Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did Dinosaurs live with man?
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(3)
Message 271 of 373 (697969)
05-02-2013 6:58 AM


Why?
Why is everybody still replying to Alfred?
He is clearly in need of medication.
It is not as if he has posted something that actually requires disproving.
No-one is reading his posts and thinking: "Hmmm....could that be true?".
Please stop feeding that troll.

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Dogmafood, posted 05-02-2013 7:03 AM Panda has seen this message but not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 272 of 373 (697970)
05-02-2013 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by Panda
05-02-2013 6:58 AM


Re: Why?
Humour value. I find it at least a little bit funny.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Panda, posted 05-02-2013 6:58 AM Panda has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2013 10:31 AM Dogmafood has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 273 of 373 (697984)
05-02-2013 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by Alfred Maddenstein
05-01-2013 10:21 PM


What do you mean by the cat's denying you know anything about anything at all?
I didn't say that. You saw something that wasn't there. How crazy of a Jew are you? Oh!.. wait, that might explain why you think there's dragons.
You mean anything past? Well, there are serious doubts about all your certainties even about relatively recent past.
Yeah, that's pretty much what I mean. We have a very simple fact here: Dinosaurs did not coexist with humans. Now, you are unable to refute that fact by adding additional knowledge. So, instead you try to combat it by discrediting the knowledge that we do have: "You don't know that they're not dragons".
You're not actually bringing anything to the table, all you're doing is pretending that we haven't brought anything either. Its pathetic, really.
And since you're doing such a disservice to everyone, you have to hide what you're doing behind obscure language and prose.
No doubt, in your arrogance, you think that you're clever. Just know that we all think that you're an idiot and a troll.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 05-01-2013 10:21 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 05-03-2013 2:00 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3966 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 274 of 373 (698096)
05-03-2013 2:00 AM
Reply to: Message 273 by New Cat's Eye
05-02-2013 10:39 AM


Density of a quackademic skull
Now, how dense a learned skull can be? - wonders the Cheshire. How do you mean you have got a "fact" about dragons here, Vatican? There is no single eternal fact in science. Any presentation includes a number of interpreted assumptions taken by the presenter and the audience for granted for the sake of enjoying the exchange of presentations in hope of possible understanding. Those may be called facts for the sake of that particular presentation only. The "facts" are not doubted and examined by the presenter and the audience any too much simply because if each and every assumption were to be thoroughly examined first, no presentation of a hypothesis would be possible at all. No theorising would ever be started. That is all there is to the "facts", Vatican.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-02-2013 10:39 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-03-2013 3:32 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied
 Message 277 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-03-2013 11:04 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 275 of 373 (698101)
05-03-2013 3:32 AM
Reply to: Message 274 by Alfred Maddenstein
05-03-2013 2:00 AM


Re: Density of a quackademic skull
Now, how dense a learned skull can be? - wonders the Cheshire. How do you mean you have got a "fact" about dragons here, Vatican? There is no single eternal fact in science. Any presentation includes a number of interpreted assumptions taken by the presenter and the audience for granted for the sake of enjoying the exchange of presentations in hope of possible understanding. Those may be called facts for the sake of that particular presentation only. The "facts" are not doubted and examined by the presenter and the audience any too much simply because if each and every assumption were to be thoroughly examined first, no presentation of a hypothesis would be possible at all. No theorising would ever be started. That is all there is to the "facts", Vatican.
Here's a fact: you can't find any dragons.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 05-03-2013 2:00 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 276 of 373 (698123)
05-03-2013 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Dogmafood
05-02-2013 7:03 AM


