Appreciated, Jaymax!
Looking back on this thread, I'm frankly disgusted by the immature and intellectually dishonest responses & deflections of someone who claims to be forthright. I thought Christians were purportedly above such behavior.
From the perspective of someone who has hypothesized new concepts to my fellow perennially skeptical scientists, I know
exactly what constitutes acceptable evidence, reasonable proof, verifiable design; in short, the standards of any good logical inquisitive pursuit. Science simply provides the means to incontrovertible proofs, and is, hence the obvious devil to a fundy mindset. Their constant vilification of
"those scientists", no matter what the finding, is proof enough of their rancorous irrationality.
I've also carefully examined
many hoaxes, either in the form of poorly designed experimental designs, or of outright intent to defraud. There is a certain stink in the air resulting from such fraudulent pursuits. In the case of the plasticine dinos, it's VERY rank.
And yet, C34 has carefully guided the conversation into some sort of last-ditch effort to disprove what is
universally accepted now, due to exactly such careful work, as
The Laws of Evolution. I know, at it's deepest level, it truly does bother the likes of our hero to know, in his cold dark heart, that essentially
all of the rational and objective world (including the Catholic Church and
many other religions), now
fully accept and
embrace Evolution.
How can you not? I, as you graciously noted, have patiently provided his self-admitted total lack of any scientific understanding with carefully thought-out and logical presentations of exactly how we have observed the detailed processes of Evolution to have worked.
That's Part No. 1.
Part No. 2 is to then apply that
proven-
factual info, no longer an hypothesis, to the real world. His accusations are that we "scientists" are blind to what we see around us. The oft-proven and well-documented
fundy alternative is to take biblical pre-conceptions and then
only accept observations that (loosely and poorly) fit and support them. Of course, in the case of hoaxes or mis-interpretations, such a backwards approach always falls short, but they also seem quite happy with that; it makes their day to "have something" on
"the evil science conspiracy".
How can any rational person denounce the vastness of our new levels of understanding, of our fantastic new investigatory tools (such as DNA sequencing, which proves without a doubt the lineage of organisms). Such research is categorically beyond any reproach! Unquestionable unless one is absolutely into heavy, almost pathologic levels of self-denial and blindered obedience to an officially outdated myth-based bit of tripe?
It's also amazing that this thread has pretty much turned into a gab-fest
between a bunch of folks who, even if they
aren't perhaps actual scientists
(some may well be), at least have an open mind, have done the open-minded version of honest learning,
and one
(at most two) dedicated block-headed fundies.
Why can I call them that? It's not stupid invective; I come to that conclusion becuase of their relentless irrational responses, or in many many
(most) cases, their
total lack of
response to
simple, point-form, direct questions. His particular aversion to response being the most egregious and consistent over these 400+ posts.
We, and I, have consistently provided many a careful outline of the simple biochemical/DNA mechanics & other aspects of how Evolution works. Proven beyond reproach by many many careful researchers. Accepted by many religions (they're not stupid, after all...). I asked him to tell we where this was in any way errant.
No response.
Others (san, Zˆ2 et al) have provided many many
links that patiently explain to the neophyte exactly how that mechanism has expressed itself in nature.
He doesn't read them.
We've pointed out the obvious fact of our 99% shared DNA, and its
virtually identical sequences in the remaining 99%, between our very close cousins and co-inhabitants the chimps (and, of course, the also patently obvious close links to the great apes and others who broke off the Evo-tree earlier.).
He deflects or ignores.
We have posted proof in the form of photo documentation of hominid transitional forms, that show, even if a scant few are missing
(this fact being then pounced on as some sort of proof that the whole concept is in trouble! hah!), an obvious, dare I say, Evolution of the forms.
He claims them to be fakes, thereby directly insulting the integrity of literally tens of millions of fresh young honest and open science student minds, not to mention those of accredited, tenured professors whose reputations are on the line with any publications they submit. How pleasant, respectful and nice. Frankly, that alone should banish him from any further contributions here. Or anywhere.
