12 #177 Share Posted August 12 (edited) 9 hours ago, Alter2Ego said: by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D. The same idiot who claimed the craters on the moon was the result of the war between Heaven and Satan. Very scientific. Edited August 12 by Rlyeh 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rlyeh Posted August 12 #178 Share Posted August 12 9 hours ago, Alter2Ego said: cormac: Pro-evolution scientists had to agree with the Bible's account that all creatures are created "according to their kinds." Please show me one scientist who agrees bats are birds. 2 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted August 12 #179 Share Posted August 12 4 minutes ago, Rlyeh said: Please show me one scientist who agrees bats are birds. "They fly!.....and eat bugs! They're birds! 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eight bits Posted August 12 #180 Share Posted August 12 Show a little respect! The OP is a classic: from May 2014 https://debatepolitics.com/threads/genesis-creation-vs-darwins-macroevolution-myth.194849/ February 2015 https://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/threads/genesis-account-v-macroevolution-myth.274776/#post-1413344 Google also thinks it found a version on a bodybuilder forum, but the site had apparently changed its forum design and so I couldn't find it. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alter2Ego Posted September 1 Author #181 Share Posted September 1 (edited) On 8/11/2024 at 11:17 PM, psyche101 said: All of them, humans, horses, rhinos, whales, seacows, mammals, birds, tetrapods etc. How are they credible? Do you not understand that if they say that, it's not true and therefore they are not credible? .... Please observe forum rules and leave links. I realise you are not doing so because your sources are rubbish, but rules is rules. Post them or I will start reporting your non compliance. psyche101 I've posted links in many of my quotations. Whenever I didn't have the links, I gave the title of the book or article where I quoted from, including page number. So I cannot be accused of plagiarism. Your problem is that you can't cope with the fact that the sources I quoted (most of whom were pro-evolution paleontologists) admitted that the fossils record doesn't support macroevolution because there are no transitional fossils showing how one creature "evolved" into something entirely different. BTW: You can start reporting my supposed non-compliance regarding links right now. For threatening me like you did above--indicating that you've chosen to fight dirty by getting the moderators involved--our conversation is permanently over. Alter2Ego Edited September 1 by Alter2Ego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted September 1 #182 Share Posted September 1 2 hours ago, Alter2Ego said: psyche101 I've posted links in many of my quotations. Whenever I didn't have the links, I gave the title of the book or article where I quoted from, including page number. So I cannot be accused of plagiarism. Your problem is that you can't cope with the fact that the sources I quoted (most of whom were pro-evolution paleontologists) admitted that the fossils record doesn't support macroevolution because there are no transitional fossils showing how one creature "evolved" into something entirely different. BTW: You can start reporting my supposed non-compliance regarding links right now. For threatening me like you did above--indicating that you've chosen to fight dirty by getting the moderators involved--our conversation is permanently over. Alter2Ego If you are being honest and quoting accessible links, where do we find Mayrs comments on allopatric speciation? Who said: It is now actually misleading to refer to evolution as a theory, considering the massive evidence that has been discovered over the last 140 years documenting its existence. Evolution is no longer a theory, it is simply a fact It's all in the links you quoted that you didn't think could be called out. Why did you omit those important aspects? 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alter2Ego Posted September 3 Author #183 Share Posted September 3 On 8/11/2024 at 9:10 PM, Sir Wearer of Hats said: that, and the fact that there was a good chance that any idea that diverged from Biblical teaching risked visits from Papal Inquisitors. Sir Wearer of Hats: The pro-evolution paleontologists that I quoted, who were forced to admit that the fossil record doesn't support macroevolution, were from the 1980's. The Papal Inquisitors died centuries prior. Alter2Ego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted September 3 #184 Share Posted September 3 6 hours ago, Alter2Ego said: Sir Wearer of Hats: The pro-evolution paleontologists that I quoted, who were forced to admit that the fossil record doesn't support macroevolution, were from the 1980's. The Papal Inquisitors died centuries prior. Alter2Ego Nah mate, they just changed its name to the doctrine of the faithful … which was run at the turn of the century by one Cardinal Ratzinger. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alter2Ego Posted September 21 Author #185 Share Posted September 21 On 9/3/2024 at 12:26 AM, Sir Wearer of Hats said: Nah mate, they just changed its name to the doctrine of the faithful … which was run at the turn of the century by one Cardinal Ratzinger. You are ignoring the fact that the paleontologists that I quoted were from the 1970s and 1980s, not from the turn of the century (the early 1900s). Alter2Ego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eight bits Posted September 22 #186 Share Posted September 22 (edited) 1 hour ago, Alter2Ego said: You are ignoring the fact that the paleontologists that I quoted were from the 1970s and 1980s, not from the turn of the century (the early 1900s). There's been another turn of the century since 1900. During the most recent one (the early 2000's), Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (a.k.a. the Roman Inquisition). In 2005, Ratzinger left that job when he was elected Pope and took the the name Benedict the16th. How can a religious expert like yourself not already know that? Edited September 22 by eight bits 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted September 22 #187 Share Posted September 22 On 9/2/2024 at 8:31 PM, Alter2Ego said: Sir Wearer of Hats: The pro-evolution paleontologists that I quoted, who were forced to admit that the fossil record doesn't support macroevolution, were from the 1980's. Alter2Ego Leaps and bounds in genetic research has been made sine the 1980s. The Lenski experiment then showed it. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ell Posted September 22 #188 Share Posted September 22 On 9/1/2024 at 4:29 AM, Alter2Ego said: So I cannot be accused of plagiarism. If you do not quote a source, nobody can check if your quote is truthful or if you are making it up. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted September 22 #189 Share Posted September 22 On 5/3/2013 at 1:10 PM, Alter2Ego said: So for the most part, they make things up as they go. Talk about making things up as you go: Quote the long debunked theory of abiogenesis Harte 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now