Re: Why?...Why indeed!
I find it at least a little bit funny.
Alfred brings out the absolute worst in other posters. He is simply too poor a foil for making even the best sarcastic or critical comments truly shine. I'd rather ask probing, yet testy questions elsewhere. Just about any elsewhere.
Alfred wasn't always so ... Maddenstein. But his preference for bizarro science was always a large part of his belief system. AM started referring to himself in third cat after getting his butt kicked in several threads and then being booted for not being able to follow simple rules. It appears that he is now only allowed in Free For All, where the only rules are just to not pee in the community corn flakes.
Always remember that the pig likes it.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Dogmafood, posted 05-02-2013 7:03 AM Dogmafood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Dogmafood, posted 05-03-2013 10:57 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 277 of 373 (698136)
05-03-2013 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 274 by Alfred Maddenstein
05-03-2013 2:00 AM


Re: Density of a quackademic skull
Now, how dense a learned skull can be? - wonders the Cheshire.
Its on the order of a couple thousand kilograms per cubic meter. You can thank science for that fact.
How do you mean you have got a "fact" about dragons here, Vatican?
Its a fact that dinosaurs did not live with man. Do you want a deduction, or something?
1) If dinosaurs lived with man, then we would have unfossilized dinosaur bones.
2) We do not have unfossilized dinosaur bones.

C) Dinosaurs did not live with man.
Now, we know you're unable to accept this fact. So, instead of bringing something to the table, all you can do is try to discredit our knowledge:
There is no single eternal fact in science. Any presentation includes a number of interpreted assumptions taken by the presenter and the audience for granted for the sake of enjoying the exchange of presentations in hope of possible understanding. Those may be called facts for the sake of that particular presentation only. The "facts" are not doubted and examined by the presenter and the audience any too much simply because if each and every assumption were to be thoroughly examined first, no presentation of a hypothesis would be possible at all. No theorising would ever be started. That is all there is to the "facts", Vatican.
But, the fact remains that this method of science works and provides results. It cures diseases, put a man on the moon, and has allowed us to communicate this way.
So it doesn't even matter at all if it "could" all be wrong. Its working great! You should be thankful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 05-03-2013 2:00 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 3:30 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 278 of 373 (698198)
05-03-2013 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by NoNukes
05-03-2013 10:31 AM


Re: Why?...Why indeed!
Point taken....again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2013 10:31 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 279 of 373 (698204)
05-04-2013 3:30 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by New Cat's Eye
05-03-2013 11:04 AM


Re: Density of a quackademic skull
Its a fact that dinosaurs did not live with man. Do you want a deduction, or something?
1) If dinosaurs lived with man, then we would have unfossilized dinosaur bones.
2) We do not have unfossilized dinosaur bones.
I already answered you on the Do Creationists try to find fossils thread referring to my earlier post where I linked a couple articles:
The article on petrification clearly describes bodies of humans and a cat that had been mineralized throughout, and there is one quote on [URL=http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/fossilboot.html]the other page[/URL=] by an Alfred Romer writing in Natural History in 1959 saying that it only takes five to ten years to completely replace chicken bones and wood with minerals. Complete replacement with minerals IS fossilization. At least those references ought to demonstrate the point.
Dinosaurs might take longer to fossilize but a few hundred years ought to be more than enough, and we have some 4300 years since the Flood for the job anyway.
There is no doubt that dinosaurs and people shared this planet before the Flood.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Remove the line of "=".

He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.
2Cr 10:4-5 (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-03-2013 11:04 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by Coyote, posted 05-04-2013 10:36 AM Faith has replied
 Message 285 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-07-2013 11:26 AM Faith has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 280 of 373 (698221)
05-04-2013 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by Faith
05-04-2013 3:30 AM


Dating again
There is no doubt that dinosaurs and people shared this planet before the Flood.
In order to claim that, there are a number of problems you must first explain.
Just one of these is the dating. Do you have any evidence that scientific dating is off by a factor of some 5,000X?
I don't want to see hand-waving, a restatement of your beliefs, or any of that. I want you to produce real evidence that all dating methods are wrong.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 3:30 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 11:33 AM Coyote has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 281 of 373 (698222)
05-04-2013 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 280 by Coyote
05-04-2013 10:36 AM