We've provided multiple links that show the basic irrefutible technologies behind the spectacularly complex yet also spectacularly accurate dating technologies that categorically position all articfacts, even those of absolutely known origin (clay items made within recorded and documented history.)
He says they are nonetheless unreliable or casually mis-interpreteted, though he later then hangs his entire argument on an admitted and documented mis-use of the oldest technology of them all, applied in the '50s no less. The entirely wrong technology, BTW. Though he often decries scientists, he now asks me how any of them could possibly mis-use a technology he so desperately needs but oddly doesn't accept anywhere else.
This alone proves it's a hoax, yet he can't/won't accept that. Right there in front of his face. Even his own bible doesn't mention dinos, nor if they did co-exist and such magnificence was created by his Gawd, there's ditto no mention of what happened to them, how they came to be buried under tons and countable layers of volcanically hardened rock, all of which dates reliably, by the simplest of techniques, to be millions of years old.
Yet the specimens he claims as incontrovertible proof of a dino-human co-existance were conveniently located just 3 - 4 feet down, under nice soft earth, rife with conflicting proof of tampering and recent placement, and in immaculate condition. The find does show some dino metaphors, which we are to take as absolute, yet they also show dino-human cross-breeds. Also to be taken as the inerrant truth? Yes or No? Another question unanswered or ignored. How do these people sleep at night?
Odd, no?
The stupidity of the perpetrators of this hoax evades his blindered eye.
The dating technology critical to his argument (C14 radiocarbon) is
routinely and
viciously dismissed out of hand in
every case supporting Evolution. Then, where a
hoax-find, driven by the greed of a small Mexican peasant community, supposedly shows that T-Rexs happily co-existed, and apparently even bred with, man., it is suddenly quite acceptable, inerrant and reliable.
The utter illogic, the nonsense value, the utter stupidity of the concept of co-existant carnivorous dinosaurs with a defenseless man (OK; they had some rock clubs. Whoopeee!) is exceeded only by the fact that our believer stands by it as
The Proof That Disproves Evolution, despite
our thoughtful and objective review and criticism of it and the well-documented problems with how the dig was done. Even if there were some possibility of it's validity, the overall nonsense of it cannot stand in the face of the overwhelming alternate documentation, research and evidence.
Even if it
were to be true, an
alternate hypothesis (a keystone of good science, BTW) was
never posited; that perhaps these simple peoples' ancestors may well have found the well-preserved remains of many dino bones, laid out in a receding mud bed, in their original skeletal forms.
The resulting mental Play-Dough reconstruction of a plausible model, plus some fantasy imaginings of human-dino crosses, may well have been preserved in simple play toys. Why not found elsewhere though? Esp. since the "discoverer" was paying for each and every find, so a stupifying 33,000 "artifacts", fabulously well preserved, suddenly and reliably showed up, along with the trampling of known actual artifacts while the frantic money-hungry villagers dug for their previously planted and now valuable toys.
"Go forth and make, then bury, then "find" me some good intact dino model toys. Here's some drawings of what I want you to "find! There's good money in it for you!"
Such a reasonable possibility is never even discussed, because the YEC mindset desperately needs such pseudo-proofs in defence of their now-disproven myth.
Can we rationally conceive of Brontosaurs being herded pleasantly along by a happy and nonplussed primate herder, accompanied by his trusty 5 ton sidekick "Rex"? Can we imagine in our minds a family, picnicing by a pleasant summer stream, glancing up to the lovely sight of a flying viciously predatory Pterodactyl coming in for a friendly vegan bite of lunch, to twitter amongst those juicy kids?
