- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (TimothyVI @ May 26 2011,23:43) Hi T8, You said “However, you say that this man has no aptitude for science.'
That is not what I said at all.
I said ” He shows no aptitude for science
in my opinion.”
Yes I know that you said opinion, without looking back at my post, I think I acknowledged that.My question was what was your qualifications for saying that he lacked this aptitude. What aptitude do you have to base that opinion on?
Quote (Stu @ May 27 2011,23:10) Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 23 2011,06:56) Nice side step. I was making a serious point though. What differentiates a Crocodile or Tuatara from the dinosaur?
The tuatara belongs to a really old line of descent off which sprang the line to dinosaurs. Tuataras are not dinosaurs.Stuart
Right, so the all the ones that were wiped out were called dinosaurs and the ones that lived were not. Another great coincidence perhaps?Also dinosaurs supposedly evolved into birds. But how could they if they were wiped out?
Confused. I rang 0800 DARWIN and there was no hotline either.
Quote (Stu @ May 27 2011,23:10) The tuatara belongs to a really old line of descent off which sprang the line to dinosaurs. Tuataras are not dinosaurs.
Substantation please.…and the crocodile?
Quote (Stu @ May 27 2011,23:27) Scientists are more often right than creationists. Far more often.
Spouting unsubstantiated generalisations underpinned by informal fallacies – is this your modus operandi Stu?On what do you base this statement? Do you have some data to share with us?
Quote (t8 @ May 28 2011,11:03) Quote (Stu @ May 27 2011,23:10) Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 23 2011,06:56) Nice side step. I was making a serious point though. What differentiates a Crocodile or Tuatara from the dinosaur?
The tuatara belongs to a really old line of descent off which sprang the line to dinosaurs. Tuataras are not dinosaurs.Stuart
Right, so the all the ones that were wiped out were called dinosaurs and the ones that lived were not. Another great coincidence perhaps?Also dinosaurs supposedly evolved into birds. But how could they if they were wiped out?
Confused.
I realise you are confused. That is pretty clear from your post.There is no pleasing some creationists. First they complain that if humans evolved from chimpanzees (we didn't), then there should no longer be chimpanzees, and now we have the opposite complaint that if there are birds then how is it the dinosaurs got wiped out?
If you care to know then you will be able to find out what the evidence says easily enough without my help.
Stuart
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 28 2011,11:04) Quote (Stu @ May 27 2011,23:10) The tuatara belongs to a really old line of descent off which sprang the line to dinosaurs. Tuataras are not dinosaurs.
Substantation please.…and the crocodile?
The same applies to you Is 1:18 as it does to t8. Why don't you do some reading if the topic is of interest to you? That's how I found out about it.Stuart
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 28 2011,11:09) Quote (Stu @ May 27 2011,23:27) Scientists are more often right than creationists. Far more often.
Spouting unsubstantiated generalisations underpinned by informal fallacies – is this your modus operandi Stu?
No. See t8 if you want that sort of thing.Quote On what do you base this statement? Do you have some data to share with us?
Give me a uniquely creationist truth claim that is supported by unambiguous evidence. Even one!Stuart
Quote (Stu @ May 28 2011,23:52) Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 28 2011,11:04) Quote (Stu @ May 27 2011,23:10) The tuatara belongs to a really old line of descent off which sprang the line to dinosaurs. Tuataras are not dinosaurs.
Substantation please.…and the crocodile?
The same applies to you Is 1:18 as it does to t8. Why don't you do some reading if the topic is of interest to you? That's how I found out about it.Stuart
I'm a little pressed for time these days. I'm not asking much, just for you to substantiate the assertion you made. Can you do that please? If you can't do it – just say so.http://lmgtfy.com/?q=crocodile+evolution
Fourth one down.
Apologies for the unnecessary sarcasm, but well that's the appropriate response to requests from creationists who are too busy to learn about biology.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ May 29 2011,11:13) http://lmgtfy.com/?q=crocodile+evolution Fourth one down.
Apologies for the unnecessary sarcasm, but well that's the appropriate response to requests from creationists who are too busy to learn about biology.
Stuart
I did some reading and didn't find what I was looking for, maybe you can assist? Presuppositions with regard to lineage etc aside, what are some physiological/morphological features of dinosaurs that are lacking in tuataras and crocodiles? Or conversly, what do tuataras/crocodiles have that are lacking in dinosaurs? What differentiates them in that sense? If a paleontologist happened to dig up a tuatara/crocodile fossil what features would tell him that it wasn't a dinosaur?You don't dig up fossils of extant animals, if the remains are fossilised then they will be those of an ancestral species.
Read this to see how fossil evidence only gets you so far with tuatara evolution, and certainly not back as far as dinosaurs. The evidence used is molecular, as indicated by the reference at the bottom of the page:
http://chickenoreggblog.wordpress.com/2010….saur-ok
Fossil remains of dinosaurs would differ from crocodile skeletons as described here:
http://www.txtwriter.com/backgrounders/Dinosaurs/dinoBG3.html
Stuart
I did forget to add that there could be some argument for and against my first statement about fossils not being of extant animals, depending on where the last species boundary is considered to lie. Arbitrarily, remains older than 10,000 years are considered fossil remains and most extant species were the same 10,000 years ago so you could technically dig up fossil remains of things that still walk the earth. However it remains true that you do not need to find crocodile or tuatara fossils to compare with dinosaur fossils.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ May 29 2011,15:53) You don't dig up fossils of extant animals, if the remains are fossilised then they will be those of an ancestral species.
It was a hypothetical question. I think you knew that.Quote Read this to see how fossil evidence only gets you so far with tuatara evolution, and certainly not back as far as dinosaurs. The evidence used is molecular, as indicated by the reference at the bottom of the page:
I asked “what are some physiological/morphological features of dinosaurs that are lacking in tuataras and crocodiles? Or conversly, what do tuataras/crocodiles have that are lacking in dinosaurs?”. No details pretaining to physiological/morphological features are given in your reference.Quote Fossil remains of dinosaurs would differ from crocodile skeletons as described here:
This was much closer to the mark, but I now realise my question was sloppy. I should have asked:“Presuppositions with regard to lineage etc aside, what are some physiological/morphological features of dinosaur-era reptiles that are lacking in tuataras and crocodiles? Or conversly, what do tuataras/crocodiles have that are lacking in dinosaur-era reptiles? What differentiates them in that sense? If a paleontologist happened to dig up a tuatara/crocodile fossil what features would tell him that it wasn't a dinosaur-era reptile?
Because it seems crocodiles most certainly co-existed with the dinosaurs:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science….ra.html
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1942153,00.htmlSo, save for a small taxonomic detail about what actually constitutes a dinosaur, my postulation about humans co-existing with dinosaurs is looking pretty solid! They lived with them then and we live with them today.
Quote So, save for a small taxonomic detail about what actually constitutes a dinosaur, my postulation about humans co-existing with dinosaurs is looking pretty solid! They lived with them then and we live with them today.
Crocodiles are not dinosaurs. The archosaurs split into dinosaurs and crocodiles:
As I already explained, your best hope is to claim that we live today with this dinosaur descendent:
Of course for those who are bible-believers there is the “small taxonomic detail” of its claim that bats are birds.
Stuart
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Feb. 09 2011,07:09) Quote (Ed J @ Feb. 08 2011,07:04) Hi Princess, God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
awesome video.
i watched the whole thing.
Hi Stuart,Did you watch this video?
If so, what did you think of it?God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
