What does the fossil record say?

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by wilsoncole

That NEVER happens and you have no working model to draw from.

It happens millions of times every day. Every living organism starts out as a single cell, including you wilson. Organisms like algee and slime regularly change from single-cell into multi-cellular organisms as the conditions change.

Really? How man mutations are there in "each individual organism?"
Mr. Camanintx,
Why do you feel you can fool me so easily?
That response is downright dishonest.

According to current research, you and I each carry between 100 and 200 mutations in our genetic structure. And these are germ level mutations, not somatic.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by newhope101

I can go one better.

You as a biologist cannot back either view on bird decent. As much as you wish to woffle on and on you have not responed with anything but degredations of me.

PAINTEDWOLF HAS NO CLUE HERE, EVERYONE!..and really has no clue about birds despite all her crap and microraptors.


Hence you are akin to a looser with no game to play here.

Neither are you unable to refute the fact that the refute to the human footprints along dinos appear to be obviously human and not a typical dino footprint. The refute is unjustified.

You are a shadow walker at best, PW, with no clue about what birds really decended from.

pog mo thóin

Keep telling yourself that newhope and you just might believe it. The rest of us however know better.

[painted wolf]

Originally Posted by newhope101

I can go one better.

You as a biologist cannot back either view on bird decent. As much as you wish to woffle on and on you have not responed with anything but degredations of me.

PAINTEDWOLF HAS NO CLUE HERE, EVERYONE!..and really has no clue about birds despite all her crap and microraptors.



Hence you are akin to a looser with no game to play here.

Neither are you unable to refute the fact that the refute to the human footprints along dinos appear to be obviously human and not a typical dino footprint. The refute is unjustified.

You are a shadow walker at best, PW, with no clue about what birds really decended from.

pog mo thóin

awe... did you make that for me? That's so sweet.

Why do your "human footprints" have three toes?

Why can't you define what a bird is? Are they all the same "kind"?

Why can't you give me an alternative to dinosaurs for bird ancestry? hint: "glider" is not an animal.

Why do you insist on blowing smoke and trying to make this about me (meaning I eventually have to respond to get your attention.... I clearly have it for what it's worth) rather than addressing the issues presented to you?

wa:do

ps... I try to avoid getting my face so close to filth. And such language isn't very christian of you now is it?

[outhouse]

PAINTEDWOLF HAS NO CLUE HERE, EVERYONE!..

you could learn a vast amount of knowledge from her, if your mind wasnt blinded by 3000+ year myths found in the bible you base your miserable guesses from.

newhope

I have never seen anyone with such a twisted view as the one you hold.

you have been dishonest and have been caught at it time and time again.

shame on you for your desperation

[newhope101]

Originally Posted by painted wolf

awe... did you make that for me? That's so sweet.

Why do your "human footprints" have three toes?

Why can't you define what a bird is? Are they all the same "kind"?

Why can't you give me an alternative to dinosaurs for bird ancestry? hint: "glider" is not an animal.

Why do you insist on blowing smoke and trying to make this about me (meaning I eventually have to respond to get your attention.... I clearly have it for what it's worth) rather than addressing the issues presented to you?

wa:do

ps... I try to avoid getting my face so close to filth. And such language isn't very christian of you now is it?

You still haven't committed to bird ancestry. I'll take you on one point at a time. So you cannot comment on which of these proposals you agree with. What are you waiting for.? You do not know for sure.

That means that all the dino bird evidence you shoved in my face is something you yourself are unable to defend at the moment. Looser!

Bird-from-dinosaur theory of evolution challenged: Was it the other way around?
Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links


You had best come up with an answer PW, otherwise I'll make sure every creationist and evolutionist on RF hears of it, on every thread, one way or another!!!!!,!

[tumbleweed41]

Originally Posted by newhope101

You had best come up with an answer PW, otherwise I'll make sure every creationist and evolutionist on RF hears of it, on every thread, one way or another!!!!!,!

While your at it, let everyone know about your endorsement of the Paluxy human/dino footprint fiasco.

[painted wolf]

Originally Posted by newhope101

You still haven't committed to bird ancestry. I'll take you on one point at a time. So you cannot comment on which of these proposals you agree with. What are you waiting for.? You do not know for sure.

That means that all the dino bird evidence you shoved in my face is something you yourself are unable to defend at the moment. Looser!

I asked you questions first... making you the looserest.

And yes, I addressed your question a few times... you still have yet to mention mine, so again... you prove to be the looserest.

Bird-from-dinosaur theory of evolution challenged: Was it the other way around?

this was a deeply flawed study... Microraptor can't spread it's legs like they proposed as any decent study of the pelvis would show. This paper was soundly thrashed here: http://www.pnas.org/content/107/40/E155.extract
and here among other places.
New Commentary Stirs Dino-Bird Brouhaha | Dinosaur Tracking

Discovery Raises New Doubts About Dinosaur-bird Links

Another deeply flawed and discredited paper. Not only does it ignore birds with tails like Archy, but it ignores actual dinosaur anatomy in favor of outdated views from the last century.

Neither of your sources suggests anything viable other than dinosaurs as bird ancestors. This is the biggest flaw of the BAND group, they are full of hot air and otherwise empty. Without an alternative hypothesis to test you are just blowing smoke.

You had best come up with an answer PW, otherwise I'll make sure every creationist and evolutionist on RF hears of it, on every thread, one way or another!!!!!,!

is that supposed to be impressive somehow?

Now... what is "Bird kind" again?

wa:do

[David M]

Why are creationists so incapable of using the quote function.

