1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    19 Jul '15 12:12
    http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150716/srep11775/pdf/srep11775.pdf

    Dinosaur with a lot of feathers. Another notch against creationists.
  2. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    19 Jul '15 15:46
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150716/srep11775/pdf/srep11775.pdf

    Dinosaur with a lot of feathers. Another notch against creationists.
    Just speculation. Nothing but an extinct bird. 😏
  3. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    19 Jul '15 17:18
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Just speculation. Nothing but an extinct bird. 😏
    Ah, a bird the size of a mule. Sure, it could happen. In a pigs eye.
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    22 Jul '15 20:45
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Ah, a bird the size of a mule. Sure, it could happen. In a pigs eye.
    If it has feathers, it must be a bird. Reptiles do not have feathers. That is a fact of science. 😏
  5. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Spirited Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    8572
    22 Jul '15 20:57
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    If it has feathers, it must be a bird. Reptiles do not have feathers. That is a fact of science. 😏
    'Integumentary structures that gave rise to the feathers of birds are seen in the dorsal spines of reptiles and fish. A similar stage in their evolution to the complex coats of birds and mammals can be observed in living reptiles such as iguanas and Gonocephalus agamids. Feather structures are thought to have proceeded from simple hollow filaments through several stages of increasing complexity, ending with the large, deeply rooted, feathers with strong pens (rachis), barbs and barbules that birds display today.'
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    23 Jul '15 05:39
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    'Integumentary structures that gave rise to the feathers of birds are seen in the dorsal spines of reptiles and fish. A similar stage in their evolution to the complex coats of birds and mammals can be observed in living reptiles such as iguanas and Gonocephalus agamids. Feather structures are thought to have proceeded from simple hollow filaments th ...[text shortened]... deeply rooted, feathers with strong pens (rachis), barbs and barbules that birds display today.'
    More speculation by evolutionists. Nothing more. 😏
  7. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    25 Jul '15 06:12
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    If it has feathers, it must be a bird. Reptiles do not have feathers. That is a fact of science. 😏
    Could god create a dinosaur with feathers?
  8. Standard memberlemon lime
    go phish
    oLd ScHoOl
    Joined
    31 May '13
    Moves
    5577
    25 Jul '15 18:25
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150716/srep11775/pdf/srep11775.pdf

    Dinosaur with a lot of feathers. Another notch against creationists.
    Yes, I agree this thread belongs in the Spirituality forum and not in Science...

    So is there anyone other than twhitehead who wants to claim evolution is not used by atheists to discredit religion? This is only a suggestion, but maybe you and the other atheists here could benefit by comparing notes in order to avoid contradicting one another.


    no need to get upset, it's only a suggestion
  9. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    25 Jul '15 18:56
    Originally posted by lemon lime
    Yes, I agree this thread belongs in the Spirituality forum and not in Science...

    So is there anyone other than twhitehead who wants to claim evolution is [b]not
    used by atheists to discredit religion? This is only a suggestion, but maybe you and the other atheists here could benefit by comparing notes in order to avoid contradicting one another.


    no need to get upset, it's only a suggestion[/b]
    Evolution does not discredit religion, just the creation story. I don't know if you knew, but the biblical creation story is lifted from an ancient Egyptian 6 day creation tale, but cut and pasted and edited for Jewish culture. Biblical creation is plagiarized from Egypt.

    Also, it is not in the bible ANYWHERE where it says Earth is only 6000 years old like young Earth creationists try to claim.

    Those numbers simply come from the sum of all the George Begat Suzie who begat Roger who begat Zulu, who begat Ab who begat, etc,etc., etc.

    They just assume all those begats are totally 100% accurate. tell me of ANY ancient document 100% accurate. So many assumptions to come up with that 6000 year figure, but that doesn't matter. Some dude did those 'calculations' and now it is 'proven' the Earth is 6000 years old.

    Which is about as close to BS as anything will ever come.
  10. Standard memberlemon lime
    go phish
    oLd ScHoOl
    Joined
    31 May '13
    Moves
    5577
    25 Jul '15 20:42
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Evolution does not discredit religion, just the creation story. I don't know if you knew, but the biblical creation story is lifted from an ancient Egyptian 6 day creation tale, but cut and pasted and edited for Jewish culture. Biblical creation is plagiarized from Egypt.

    Also, it is not in the bible ANYWHERE where it says Earth is only 6000 years old l ...[text shortened]... oven' the Earth is 6000 years old.

    Which is about as close to BS as anything will ever come.
    Am I supposed to believe your attempt at discrediting the creation story is not part of an overall effort to discredit Christianity and a belief in God?

    It's difficult to dispute YEC from a Biblical perspective when acts of creation are immediately followed by, "And there was evening and there was morning, the first day"... "second day", "third day", "fourth day", etc. And what proof do you have to show that the Biblical story of creation was plagiarized from Egypt? Egypt wasn't the first or only culture to have a similar creation story. And there have also been unrelated cultures (at various times and places) that had stories of a world wide flood...

    coincidence?
  11. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    25 Jul '15 20:52
    Originally posted by lemon lime
    Egypt wasn't the first or only culture to have a similar creation story. And there have also been unrelated cultures (at various times and places) that had stories of a world wide flood...

    coincidence?
    Not a coincidence.

    Those ancient civilisations grew up on flood plains that flooded each year.
    Floods were a known phenomenon. (And unexplained)
    Not unexpected that floods would be attributed to a god
    and that an angry god may deliver a bigger than usual flood one day.
  12. Standard memberSoothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    Planet Rain
    Joined
    04 Mar '04
    Moves
    2437
    25 Jul '15 20:591 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150716/srep11775/pdf/srep11775.pdf

    Dinosaur with a lot of feathers. Another notch against creationists.
    As great as this is, posting it here is an open invitation for god botherers to come and fling bible scat around in the science forum.
  13. Standard memberlemon lime
    go phish
    oLd ScHoOl
    Joined
    31 May '13
    Moves
    5577
    25 Jul '15 21:05
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    Not a coincidence.

    Those ancient civilisations grew up on flood plains that flooded each year.
    Floods were a known phenomenon. (And unexplained)
    Not unexpected that floods would be attributed to a god
    and that an angry god may deliver a bigger than usual flood one day.
    Oh, good grief... do you really think people back then were so stupid they couldn't tell the difference between a flood plain and the entire world?


    Welcome to the Spirituality Forum 😞
  14. Standard memberlemon lime
    go phish
    oLd ScHoOl
    Joined
    31 May '13
    Moves
    5577
    25 Jul '15 21:08
    Originally posted by Soothfast
    As great as this is, posting it here is an open invitation for god botherers to come and fling bible scat around in the science forum.
    No kidding, and you would think the Science guys might be smart enough to have figured this out by now... but apparently not.
  15. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    25 Jul '15 21:081 edit
    Originally posted by lemon lime
    Oh, good grief... do you really think people back then were so stupid they couldn't tell the difference between a flood plain and the entire world?


    Welcome to the Spirituality Forum 😞
    Ah, you mean they had access to God's GPS and knew all about Australia, Antarctica, North and South America, Siberia and all that back in the so-called flood days?

    Are you one of those taking the flood story literally?
Back to Top