A Case For Creation

[celldog]

Ever heard of him?

 

[jaguarr]

Yes, I've heard of Barry Manilow.

jag

 

[celldog]

Intelligent Design is not a 'new' theory. It's just something that's only recently been given a name and definition.

True dat.

 

[celldog]

Yes, I've heard of Barry Manilow.

jag

Aaaaah.. Smell the avoidance in the air. Smells like BBQ!

 

[jaguarr]

Aaaaah.. Smell the avoidance in the air. Smells like BBQ!

Yes. And quite a feast it will be. We're roasting the non-existent remains of a primitive man that was built from the ground up out of a peccary tooth. Mmmmmm! It's the slow cooking method and the right rub that work the magic.

jag

 

[Bill]

[B]I guess these two guys aren't really scientists..... Interesting how their faith disqualifies them, in your eyes. It's as silly as if liking Barry Manilow disqualifies me from being black. [/b]

You have a penchant for bad analogies. I was referring to your comments. Why don't you answer to the links and references contained within them as opposed to dodging the issue?

 

[Bill]

Ever hear of "Nebraska Man"??? LOL

Yep. You ever hear of Paluxy Man?

 

[celldog]

We may need to send you in for deprogramming.

jag

 

[ShadowBoxing]

In it's 4 or 5 paragraph discussion of what the book/documentary was about it gave no indication that Earth couldn't be an accident, just merely stated that the probabilty was low.

 

[celldog]

Yep. You ever hear of Paluxy Man?

According to the standard geologic timetable, humans did not appear on earth until approximately 60 million years after dinosaurs became extinct. Nevertheless, for many years claims were made by some strict creationists, and continue to be encouraged by a few individuals, that fossil human footprints or "giant man tracks" occur alongside dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy Riverbed of Glen Rose, Texas.

However, initial critical work in the early 1970's, and more intensive scientific studies in recent years, have convincingly refuted the "man track" claims, and led to their abandonment even by most creationists. The alleged human tracks involve a variety of phenomena, including elongate dinosaur tracks, erosional features, indistinct markings of unknown origin, and a few carvings.

State Park Ledge. This shelf, situated above the main track layer in Dinosaur Valley State Park, is across the river from the north-west parking lot. A variety of supposed "man tracks" here were first publicized by Stanley Taylor and crew in the late 1960's, and were subsequently advocated by other "man track" enthusiasts. However, careful analysis of the supposed prints here indicates that they are merely natural irregularities and erosional features of the substrate. Many past "man track" advocates had applied water, oil, or other substances to the markings to encourage the appearance of human shapes; however, without selective highlighting none show clear human features.
The Taylor Site. This was the Paluxy site most often claimed to contain human tracks, beginning with Stanley Taylor's research and film in the late 1960's and early 1970's, and continuing with other claims throughout the 1970's and 1980's. However, the most thorough analyses indicate that the alleged human tracks here are elongate, metatarsal dinosaur tracks--made by dinosaurs that, at least at times, impressed their soles and heels as they walked. When the digit marks of such tracks (which are common in the Paluxy Riverbed) are subdued by one or more factors (erosion, sediment infilling, or mud-collapse), they often resemble giant human prints. Most of the tracks on the Taylor Site are largely infilled with a secondary sediment which hardened into the original track depressions. When the tracksite surface is well cleaned, at least some tracks in each trail show shallow tridactyl (three-toed) digit impressions indicating dinosaurian origin, as as well as color and texture distinctions corresponding to the infilled material and further confirming the dinosaurian nature of the tracks. Recent claims that some of these tracks have human prints within them have been shown to be as baseless as the original claims.


What do know about Nebraska Man?? He was suppose the the "missing link". What happened?

 

[Bill]

According to the standard geologic timetable, humans did not appear on earth until approximately 60 million years after dinosaurs became extinct. Nevertheless, for many years claims were made by some strict creationists, and continue to be encouraged by a few individuals, that fossil human footprints or "giant man tracks" occur alongside dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy Riverbed of Glen Rose, Texas.