Originally Posted by newhope101

Did you hear about the live snail was dated to 27,000 years.

Yes I did, just as I heard about the other aquatic organisms that give old radiocarbon ages. There is a reason for this which ignorant creationists like to pretend does not exist.

Radiocarbon dating works on carbon in living and once living things that comes from the atmosphere. Aquatic creatures take their carbon from both carbon dioxide dissolved in the water and from carbon that forms from dissolved minerals.

In the case of the snail it lived in an aquifer which means that it was surrounded by water that had not been in contact with the air for a very long time and had absorbed carbonates from rocks that were ancient.

Originally Posted by newhope101

Carbon Dating: Why you cant trust it or other radiometric dating methods. creation evolution young earth evidence old earth bible
What was the scoop on living snails that seemed to be 27,000 years old?

Your first source is exactly the type of ignorant lying BS that is so prevalent in creationist circles. Perhaps you would like to inform us why carbon dating would be possible on fossils where all the carbon that was once living tissue has been replaced by minerals?

After all Miller lied to the museum about what they wanted to do, ignored the lab that told him that the samples were not suitable for carbon dating and ignored the fact that the bones were coated with modern shellac (that contains organic carbon) even though the lab told him that there was a lot of carbon in the shellac.

And your second source refutes your argument.

Originally Posted by newhope101

..and there are plenty more re lava misdated etc. Fortunately someone knew the true ages of these specimens and were able to contradict the findings. This is not the case with older fossils etc.

The only misdated lava is that which was dishonestly submitted for dating using a technique that cannot possibly date lava that young or when whole rock is dated and creationists ignore the geology which makes whole rock samples date to older than the eruption that formed the lava.

Originally Posted by newhope101

No I am not a liar I just know more than you, apparently.

No, you have just displayed your ignorance and credulity once again.

Originally Posted by newhope101

Creative Science 23 - Inorganic Radioactive Dating | Bible.org Blogs

Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

RATE's shoddy methodologies and distortions of the truth have already been amply documented.

Originally Posted by newhope101

Why? There are humans around with dinos, nothing should surprise you.

No, there are not.

Originally Posted by newhope101

I believe the status of my definition is solid and does not need your acceptance

Good, in that case your defintion of kind contradicts the bible.

Originally Posted by newhope101

There are human footprints found along side dino footprints. No doubt this is challenged and explained away somewhere other wise it should have made huge headlines. This is the sort of information your researchers often find and hide, or go to great lengths to discredit someway. They hide or throw away as incredible every result or evidence that is impossible to resolve into a TOE framework.

There are no dinosaur footprints along side human footprints.

Originally Posted by newhope101

TOE is the greatest lie ever inflicted on human society.

To be accurate your claim to understand of ToE is one of the greatest lies ever inflicted on an internet forum.

Originally Posted by newhope101

The Taylor Trail:
A series of 14 sequential human footprints on the same platform with at least 134 dinosaur tracks.

This rapidly flowing river runs through the middle of Dinosaur Valley State Park, famous for its dinosaur tracks. Not as well known is the fact that human tracks have also been found, not only in the same formation, but on the same bedding plane and in some cases overlapping the dinosaur tracks.



The Taylor Trail, as it normally appears in the river under water. Subsequent excavation has extended the trail to a total of fourteen tracks in a consistent right-left pattern. The entire sequence can be seen through the water in this 1994 photograph, even though a thin layer of mud obscures the details. A trail of three-toed dinosaur tracks can be seen crossing at an angle of approximately 30 degrees.

Taylor Trail: Evidence that Dinosaurs and Humans coexisted

Wrong, unless you are suggesting humans have 3 toes.

Originally Posted by newhope101

That means that all the dino bird evidence you shoved in my face is something you yourself are unable to defend at the moment. Looser!

I love the smell of desparation in the morning. Smells like victory

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by newhope101

These tracks look human to me.
What rubbish is this saying that a dino put his heel down to make such a print. The alledged human footprints are clearly that of a creature walking. So this dino, every time he took a step made sure he left his heel mark there also. Where are his 3 toe marks deeply impressed into the mud? Rubbish!

These footprints that are alledgedly human appear plainly human and do not resemble dino footprints at all.

https://www.forbiddenhistory.info/?q=node/55


In 2000, Alvis Delk and James Bishop of Stephenville, Texas, discovered a clear five-toed human footprint that shows uplift from a three-toed dinosaur print that pressed into it. The Creation Evidences Museum in Glen Rose has the original Alvis Delk footprint on display (and in person it is quite impressive. Photos do not do the print justice).

John Allen Watson, in his book Man, Dinosaurs, and Mammals Together (2001), notes that Willis' catalog of animals from the phosphate beds included dinosaurs, plesiosaurs, whales, sharks, rhinos, horses, mastodons, mammoths, porpoises, elephants, deer, pigs, dogs, and sheep

Dinosaurs and Men Together... Yep - eNews for July 27, 2010
http://www.dinosaursandman.com/resea..._DINOSAURS.pdf

it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution, in the light of these questions

John Morris, creationist.

Arguments that should be avoided (because further research is still needed, new research has invalided aspects of it, or biblical implications may discount it)

Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed.

Answers in Genesis, creationists.

Even the creationists admit they're phony, newhope. But congratulations on burning whatever shred of credibility you hoped to cling to here.

[Dirty Penguin]

Originally Posted by David M

Why are creationists so incapable of using the quote function.

Yea, I hate that too.....