Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Not that more proof is needed ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    "Confused" isn't the word that I'd use. Some know the score but wish to retain their jobs and avoid the label of "pseudo-scientist". Others know the truth but are ideologically bound to the falsehoods that The Establishment promotes. Others serve their Master - Satan - and are all about spreading lies so as to lead people into Hell. Others are simply ignorant - they don't know anything other than what they've been indoctrinated to believe. Others are intellectually lazy and/or dishonest and so do not pursue the truth (with hard work) or do not accept the truth (with integrity). Others do not wish to submit to the truth because it would cramp their chosen/preferred lifestyle.

    In short, there isn't a single, one-size-fits-all reason. Try harder, Roland.

    Jorge
    Jorge, do you understand what "argument by assertion" is?

    At the moment you haven't presented me with any thing to show that they are confused. All I have from you is nothing more than words like these - "They are confused because I said so, and because they are lazy and controlled by Satan".

    Well we all know you said so, but you've done nothing to demonstrate that they are lazy and you have done nothing to show that Satan controls them. Again, we have to take your word for the truth of those assertions.


    Perhaps you still don't understand, so let me give you an analogy, just to help you understand. What you have done so far is no better than me asserting:-

    Jorge, you do not have a degree in maths. And this is so because you are lazy and you rant.

    Can you see what I have done here?
    Last edited by rwatts; 02-13-2015, 06:41 PM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Jorge View Post
      Little by little, even the hundreds of millions of years that the Evo-Faithful have awarded themselves are proving to be insufficient to explain the observations. Here's the latest evidence testifying to that fact:

      "See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0212141447.htm - "We consistently find with every new fossil that the earliest mammals were just as diverse in both feeding and locomotor adaptations as modern mammals," said Zhe-Xi Luo, PhD, professor of organismal biology and anatomy at the University of Chicago and an author on both papers. "The groundwork for mammalian success today appears to have been laid long ago."
      .
      .
      So, if the earliest mammals were just as diverse as modern mammals, then pray tell, Evo-Guru, when-oh-when did their Evolution take place? Perhaps it was while no one was looking? Yeah, and that's why we have no evidence - because no one was looking.

      One can only wonder at what howlers the Evo-Faithful will conjure up to save their day.

      Jorge
      Did you miss this part, Genius?

      K54

      P.S. The diversity being similar does not mean no evolution has taken place.

      Unless you can show that modern mammal species are the same as fossil mammal species, then you're just whistlin' Dixie.

      P.P.S. If ancient fossil mammals ARE different than modern mammals, then what pray tell be the YEC explanation?
      Last edited by klaus54; 02-14-2015, 01:22 PM. Reason: P.S.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Jorge View Post
        "Confused" isn't the word that I'd use. Some know the score but wish to retain their jobs and avoid the label of "pseudo-scientist". Others know the truth but are ideologically bound to the falsehoods that The Establishment promotes. Others serve their Master - Satan - and are all about spreading lies so as to lead people into Hell. Others are simply ignorant - they don't know anything other than what they've been indoctrinated to believe. Others are intellectually lazy and/or dishonest and so do not pursue the truth (with hard work) or do not accept the truth (with integrity). Others do not wish to submit to the truth because it would cramp their chosen/preferred lifestyle.

        In short, there isn't a single, one-size-fits-all reason. Try harder, Roland.

        Jorge
        Looking in the mirror again?

        K54

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by rwatts View Post
          Jorge, do you understand what "argument by assertion" is?

          At the moment you haven't presented me with any thing to show that they are confused. All I have from you is nothing more than words like these - "They are confused because I said so, and because they are lazy and controlled by Satan".

          Well we all know you said so, but you've done nothing to demonstrate that they are lazy and you have done nothing to show that Satan controls them. Again, we have to take your word for the truth of those assertions.


          Perhaps you still don't understand, so let me give you an analogy, just to help you understand. What you have done so far is no better than me asserting:-

          Jorge, you do not have a degree in maths. And this is so because you are lazy and you rant.

          Can you see what I have done here?
          I had written:

          "Confused" isn't the word that I'd use. Some know the score but wish to retain their jobs and avoid the label of "pseudo-scientist". Others know the truth but are ideologically bound to the falsehoods that The Establishment promotes. Others serve their Master - Satan - and are all about spreading lies so as to lead people into Hell. Others are simply ignorant - they don't know anything other than what they've been indoctrinated to believe. Others are intellectually lazy and/or dishonest and so do not pursue the truth (with hard work) or do not accept the truth (with integrity). Others do not wish to submit to the truth because it would cramp their chosen/preferred lifestyle.

          In short, there isn't a single, one-size-fits-all reason. Try harder, Roland."



          Your response was the post shown above. I won't waste any more time other than to tell you that I can't be blamed for your ignorance, Roland. Numerous books have been written supporting the things that I listed above. For example, Slaughter of the Dissidents, by Bergman, contains over 300 fully documented cases where people lost their jobs and/or were labeled "pseudoscientists".