However, initial critical work in the early 1970's, and more intensive scientific studies in recent years, have convincingly refuted the "man track" claims, and led to their abandonment even by most creationists. The alleged human tracks involve a variety of phenomena, including elongate dinosaur tracks, erosional features, indistinct markings of unknown origin, and a few carvings.

State Park Ledge. This shelf, situated above the main track layer in Dinosaur Valley State Park, is across the river from the north-west parking lot. A variety of supposed "man tracks" here were first publicized by Stanley Taylor and crew in the late 1960's, and were subsequently advocated by other "man track" enthusiasts. However, careful analysis of the supposed prints here indicates that they are merely natural irregularities and erosional features of the substrate. Many past "man track" advocates had applied water, oil, or other substances to the markings to encourage the appearance of human shapes; however, without selective highlighting none show clear human features.
The Taylor Site. This was the Paluxy site most often claimed to contain human tracks, beginning with Stanley Taylor's research and film in the late 1960's and early 1970's, and continuing with other claims throughout the 1970's and 1980's. However, the most thorough analyses indicate that the alleged human tracks here are elongate, metatarsal dinosaur tracks--made by dinosaurs that, at least at times, impressed their soles and heels as they walked. When the digit marks of such tracks (which are common in the Paluxy Riverbed) are subdued by one or more factors (erosion, sediment infilling, or mud-collapse), they often resemble giant human prints. Most of the tracks on the Taylor Site are largely infilled with a secondary sediment which hardened into the original track depressions. When the tracksite surface is well cleaned, at least some tracks in each trail show shallow tridactyl (three-toed) digit impressions indicating dinosaurian origin, as as well as color and texture distinctions corresponding to the infilled material and further confirming the dinosaurian nature of the tracks. Recent claims that some of these tracks have human prints within them have been shown to be as baseless as the original claims.


What do know about Nebraska Man?? He was suppose the the "missing link". What happened?

Firstly, post a link to the info you are using. Otherwise, it looks like your plagarizing. Secondly, Nebraska Man was an admitted mistake made by an overzealous scientist and it was publically retracted and corrected. Scientists remained skeptical of the find, and rightly so. Here is a link to the circumstances. Now, do you think ID and Creationist "scientists" do that?

 

[celldog]

BEHOLD YOUR GREATEST HOPE MR. EVOLUTIONIST!


Guess how they got his sketch....... They found a tooth on a Nebraska farm and drew this around it!! This guy could give Jack Kirby a run for his money in the "imagination department!! LOL All of this from a tooth. And creationists are looney??? LOL

And it doesn't stop there. The tooth they found was discovered to be a PIG'S tooth!!!!


Even if it was a human tooth, how the heck can you draw a body and facial features around it?

 

[Addendum]

Who really gives a damn about what someone thinks about the origins of life?!

 

[celldog]

Who really gives a damn about what someone thinks about the origins of life?!

You, for starters. You've been in this conversation for a while now. The only person missing is "The Question". He follows me everywhere. LOL

 

[Addendum]

You, for starters. You've been in this conversation for a while now. The only person missing is "The Question". He follows me everywhere. LOL

Actually, I don't as shown by my first post in this thread.

yawn

If someone believes a talking beard invented the universe after a night of binge drinking, so what.

If someone else believes that the universe lit a fart, hence the big bang, so what.

It's not a big deal.

So just lighten up and don't get pissy when people don't share your every thought

 

[celldog]

Actually, I don't as shown by my first post in this thread.



If someone believes a talking beard invented the universe after a night of binge drinking, so what.

If someone else believes that the universe lit a fart, hence the big bang, so what.

It's not a big deal.

So just lighten up and don't get pissy when people don't share your every thought

I'm issy-pay? You're the only that seems a bit tense, my friend?

