So hey, anyone object to unbanning me?

[Cerise]

wow. that explanation is pretty asshole-ish. but, nah, i'm not saying anything about YOU with this comment.

Why, thank you.

 

[Gotholic]

It doesn't become invalid. Soft tissue and DNA does not survive fossilisation.

Not true. What is probable is that fossils are not as old as they think they are.

Hell, it's pretty rare for any animal to become a fossil and demands very specific circumstances in order to do so. It's no surprise that the fossil record is not found on every piece of land and through every stratum.

Darwin was specifically talking about intermediate, i.e., transitional, fossils that are not found in any of the strata.

Hell...mankind had barely seen/named/catalogued 10% of the living species on Earth now.

I do not doubt that. It should only giver further credence that there is not a good sample of "transitional fossils" to make a preponderant case for macro evolution.

As for macro evolution, just looking at the movement from mastadon to common elephant(s) should be sufficient recent proof for even eyes that refuse to see.

That is an example of specie variation or micro evolution, not macro evolution. There are roughly 10,000 species of birds that are known with an abundant variation. It would not be surprising to see variation with elephants.

Cute...cave pics of elk and moose that look like they might be dinos...if you squint just right and turn your head this way..maybe.

There are some good ones there. I think you just might be intellectually dishonest.

Proof... not conjecture. How about some non-fossilized remains? Maybe a mummified velociraptor or summat. Or better yet... if dinos were around 3000 years ago or so... where are their descendants?

Ever read about the apparent Plesiosaur that washed ashore in 1925? Or the dinosaur and man foot prints found in the Paluxy River bed?

Oh, and before you use the 'flood' - try and do the math. Noah and wife..a few sons and their wives. How many generations are needed to get to 6billion people currently alive plus the roughly 56million deaths per year?
In addition, why weren't the dinos on the arc?

I would not use the great flood with you. As for your population inquiry, here you go:

The human population can be extrapolated backwards to see how long it would have taken to achieve present-day numbers. Using even conservative growth figures of one-half percent per year, earth’s population would have been eight people about 5,000 years ago. That compares nicely with the number of people on Noah’s Ark. Starting with evolution’s claim for the origin of man, and using the same ½ percent growth figure for the human race, we calculate a huge present day population that can not be justified by the fossil record or current statistics.

Source

I am not vouching for the above quote. It just something to chew on, as is this. The exact details of what happened with the flood is not the point I am arguing.

 

[Gotholic]

I thought that image fits him as well. He is always parroting while in debate, which is quite annoying. Though since it appears to be a monkey, mimic may be the right word.

You're lack of image fits you well. You always have the "my religion says so" form of debate.

You only prove my point. Can you not come up with something original?

Monkey see, monkey do.

 

[Gonz]

Which leaves Gonz in charge.

Which means free speech reins. Kind of ironic, those who purport to love choice didn't like it when it was allowed to breathe free.

Nobody on the left was chased away. They just didn't like people who aren't as sensitive as they think they are. 9 other forums & still the RW maintains its championship status.

 

[spike]

No, the difference is I did not call you the noun: "fool"

I called you the adjective: "foolish."

Refer to the dictionary if you can't see the distinction.

Sorry you can't take a little criticism.

That is my opinion, and I stand by it.

Both are insults. Most personal attacks are opinions.

 

[spike]

You only prove my point. Can you not come up with something original?

Original? Why not just describe "my religion says so and I will not question it".

Monkey see, monkey do.

Go ahead with the childish insults. You're making my point in this thread for me.

 

[spike]

Neither fury nor Les want to touch it..so be it. No more say either. Mods aren't piping in..not even Luis, the only active Mod around.

Shit or get off the pot.

When do you think that might happen?

 

[Gotholic]

Original? Why not just describe "my religion says so and I will not question it".

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Anyways, can you substantiate that assertion of yours pertaining to me?

Go ahead with the childish insults.

Do you really think I am calling you a monkey? Perhaps I am just illustrating a point of you mimicking others as your avatar implies since that is what monkeys do. You do have a monkey avatar. Do you know what avatar means?

You're making my point in this thread for me.

Again, you mimic me.

 

[spike]

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Anyways, can you substantiate that assertion of yours pertaining to me?

Most of your posts substantiate that. Maybe you could give us a few issues where you disagree with the Catholic church's official position substantially?

Do you really think I am calling you a monkey?

You were trying to insult me.

Do you know what avatar means?

A hindu diety. Mostly though it's just images people like. Mine is a cool character form a cartoon.

Again, you mimic me.

Oh noez! Maybe you should quit trying to insult me.

 

[Cerise]

Both are insults. Most personal attacks are opinions.

Oh, I didn't realize you leftists are so sensitive!

 

[Gotholic]

Most of your posts substantiate that.

What a cop out.

Maybe you could give us a few issues where you disagree with the Catholic church's official position substantially?

There are issues of which I am in disagreement. It would not be prudent to get into them.

You were trying to insult me.

If you found my comment offensive I apologize, it was not my intention. But I think you are merely being contentious.

A hindu diety. Mostly though it's just images people like. Mine is a cool character form a cartoon.

I suppose if I thought you were gay, you would think I thought you were happy? The image beneath your name is commonly called a message board avatar. The meaning of which is not what you described.

 

[spike]

There are issues of which I am in disagreement. It would not be prudent to get into them.

Now that is a cop out. C'mon, don't be scared.

If you found my comment offensive I apologize

I appreciate it.

The image beneath your name is commonly called a message board avatar. The meaning of which is not what you described.

No, it really is mostly just images people like.

 

[spike]

Oh, I didn't realize you leftists are so sensitive!

Rightists are more sensitive. I'm just stating facts.

 

[Dave]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Most Inane Thread!

EVAH!

 

[Gotholic]

Now that is a cop out.

Another mimic.

C'mon, don't be scared.

Haha. Do not try to switch the subject. Substantiate your assertion.

No, it really is mostly just images people like.

It usually reflects their mentality.

 

[Gotholic]

Rightists are more sensitive. I'm just stating facts.

Here is a little fact for you, a lefty banned you from the TRW.

 

[spike]

Most Inane Thread!

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Maybe you were looking for "How man OTcers does it take to screw in a lightbulb" or that old ass contest that's still stickied.

 

[Winky]

locked safely away, forever

Good one Gothy

 

[Dave]

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Maybe you were looking for "How man OTcers does it take to screw in a lightbulb" or that old ass contest that's still stickied.

*tosses Spike a biscuit

1 : empty, insubstantial
2 : lacking significance, meaning, or point : silly <inane comments>
synonyms see insipid

I looked it up...

 

[spike]

Another mimic.

Pointing out your hypocrisy.

Haha. Do not try to switch the subject. Substantiate your assertion.

You substantiated it for me. You can't provide a single example where you disagree with the catholic church on anything substantial.

It usually reflects their mentality.

Not really.