[001]
Spinosegnosaurus77
Current Version
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Okay. \
to:
Okay. \\\"Compythysaurus\\\" isn\\\'t even a proper dinosaur name. It probably refers to \\\'\\\'Compsognathus\\\'\\\'. The lizard like animal described does not match what we know about such theropods anyway. ScienceMarchesOn plays hell on Creationist Dogma and lies.
\\\'\\\'Pteranodon\\\'\\\' in Egypt? \\\'\\\'Triceratops\\\'\\\' in France? Plesiosaurs in the Pacific? MisplacedWildlife to the extreme. Further, \\\'\\\'Pteranodon\\\'\\\' was a sea going fish eater, it\\\'d have little to no interest in spices. \\\'\\\'Triceratops\\\'\\\' are herd animals, so a knight finding one alone (let alone killing it dragon-style) is ridiculous beyond words. Plesiosaur \\\"sightings\\\" play up their swan like necks, something their musculuature could not support nor could their vertebra allow them to move that fluidly.
Appeals to authority are just that and thus easily ignored as non-evidence.
Kendai, projection is an ugly thing.
Creationism has never published anything of value. No scientific journals, no discoveries, not break throughs, no peer review. Any idiot can make a website. It\\\'s failed in the scientific literature, it\\\'s failed in courts mutliple times due to a blatant re-naming campaign (\\\"Creationism\\\" replaced with \\\"Intelligent Design\\\" in \\\'\\\'Of Pandas and People\\\'\\\', the Creationist and Intelligent Design textbook).
I can clearly call creationists lying because they\\\'ve been \\\'\\\'\\\'convicted\\\'\\\'\\\' of it. Multiple times.
You want Creatsionism to be taken seriously as a science? Pointed to something published in a peer reviewed journal, or some medidical or scientific break through that uses creation theory to make human lives better in an objective physical way?
Furbearingbrick gave some good links. I\\\'d throw in [[http://www.creationtheory.org/ Creationtheory.org]], which breaks down all the common arguments and has example debates...er...dismantelings of creation theory in action.
\\\'\\\'Pteranodon\\\'\\\' in Egypt? \\\'\\\'Triceratops\\\'\\\' in France? Plesiosaurs in the Pacific? MisplacedWildlife to the extreme. Further, \\\'\\\'Pteranodon\\\'\\\' was a sea going fish eater, it\\\'d have little to no interest in spices. \\\'\\\'Triceratops\\\'\\\' are herd animals, so a knight finding one alone (let alone killing it dragon-style) is ridiculous beyond words. Plesiosaur \\\"sightings\\\" play up their swan like necks, something their musculuature could not support nor could their vertebra allow them to move that fluidly.
Appeals to authority are just that and thus easily ignored as non-evidence.
Kendai, projection is an ugly thing.
Creationism has never published anything of value. No scientific journals, no discoveries, not break throughs, no peer review. Any idiot can make a website. It\\\'s failed in the scientific literature, it\\\'s failed in courts mutliple times due to a blatant re-naming campaign (\\\"Creationism\\\" replaced with \\\"Intelligent Design\\\" in \\\'\\\'Of Pandas and People\\\'\\\', the Creationist and Intelligent Design textbook).
I can clearly call creationists lying because they\\\'ve been \\\'\\\'\\\'convicted\\\'\\\'\\\' of it. Multiple times.
You want Creatsionism to be taken seriously as a science? Pointed to something published in a peer reviewed journal, or some medidical or scientific break through that uses creation theory to make human lives better in an objective physical way?
Furbearingbrick gave some good links. I\\\'d throw in [[http://www.creationtheory.org/ Creationtheory.org]], which breaks down all the common arguments and has example debates...er...dismantelings of creation theory in action.
