Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Same here - we (my mouse and I) bid thee good will as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlewitness
Never heard of Ivan Panin, and no we're not inferring any thing.
Ivan Panin both discovered and wrote the genealogy you posted earlier. We found that information (my google and I) and we are providing that information to you. http://www.s8int.com/ivan-panin.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlewitness
As far as dinner...you're missing the point. An atheist doesn't believe in any thing so good luck on their "input.."
Well, you're missing a blessing! We (my table and I) have eaten with atheists who believe in a lot of things and have lots of great input about a lot of important issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlewitness
This much is certain...there was a T-rex, and a man running through dense vegitation for the same reason...water, and lots of it.
You saw this?!! Where?
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlewitness
The Blessings of The Eternal One bring you joy...
And also to you, uhmmm ....well.. .. I mean... ya'll, (whoever the "we" is)
Last edited by firstborn888; 07-31-2010 at 03:22 AM..
Don't think so. Haven't seen it yet here at any rate, and when they post that sort of illiterate tripe, what else is inhabiting their brainstems?
Me = "Oh ye of little faith!"
I've asked Christians so many times to answer a few short to-the-point scientific questions. For sure, I'm angling to corner them, but then that's what the truth versus fables tends to do.
√ Like, for example: which key elements of Evolution do they disagree with?
Or:
√ Explain three types of tRNA or DNA transcription errors in mitosis.
Guess what: they never answer these. Or anything else. And why??: 1) they haven't a clue how Evolution even works ("I'll believe it when my cat births a dog overnight! Nyah!") or 2) they absolutely know it's true, but have to save face.
In other words, they have zero intellectual honesty.
Hey rifleman I'm a christen and I believe in evolution, go figure.
Hey rifleman I'm a christen and I believe in evolution, go figure.
busta
Wonderful! An intelligent, thoughtful, rational Christian. Congratulations! You'd certainly not be the target of my slings and arrows, ever. In fact, I applaud those of any spiritual persuasion who can put things as obvious and documented as Evolution in it's right and proper perspective.
Again, as far as this Delk footprint, and not having read the past few pages (What? Are they still arguing about the validity of this hoax? After the owner admitted to carving it? WTF, huh?), the "glory of this story" was fun for them to hope for and bask in for a while, but hey; let's get real.
Dinos, especially those huge, constantly ravenously hungry types, did not co-exist with man. We know that dogs, horses, cats, ferrets, turtles, rodents, goats, sheep and rabbits did because; hey: when we uncover ancient camping, hunting, spiritual or village sites, we find bones from those obvious co-inhabitants alongside those of its human dwellers. This is typical all over the globe. But a human burial pit with a T-Rex remnants alongside? A religious plot with a buried Bronti there? Found everywhere across the globe? Nope. Never. Ever.
As well, with ever-more-accurate isotopic and other dating methods, the geological column (Shoot! Them damned "varves" again...) degrees of fossilization in samples, and the vegetation and prey we've found in their remnant stomachs, this is no longer a question. All the fossils and remnants we've ever found are from far older times, millions of years before man's entrance.
Quite elementary, actually. Well, except for the delusional crowd. and what can we ever hope to do with them after all?
Just because this puts the kaibosh on primitive literal biblicalism, well so be it.
Let's not fall into the deep end of the logic pool in defense of lunatic interpretations, just because they drill a small leaky hole in the Christian ship of state. Hey; it's gonna sink sooner or later anyhow, right? May as well go grab on to an atheist's life raft. It's OK: we'll let you onboard!
Sigh... the analysis of the faked Delk foot imprint clearly indicates it was not from a bipedal hominid. It was a carved likeness that ,unfortunately, failed in it's attempt to duplicate the propermorphology of the hominid foot. We know what that was and is and must be like, BTW. Just talk to your local orthopœdic surgeon. He knows a LOT more about it than you or I can ever hope to, and it was exactly one of those specialists who analyzed this print in a blind test, (i.e.: where he was not aware of the import or claims made for it. someone just handed a copy of the scan to him and asked him what he thought.)
His impartial but detailed analysis? It was not made by a human, (or anything else living, not even matching a god simian [ape] print) but was rather a carved "likeness". If it were real, the "owner" would not have been able to walk properly.
But such well-presented, thoughtful and detailed analyses go unheeded or instantly dismissed [with no good counter-argument other than "scientists are biased!"] by the ardent Christian fringe, since they depend on such faked pseudo-science and made up stuff to support their rather fruitless story line.
Actually and logically, if humans and massive carnivorous dinos with brains the size of an egg did co-exist, it would not have been for long; it never would have lasted unless the humans had coincidentally invented the .416 Rigby, .375 Holland & Holland Magnum rifles, or a rocket launcher defense system to ward them insistent macro-lizards from sneaking in through the cave front door.
(I watched an intriguing Nat Geo documentary the other night about the inexplicable die-offs of the crocs in a lake in the American south. Turns out it was because of the profusion of a particular fish prey species, and they found that out by removing and freeze-sectioning the croc's brains. They showed the extraction of same: it was, literally, the size of a quail egg, and dinos had much smaller ones than that. They were ,after all ,the primitive ancestors of the now more advanced (!!) crocs.
Say: why haven't we tamed and saddled up those crocs? You want to demo and hop on one for us? Awe, pleeeeeezzze? It would prove your point. Or ours....
By direct comparison, a cow's or cat's or even a modern chicken's brain, which allows them to orchestrate emotions towards human involvement and "social coordination", are many MANY times bigger. They literally have neurological "headspace" to allow conscious thought, situational awareness and simple decision-making. Unlike the dinosaurs, whose only decision was...