Re: Dating again
No I don't have the evidence you want though I think some creationistsw do, I just can never keep it all in mind. But I do have the Bible which is God's word, which says you're wrong. That really ought to suffice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Coyote, posted 05-04-2013 10:36 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Coyote, posted 05-04-2013 11:59 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 284 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-05-2013 1:31 PM Faith has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 282 of 373 (698224)
05-04-2013 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by Faith
05-04-2013 11:33 AM


Re: Dating again
No I don't have the evidence you want though I think some creationistsw do, I just can never keep it all in mind. But I do have the Bible which is God's word, which says you're wrong. That really ought to suffice.
If the bible says that dinosaurs coexisted with man it is wrong.
That's pretty much all there is to it.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 11:33 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by Rahvin, posted 05-04-2013 4:56 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


(2)
Message 283 of 373 (698243)
05-04-2013 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by Coyote
05-04-2013 11:59 AM


Re: Dating again
If the bible says that dinosaurs coexisted with man it is wrong.
That's pretty much all there is to it.
There's always the possibility that Faith's interpretation is wrong. After all, just because Faith completely and utterly misunderstands and misinterprets things like the theory of evolution or radiometric dating doesn't mean those scientific principles are inaccurate. The same can apply to her Bible.
I've seen some excellent analysis of some of the more outlandish interpretations of supposed megafauna in the Bible - it's quite readily apparent that real creatures like, for instance, rhinos, elephants, and the like account for what many Creationists interpret to be unicorns and dinosaurs.
Not that I'm actually arguing in favor of Biblical accuracy, mind you - just that Faith's Bible isn't wrong about absolutely everything, and her interpretation of it lines up with reality even less.

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus
"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Coyote, posted 05-04-2013 11:59 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 284 of 373 (698325)
05-05-2013 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by Faith
05-04-2013 11:33 AM


Re: Dating again
No I don't have the evidence you want though I think some creationistsw do, I just can never keep it all in mind. But I do have the Bible which is God's word, which says you're wrong. That really ought to suffice.
Also, kudos to Coyote for being mentioned in the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 11:33 AM Faith has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 285 of 373 (698474)
05-07-2013 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by Faith
05-04-2013 3:30 AM


Re: Density of a quackademic skull
[qs]
Its a fact that dinosaurs did not live with man. Do you want a deduction, or something?
1) If dinosaurs lived with man, then we would have unfossilized dinosaur bones.
2) We do not have unfossilized dinosaur bones.
I already answered you on the Do Creationists try to find fossils thread referring to my earlier post where I linked a couple articles:
The article on petrification clearly describes bodies of humans and a cat that had been mineralized throughout, and there is one quote on [URL=http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/fossilboot.html]the other page[/URL=] by an Alfred Romer writing in Natural History in 1959 saying that it only takes five to ten years to completely replace chicken bones and wood with minerals. Complete replacement with minerals IS fossilization. At least those references ought to demonstrate the point.
Dinosaurs might take longer to fossilize but a few hundred years ought to be more than enough, and we have some 4300 years since the Flood for the job anyway.
The point was that there are not any dinosaur bones that are not fossilized. If they existed when humans did, then we would have at least one bone from a dinosaur that didn't get fossilized. But we don't.
Its impossible for The Flood to have fossilized just some of the bones from animals that all existed at the same place at the same time. If humans and dinosaurs were together, then we'd have human bones fossilized with dinosaur bones, and we'd have unfossilized dinosaur bones with the unfossilized human bones. But we don't see any of that anywhere at all.
All the dinosaur bones are fossilized and the human ones are not. Therefore, they couldn't have been together at the same place and the same time.
There is no doubt that dinosaurs and people shared this planet before the Flood.
Even you don't believe that. You just have to say that to save face.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 3:30 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by Coyote, posted 05-07-2013 11:55 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 288 by Faith, posted 05-07-2013 2:27 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 294 by Faith, posted 05-08-2013 12:36 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024