 

[Danalys]

"no i'm less tense"
"i'm less tense"
"nu uh"
"pfft"
"I'm less tense damn it."
"ARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHH"

 

[deemar325]

jag

The Noodle God has bigger 'Balls' than the Roman guy.

 

[jaguarr]

The Noodle God has bigger 'Balls' than the Roman guy.

That's why he's a GOD and the other guy is not.

jag

 

[deemar325]

Lol!^

 

[C.F. Kane]

I really don't want this silly debate to go on. I could easily continue this argument over what is and what is not good science with the usual arguments, but I'm not.

I could repeat that ID was designed by creationists to make their religious claims a valid scientific theory, but I'm not.

I could repeat that ID cannot be a valid scientific theory because it fails the tests of connectivity, falsifiability, and credibility, but I won't.

I could once again post that this is a religious argument and not a scientific one, but I won't.

I could say that you might as well reject gravity in favor of intelligent falling, but I clearly won't.

And I could say that teaching the existence of a "designer" which causes everything to happen will greatly harm the education systems by teaching our children beliefs that clearly contradict the scientific method, and makes a mockery of science in general with a baseless superstition.

But, I won't.


I also expect to be flamed repeatedly for this post. I expect to be called intolerant, pretentious and condescending.

But then again, that's all we've been doing here for the last five pages.

 

[Corinthian™]

I really don't want this silly debate to go on. I could easily continue this argument over what is and what is not good science with the usual arguments, but I'm not.

I could repeat that ID was designed by creationists to make their religious claims a valid scientific theory, but I'm not.

I could repeat that ID cannot be a valid scientific theory because it fails the tests of connectivity, falsifiability, and credibility, but I won't.

I could once again post that this is a religious argument and not a scientific one, but I won't.

I could say that you might as well reject gravity in favor of intelligent falling, but I clearly won't.

And I could say that teaching the existence of a "designer" which causes everything to happen will greatly harm the education systems by teaching our children beliefs that clearly contradict the scientific method, and makes a mockery of science in general with a baseless superstition.

But, I won't.


I also expect to be flamed repeatedly for this post. I expect to be called intolerant, pretentious and condescending.

But then again, that's all we've been doing here for the last five pages.

intolerant people burn people and call them witches. Pretentious people think that they set of believes is right and base it on a book and not on actual proofs(they could try to proove themselves but they don't).

 

[Bill]

BEHOLD YOUR GREATEST HOPE MR. EVOLUTIONIST!


Guess how they got his sketch....... They found a tooth on a Nebraska farm and drew this around it!! This guy could give Jack Kirby a run for his money in the "imagination department!! LOL All of this from a tooth. And creationists are looney??? LOL

And it doesn't stop there. The tooth they found was discovered to be a PIG'S tooth!!!!


Even if it was a human tooth, how the heck can you draw a body and facial features around it?

I just posted a link that explained this. Is your knowledge of science that far outdated?

 

[celldog]

I really don't want this silly debate to go on. I could easily continue this argument over what is and what is not good science with the usual arguments, but I'm not.

I could repeat that ID was designed by creationists to make their religious claims a valid scientific theory, but I'm not.

I could repeat that ID cannot be a valid scientific theory because it fails the tests of connectivity, falsifiability, and credibility, but I won't.

I could once again post that this is a religious argument and not a scientific one, but I won't.

I could say that you might as well reject gravity in favor of intelligent falling, but I clearly won't.

And I could say that teaching the existence of a "designer" which causes everything to happen will greatly harm the education systems by teaching our children beliefs that clearly contradict the scientific method, and makes a mockery of science in general with a baseless superstition.

But, I won't.


I also expect to be flamed repeatedly for this post. I expect to be called intolerant, pretentious and condescending.

BUT YOU WON'T.....


But then again, that's all we've been doing here for the last five pages.

Why should you be called those things?? Because we disagree? Those are the insults you guys save up for me. Remember??

 

[Addendum]

Why should you be called those things?? Because we disagree? Those are the insults you guys save up for me. Remember??

You're not that loved