It staggers the mind. The
fact that we have the fossils, their mouths filled with ultra-sharp dentition of a type that is specifically designed for carnivorous predation;
that we have fossilized remains of fish or small mammals in their stomachs;
that we have absolute cross-checked dates of them far far preceeding some "Insta-Poof" mythical Creation event;
that we have known DNA sequences showing, incontrovertibly, the progression from apes to chimps to us;
that we have the geological sequencing, easily countable "varves"
that, all on their lonesome, prove that the Earth is significantly older than even the longest YEC idea (>>> 10,000 yrs. More like 150,000 yrs).
All this interlocking evidence is dismissed with a smirking and arrogant hand-wave as a massive wrold-wide conspiracy of deception. Not unlike what Christianity has foisted off on literally billions of placid and accepting, intellectually dependant peasant thinkers. To this day.
How professional. How logical. How believable.
Then, all of this is coupled with the significant statement by one of the YEC proponents that the
entirely wrong methodology was used to date these
Plastocene-era dino toys. Why that obvious mistake?
Oh, don't mention THAT! Ignore THAT. 
Deflect over THAT.
Because, as usual, fundies' understanding of technology tends to hang on what they are told to parrot. Their now 50 year-old criticisms of carbon14 dating are themselves totally outdated, but it's all they know. They, as a group, refuse to update their knowledge base, and their leaders fear
that above all else. Why else do we see such luminary Boards of Education as demo'd by the states of Ohio and Louisiana disallowing the teaching of Evolution? The taint of fear fills the air.
Additionally,our hero here doesn't even understand these technologies at their most basic level (despite my patient provision of a well-written link that outlines all of the newest methods that hugely bypass all of C14's obvious limitations. One of which is that it is usless on ceramics or any inorganic form. Let me repeat that for him, once again: Useless.).
And even more silliness surfaces when he
now apologetically hangs his entire argument on dating alone, and on, at that time, a
nascent technique of thermoluminescence which, absent lasers and our benchmark work at my very own Simon Fraser University Graduate School of Archeology & Earth Sciences in the '80s and '90s, was VERY unreliable. Strange that he doesn't harp on
it's known limitations back then, eh? And not acknowledge that, just possibly, I might be enough of an authority to refute his nonsense.
Oh, don't mention THAT! Ignore THAT. 
Deflect over THAT.
When the fundy approach is that
all dating is unreliable, errant, not to be trusted, and just one big scientific hoax, such newfound dedication to it is illogical and laughable, wouldn't you all say? If it's
not fraudulent, how then do we interpret it's vast other cross-verified findings, in droves, by actual honest researchers worldwide, that the world is factually
hundreds of millions of years old,
Ditto, the actual age of real fossil dino remains. This is referred to as
"Beliefs of Convenience", BTW.
Oh, don't mention THAT! Ignore THAT. 
Deflect over THAT.
The final insult to all of us who tried to enter into an honest debate? He is incapable of conceding anything, ever, and yet didn't tell us that in the beginning, which would have saved us all a lot of computer time. The so-called entertainment value of playing with a snail and expecting it to learn tricks is limited.
So thanks again,
Jaymax. I
did learn a valuable lesson here, as I'm relatively new to C-D. To wit:
You can't teach a cat to walk backwards, even to save it's life.
(For the less metaphorically adept; this means:
There are some that simply can't be taught; no amount of logic, truth or tasty little knowledge treats placed under their noses will affect their world.
Say... Perhaps it's an evolutionary thing; some of us aren't capable of independant open thought.
Homo irrationalis?
I may well have inadvertently stumbled on something here! I see a PhD in this discovery; after all, there's plenty of evidence for it, and my ego-driven scientist buddies would prob'ly grant me, on early release, the PhD I've mostly already finished for this truly fascinating and easily documentable discovery!. Yeah! Say... Doctor Rifleman! I LIKE It!
Again, bye for now on this thread. I just had to summarize after I'd calmed down.
You too,
H. irrationalis, sub-sp.
fundamentalis; race
christianicus
(*In ignorance there is contentment) 
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.
