1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    28 Feb '13 16:321 edit
    https://www.google.com/search?q=tiktaalik+fish&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=hoUvUd6_POjC0AHmjIDYCA&ved=0CEgQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=677

    How would creationists explain this one? They always say, there has never been a missing link. Well here is the refutation for that stance.

    http://www.earthhistory.org.uk/technical-issues/tiktaalik-roseae
  2. SubscriberProper Knob
    Cornovii
    North of the Tamar
    Joined
    02 Feb '07
    Moves
    51472
    28 Feb '13 17:121 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    https://www.google.com/search?q=tiktaalik+fish&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=hoUvUd6_POjC0AHmjIDYCA&ved=0CEgQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=677

    How would creationists explain this one? They always say, there has never been a missing link. Well here is the refutation for that stance.

    http://www.earthhistory.org.uk/technical-issues/tiktaalik-roseae
    Neil Shubin who led the team which discovered this fossil wrote an interesting book titled 'Your Inner Fish' which is well worth a read. He goes into great detail about the expeditions to find this fossil and how the team went about it.
  3. Joined
    30 Dec '04
    Moves
    59686
    28 Feb '13 18:01
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    https://www.google.com/search?q=tiktaalik+fish&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=hoUvUd6_POjC0AHmjIDYCA&ved=0CEgQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=677

    How would creationists explain this one? They always say, there has never been a missing link. Well here is the refutation for that stance.

    http://www.earthhistory.org.uk/technical-issues/tiktaalik-roseae
    Very interesting article but nothing definative. The title even has a question mark.(?)There are also:
    'Some caution is appropriate'
    'It is also debatable' <---- to show a few...

    Still an interesting article though. When time permits I will look up more about this. Too many big words for me to absorb on a short lunch break.
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    01 Mar '13 09:322 edits
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    https://www.google.com/search?q=tiktaalik+fish&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=hoUvUd6_POjC0AHmjIDYCA&ved=0CEgQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=677

    How would creationists explain this one? They always say, there has never been a missing link. Well here is the refutation for that stance.

    http://www.earthhistory.org.uk/technical-issues/tiktaalik-roseae
    They don't seem to realize that Archaeopteryx has already been proven a fraud.

    YouTube

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=Xhv5NR_cDnA
  5. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    01 Mar '13 19:261 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    https://www.google.com/search?q=tiktaalik+fish&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=hoUvUd6_POjC0AHmjIDYCA&ved=0CEgQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=677

    How would creationists explain this one? They always say, there has never been a missing link. Well here is the refutation for that stance.

    http://www.earthhistory.org.uk/technical-issues/tiktaalik-roseae
    Why DNA Proves Evolution Is False

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=3yNju1_-CMk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=4dWimXdtzWs
  6. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    93543
    01 Mar '13 20:12
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Why DNA Proves Evolution Is False

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=3yNju1_-CMk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=4dWimXdtzWs
    what part of the first video proves evolution is false?
  7. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    02 Mar '13 00:22
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    what part of the first video proves evolution is false?
    So you only have a problem with the first video? Were you able to watch it?
  8. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    02 Mar '13 01:50
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    So you only have a problem with the first video? Were you able to watch it?
    Oh pleeeze, another creationist site just HAPPENED to be interested in science, only JUST HAPPENED to be biased against evolution, citing a fraud from 1864? How about proven frauds from century 21? Don't EVEN call neandertal fraud. Why don't you find real science to refute evolution? I'll tell you why. You CAN"T. You can only come up with creationist site with their oh so predictable line of BS. Show me a 200 million year old fossil of a rabbit or crow, that would be a game changer, otherwise go ply your wares elsewhere. Only a very small minority of people here actually believe the Earth is 6000 years old and growing smaller every year just like flat earthers.

    How a grown man can look at something like the grand canyon or the buttes and think 'its amazing how much can happen in 6000 years' is more than amazing to me, more like leaving me aghast at the pure stupidity of such a stance.
  9. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    02 Mar '13 02:106 edits
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Oh pleeeze, another creationist site just HAPPENED to be interested in science, only JUST HAPPENED to be biased against evolution, citing a fraud from 1864? How about proven frauds from century 21? Don't EVEN call neandertal fraud. Why don't you find real science to refute evolution? I'll tell you why. You CAN"T. You can only come up with creationist site re than amazing to me, more like leaving me aghast at the pure stupidity of such a stance.
    There are no 200 million year old fossils. The fossils we have are very young, perhaps a few thousnd years old, in comparison to that, so you are out of luck. If someone claims to have a 200 million year fossil, don't trust them to run free in your house.

    Now as far as the age of the Grand Canyon, I have already referenced a link to the Mount St. Helena eruption and Spirit Lake flooding in 1982 that left a small canyon like the Grand Canyon in a matter of months. With that in mind it is very easy to envision the Grand Canyon being caused by volcanic eruptions and a worldwide flood.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_Lake_(Washington)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_eruption_of_Mount_St._Helens

    YouTube

    http://www.travel-travel-travel.com/out/archives/23/GEORGIA-S_LTTLE_GRAND_CANYON.htm

    YouTube
  10. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    02 Mar '13 15:55
    A geologist's idea of how the Grand Canyon was formed in a short time:

    YouTube
  11. Joined
    19 Jan '13
    Moves
    2106
    02 Mar '13 16:04
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    A geologist's idea of how the Grand Canyon was formed in a short time:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flrhqjN5BHo
    RJ there is a lot of rubbish on that there internet. I've clicked on a few of your links and they are not convincing me....
  12. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    02 Mar '13 20:49
    Originally posted by e4chris
    RJ there is a lot of rubbish on that there internet. I've clicked on a few of your links and they are not convincing me....
    That is too bad. 😏
  13. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    02 Mar '13 22:03
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    That is too bad. 😏
    You might even start convincing people of problems with evolution if you would find scientific links with reasoned refutations but all you come up with is your careful search for clear creationist biased video's with just words and actors reading Q cards.

    You cannot convince a 3 year old with tactics like that. It is very simple so suss out what the motivation of the speakers are and creationist bias sticks out like a sore thumb.

    Find some independent non-religious biased science and we will be a lot more likely to be swayed.

    However, all you can come up with is your search for creationist sites that shows arguments from the 19th century or objections that have been fully resolved decades ago.
  14. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    02 Mar '13 22:08
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    You might even start convincing people of problems with evolution if you would find scientific links with reasoned refutations but all you come up with is your careful search for clear creationist biased video's with just words and actors reading Q cards.

    You cannot convince a 3 year old with tactics like that. It is very simple so suss out what the moti ...[text shortened]... shows arguments from the 19th century or objections that have been fully resolved decades ago.
    You wouldn't believe them either. You have a deadbolt on your brain.
  15. SubscriberKewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    Joined
    20 Jan '09
    Moves
    315470
    03 Mar '13 02:09
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You wouldn't believe them either. You have a deadbolt on your brain.
    As Very Rusty likes to say, pot, kettle, black.
Back to Top