Reply With Quote
Youtube!
mouse is an expert on thermodynamics or whatever it is that makes him claim to know how the structure of buildings react to fires.
Youtube!
Thermite
Well, there we have it. Just email this to everybody in the country and then this entire 9/11 conspiracy thing can be put to rest.Thermite
lmao at photobucket....../RackTheMouse/...../blindassholes.jpgThermite
Do you completely miss the point of evolution? Why would you think that you would have similar evolutionary chains on a completely different planet? (Or why would you think that we would think that there would be a similar evolutionary chain to ours on a completely different planet?)
Macro or micro?
If you read correctly i said you wouldn't have "similar" body types. Thus Darwin's evolution fantasy would be worthless. (as it is today)Why would you think that you would have similar evolutionary chains on a completely different planet?
as mentioned in my quote.
maybe you interpreted my post wrong, my point was if there is life on another planet and they are made up of different organisms as humans and they have proof they are a result of some sort of intelligent design it blows away all the Darwin talk.(Or why would you think that we would think that there would be a similar evolutionary chain to ours on a completely different planet?)
You can't have it both ways you can't come in here and preach Science and tell me the earth is 4 billion years old when you don't have all the facts if you did you would have mentioned other life forms. Also you can't say man evolved from a turtle, and then when life is discovered on another planet try to explain it away as if your theories apply to the other life forms, you guys are backpedaling and life on another planet will expose Darwin's lies and your ignorance.
Okay, and what if there was evidence that they evolved? Why are we talking about hypothetical scenarios now? Your point is pointless.
Then I would accept it, Just as I would if you had had evidence,
so show me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
http://www.newscientist.com/topic/evolution
http://science.howstuffworks.com/env.../evolution.htm
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_repo...only/index.jsp
Transitional fossils:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tional_fossils
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3790531.stm
It's a matter of using Occam's razor. The most evidence points to evolution, even if it will forever be incomplete of the actual observation, at least concerning our histories. Many more questions than answers are raised in intelligent design and creationism, essentially the opposite of what science asks for in any plausible theory.
Also, there can be no proof that life was intelligently designed, so mouse's bull scenario isn't even valid. Basically, he's just making idiotic assertions yet again.
There is no evolutionist worth their salt that believes that there would be any kind of life form that would even be remotely similar to the ones we observe on this planet. If there is a planet with life forms on it, they had to adapt to a different set of cir stances. Perhaps there are stronger radiation sources near to those planets, or perhaps no asteroids hit their planet and killed off the once dominant species, perhaps the life form sprang from (as you said) silicon instead of carbon. The "fittest" which survived on this planet may not even remotely have a chance on another planet which houses life forms. It seems you really DON'T understand the theory which you are arguing against.
maybe you interpreted my post wrong, my point was if there is life on another planet and they are made up of different organisms as humans and they have proof they are a result of some sort of intelligent design it blows away all the Darwin talk.
You can't have it both ways you can't come in here and preach Science and tell me the earth is 4 billion years old when you don't have all the facts if you did you would have mentioned other life forms. Also you can't say man evolved from a turtle, and then when life is discovered on another planet try to explain it away as if your theories apply to the other life forms, you guys are backpedaling and life on another planet will expose Darwin's lies and your ignorance.
Proof is proof, if there is proof of something, then it cannot be denied.
I can see your new around here.
First off don't post a bunch of links of "theories" I asked you for proof.
your first link alone says this,
I don't want your lazy approach to proving something show me the missing link or stfu this is why your debate skills are weak and a waste of my time.This powerful explanatory and predictive (theory} has become the central organizing principle of modern biology,
Are you kidding me? you pulled out the fossil card already? That fossil chart has been proven wrong and the man who created it went to prison.
most of those fossils have been found on mountain tops and above where the chart says they can only be found.
your whole argument is based on some half ass fossils your in deep already.
here is a fossil you can start with.
show me.
You seem to be speaking for a life form you have no clue exist and if they did you can't speak for them Their bodies can be made of anium as far as you know, and if so , what creature did they evolve from, the car?
It seems you really DON'T understand the theory which you are arguing against.
sorry I had no idea your so educated in these matters, I look forward to your explanations.
one thing I understand is when people try to bull me.
lol "transitional fossils"
lol adams rib
You obviously need these links because you don't know about evolution since you have stated that evolution claims that humans evolved from snails, monkeys and now turtles.
My debate skills are weak? The only thing you do is post strawmen.I don't want your lazy approach to proving something show me the missing link or stfu this is why your debate skills are weak and a waste of my time.
The person who put together the fossil chart on wikipedia went to prison? First of all, how is that relevant to the discussion? Second, where has this chart been proven wrong?Are you kidding me? you pulled out the fossil card already? That fossil chart has been proven wrong and the man who created it went to prison.