          Other evidence is found in life experiences. You are no spring chicken yourself and so you should know by now of the human nature-tendency for laziness and dishonesty. If you haven't learned this yet then you're hopelessly lost in life. The "ignorance" factor should be obvious and accepted, even by you - or don't you know that the majority of people are wholly ignorant of these matters? This is especially true in a society where the brainwashing indoctrination is relentless 24-7-365 via every channel available.

          But, of course, folk like you will deny, deny and deny some more because you CANNOT and WILL NOT EVER concede the obvious facts. The day you did that, you'd have to abandon your beliefs and you aren't willing to do that.

          So, go ahead with your "argument by assertion" schtick. It's really all you have.
          Think and say as you please, Roland. I'm out'a here.

          Jorge
          Last edited by Jorge; 02-14-2015, 04:37 PM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Jor,

            Is the assemblage of fossil mammals different than the set of modern mammalia?

            1) Can you show they are same?

            2) If they are NOT, what's the YEC explanation of this evolution (in the true sense of the word, not the Jorgian bastardization.)

            K54
            Last edited by klaus54; 02-14-2015, 04:41 PM. Reason: NOT!!!

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Jorge View Post
              I had written:

              "Confused" isn't the word that I'd use. Some know the score but wish to retain their jobs and avoid the label of "pseudo-scientist". Others know the truth but are ideologically bound to the falsehoods that The Establishment promotes. Others serve their Master - Satan - and are all about spreading lies so as to lead people into Hell. Others are simply ignorant - they don't know anything other than what they've been indoctrinated to believe. Others are intellectually lazy and/or dishonest and so do not pursue the truth (with hard work) or do not accept the truth (with integrity). Others do not wish to submit to the truth because it would cramp their chosen/preferred lifestyle.

              In short, there isn't a single, one-size-fits-all reason. Try harder, Roland."



              Your response was the post shown above. I won't waste any more time other than to tell you that I can't be blamed for your ignorance, Roland. Numerous books have been written supporting the things that I listed above. For example, Slaughter of the Dissidents, by Bergman, contains over 300 fully documented cases where people lost their jobs and/or were labeled "pseudoscientists".

              Other evidence is found in life experiences. You are no spring chicken yourself and so you should know by now of the human nature-tendency for laziness and dishonesty. If you haven't learned this yet then you're hopelessly lost in life. The "ignorance" factor should be obvious and accepted, even by you - or don't you know that the majority of people are wholly ignorant of these matters? This is especially true in a society where the brainwashing indoctrination is relentless 24-7-365 via every channel available.

              But, of course, folk like you will deny, deny and deny some more because you CANNOT and WILL NOT EVER concede the obvious facts. The day you did that, you'd have to abandon your beliefs and you aren't willing to do that.

              So, go ahead with your "argument by assertion" schtick. It's really all you have.
              Think and say as you please, Jorge.
              I'm out'a here.

              Jorge
              Ever get weary of staring at yourself in the mirror???

              K54
              Last edited by klaus54; 02-14-2015, 04:47 PM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                I don't tell anyone what to do -- unlike the Prez B. Obama.
                Why am I not surprised...

                Likewise, you don't tell me. Just know that from this point forward I will sidestep you and your posts in the same way as I sidestep cow manure when I'm taking a pleasant stroll at the farm. In the meantime, do continue your militant attack on things that you know nothing about -- you're only making yourself look worse with each post.

                Jorge
                You are such a paragon of intellectualism and Christian sensibility.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                  Little by little, even the hundreds of millions of years that the Evo-Faithful have awarded themselves are proving to be insufficient to explain the observations. Here's the latest evidence testifying to that fact:

                  "See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0212141447.htm - "We consistently find with every new fossil that the earliest mammals were just as diverse in both feeding and locomotor adaptations as modern mammals," said Zhe-Xi Luo, PhD, professor of organismal biology and anatomy at the University of Chicago and an author on both papers. "The groundwork for mammalian success today appears to have been laid long ago."
                  .
                  .
                  So, if the earliest mammals were just as diverse as modern mammals, then pray tell, Evo-Guru, when-oh-when did their Evolution take place? Perhaps it was while no one was looking? Yeah, and that's why we have no evidence - because no one was looking.

                  One can only wonder at what howlers the Evo-Faithful will conjure up to save their day.

                  Jorge
                  Wow - if we use millions of years and that is not enough time to explain the diversity, how on earth are you going to explain the extant diversity from a bottleneck of a single breeding pair at the "Kind" level in only ~4500 years?

                  And you want to claim that WE have problems???

                  Comment

                  Related Threads

                  Collapse

                  Topics Statistics Last Post
                  Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                  48 responses
                  135 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post Sparko
                  by Sparko
                   
                  Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                  16 responses
                  74 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post shunyadragon  
                  Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                  6 responses
                  46 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post shunyadragon  
                  Working...
                  X