All that a T-Rex's brain says, after bodily function requirements, is "eat". Eat!.. EATTT!!!!!
Not : Oh yeah; gotta hold still while he saddles me up. Hey; maybe he'll give me that goat over there as a reward snack? Or that unattended baby human? I'll take either one. Yuuummm!
Sigh... the analysis of the faked Delk foot imprint clearly indicates it was not from a bipedal hominid. It was a carved likeness that ,unfortunately, failed in it's attempt to duplicate the propermorphology of the hominid foot. We know what that was and is and must be like, BTW. Just talk to your local orthopœdic surgeon. He knows a LOT more about it than you or I can ever hope to, and it was exactly one of those specialists who analyzed this print in a blind test, (i.e.: where he was not aware of the import or claims made for it. someone just handed a copy of the scan to him and asked him what he thought.)
His impartial but detailed analysis? It was not made by a human, (or anything else living, not even matching a god simian [ape] print) but was rather a carved "likeness". If it were real, the "owner" would not have been able to walk properly.
That is where the contention I have with your debunking claim. Other debunkers had specified that the Delk print was made when the matrix was soft, hence, it was not carved.
The idea of the human footprint not looking normal is baseless because who can find a normal looking footprint of an average person?
Then the charge of different layers of compression was brought up as the Delk print was not of the same compression of the other prints in the area. Anybody that runs through the mud, and I have ran through the mud, will tell you that you are not going to have the same depth of compression when running through the mud. Some areas are thicker than others and some are not. No big mystery there.
And so you have the basis of the big toe deeper than the other toes: what is this? A guy making sure his footprint is even and smooth while he is walking, turning, and pivotting and the like?
You do it and see what I mean. The impression of the big toe being deeper than the other toes is hardly grounds for fraud.
And what should have been a slam dunk case: we have debunkers claiming that Delk was afraid he'd be known as a hoaxer when he did not think anyone would take his prints as real. Yet: debunkers go to relatives or some vague reference, even to some woman claiming to see Delk making these fake prints.... and yet Delk's admission or announcement of his prints being fake is nowhere to be found in setting the record straight. Now why is that?
So it is obvious that mockers are going to misrepresent even a legitimate find because they like to pull the rug out from underneathe believers.
I bet if someone came up with a real live dinosaur right now: scoffers will declare it was cloned and believe it too.
That is where the contention I have with your debunking claim. Other debunkers had specified that the Delk print was made when the matrix was soft, hence, it was not carved.
The idea of the human footprint not looking normal is baseless because who can find a normal looking footprint of an average person?
Then the charge of different layers of compression was brought up as the Delk print was not of the same compression of the other prints in the area. Anybody that runs through the mud, and I have ran through the mud, will tell you that you are not going to have the same depth of compression when running through the mud. Some areas are thicker than others and some are not. No big mystery there.
And so you have the basis of the big toe deeper than the other toes: what is this? A guy making sure his footprint is even and smooth while he is walking, turning, and pivotting and the like?
You do it and see what I mean. The impression of the big toe being deeper than the other toes is hardly grounds for fraud.
And what should have been a slam dunk case: we have debunkers claiming that Delk was afraid he'd be known as a hoaxer when he did not think anyone would take his prints as real. Yet: debunkers go to relatives or some vague reference, even to some woman claiming to see Delk making these fake prints.... and yet Delk's admission or announcement of his prints being fake is nowhere to be found in setting the record straight. Now why is that?
So it is obvious that mockers are going to misrepresent even a legitimate find because they like to pull the rug out from underneathe believers.
I bet if someone came up with a real live dinosaur right now: scoffers will declare it was cloned and believe it too.
Sorry, no sale, I have already seen the man behind the curtain, I can't NOT pay attention.
Sorry, no sale, I have already seen the man behind the curtain, I can't NOT pay attention.
Are you sure that is the scenario you are in and not the scenario of "Crucify Him!" in deciding what to do with Jesus?
Well, so far all these off the cuffs remarks are borne out of some boisterous pretense that you all know what you are talking about, but I wonder if it isn't more like... just following the crowd.
Why? Because you are not giving any basis for the scenario you are presenting as applicable at all.
As for the rest, all I see are contrary attempts at debunking, and they contradict each other.
Fine: as much as you all wish to say that you know what you are talking about, I think it comes to a simple conclusion that those that oppose the thread are just saying they do not want to believe it.
Are you sure that is the scenario you are in and not the scenario of "Crucify Him!" in deciding what to do with Jesus?
Well, so far all these off the cuffs remarks are borne out of some boisterous pretense that you all know what you are talking about, but I wonder if it isn't more like... just following the crowd.
Why? Because you are not giving any basis for the scenario you are presenting as applicable at all.
As for the rest, all I see are contrary attempts at debunking, and they contradict each other.
Fine: as much as you all wish to say that you know what you are talking about, I think it comes to a simple conclusion that those that oppose the thread are just saying they do not want to believe it.
That I can accept.
The scenario I'm in? What the .....? Hmm, I was sure I was responding to some post on dinosaur/man tracks. I'll scroll back and check to see if I responded to the wrong post (I am sure it's possible), stand-by. ..............checking now................. OK, my post is definitely responding to a dino/man track post. Maybe you meant to respond to another post and inadvertantly attached yours to mine, evidenced by a total disconnect in how your post relates to mine.
Last edited by PanTerra; 08-03-2010 at 12:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Grab the rope: we'll pull you in to safety!