What? You're incoherent.most of those fossils have been found on mountain tops and above where the chart says they can only be found.
No, actually it is not.your whole argument is based on some half ass fossils your in deep already.
here is a fossil you can start with.
Again, relevance?
Also, you should actually read the links so you can learn more about evolution, because you clearly don't know anything. Those links to provide evidence and can give you a better understanding of evolution if you want to actually learn more about it.
However, the thing is that you don't want to learn more about evolution. You have been told time and time again that your perception of what evolution does is wrong, yet you choose to post the same wrong over and over again.
And since you want to talk about a boot,
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/boot.htmIn early 2006, an essay appeared on Carl Baugh's "Creation Evidence Museum" web site declaring that the boot contains "the fossilized remains of the owner of the boot, from the knee down." The essay continued, "Yes, fossilized bone, skin, foot, all intact and in the boot. The boot was of recent origin, as was the 'Limestone Cowboy' as he has come to be known." Baugh's phrase "from the knee down" seems questionable. The bones actually appear to be broken off at about half the distance to the knee, although it's possible that additional bone segments are embedded in the matrix.
In any case, Baugh's website essay also stated that only the contents of the boot are fossilized, not the boot itself, "demonstrating that some materials fossilize more readily than others." However, it seems very implausible that bones and flesh would be "petrified" while the boot, reportedly made of mostly of leather (another organic material), remained virtually unaltered. In Fig. 3 one can even see the stiching threads, which also look completely modern and unaltered. These inconsistencies alone would warrant that reliable independent investigators be allowed to closely examine the contents of the boot to evaluate Baugh's claims.
Although Baugh and Patton have repeatedly referred to the bones in the boot as "fossilized," they have presented no evidence that they are anything but modern bones surrounded by hardened modern sediment. One sees no indication in the bones of foreign mineral replacement, or even any infilling of the air spaces in the inner "spongy-bone" portions of the bones (see Fig. 2). If these are "fossilized" bones, it certainly is not apparent in the photographs.
Furthermore, the material around the bones does not appear to have the shape of a human leg. The bulk of the matrix appears to take the shape of the boot itself, and its surface seems to record the contours and texture of the inside of the boot. Thus, rather than representing fossilized flesh, it seems more likely that the matrix around the bones is simply a natural cast composed of whatever sediment (probably a limy mud) filled the boot after the flesh rotted away. The mud probably became fairly hard as it dried (which is not unusual) but is unlikely to be true limestone, let alone petrified or "fossilized" flesh.
In fact, the boot advocates have not even demonstrated that the bones in question are human. The bones appear to be compatible with a large mammal, but seem surprising large in relation to the size of the boot. Without more thorough do entation, it is diffult to say what creature they belong to. For all we know, someone could have stuck some cow bones in a muddy boot. On the other hand, if the bones are really human as Baugh maintains, then he should report the remains to the authorities, since they could relate to a missing person or criminal case.
If a car like creature had the qualities necessary to survive on this hypothetical planet which you speak of, then yes this could happen. Look, evolution even has a snappy catch phrase to make it easy to understand for those who haven't had the time or will to work on understanding it. Survival of the fittest. The fittest on a planet 6000 LY away does not necessarily equal the fittest in your backyard.
Better get that radar adjusted.
sorry I had no idea your so educated in these matters, I look forward to your explanations.
one thing I understand is when people try to bull me.
Anyway, you can call it running away or whatever, but I have a statistics test tonight that I need to study for. I will probably pick back up later, or I might just get a beer after the test then come home and go to sleep. We shall see.
How can you say that if you have not done the research? Your small mind and thuggish ways of posting is not helping you look any smarter.
Lets see Evolution proof. Some old bones, worthless fossils and a few apes at the circus that can smoke cigarettes.so mouse's bull scenario isn't even valid. Basically, he's just making idiotic assertions yet again.
Intelligent design proof.
The human eye is so complex and many today have little clue how it really works.
The human brain is something you may not have but many humans do and is very complex and is still being studied.
A leaf has more complex DNA data than all of the data of the Apollo 11 spacecraft.
And what monkey that evolved from a fish is going to create one of these?
If you can't see intelligent design in everyday life then you need to pull your ignorant banana eating head out your stubborn Darwin loving ass and learn something for once.
lol mavs
lol forbidden fruit
So if i leave a Honda Accord in my backyard for 2 billion years when i come back it will be a Toyota Tundra? Not only is Evolution so off base i still have not seen the proof, have you guys forgotten to post the proof?
No problem I have to leave also to visit my proctologist so i will be back later.Anyway, you can call it running away or whatever, but I have a statistics test tonight that I need to study for. I will probably pick back up later, or I might just get a beer after the test then come home and go to sleep. We shall see.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
