Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [DebunkCreation] CSICOP's Creation & Intelligent Design Watch

Expand Messages
  • John Burman
    read your paper .you like to suggest ludicrous notions that support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space ship those are beneath even the
    Message 1 of 23 , Aug 23, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      read your paper .you like to suggest ludicrous notions that support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space ship those are beneath even the connection of brain to eye interaction, as usual much ado about nothing!  all i ask is a simple outhouse , they should be springing up occasionall . we should have seen them by now! i think you lack integrity, in that you will hold untenable positions in the face of common lamens logic!  in other words the point of your debate is self aggrandizement and not a search for truth.


      Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

    • Roger Stanyard
      ... Could you possibly explain what you are saying in English? ... support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space ship those are beneath even
      Message 2 of 23 , Aug 23, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
        <blugreeneyes38@...> wrote:
        >
        >

        Could you possibly explain what you are saying in English?


        > read your paper .you like to suggest ludicrous notions that
        support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space ship
        those are beneath even the connection of brain to eye interaction, as
        usual much ado about nothing! all i ask is a simple outhouse , they
        should be springing up occasionall . we should have seen them by now!
        i think you lack integrity, in that you will hold untenable positions
        in the face of common lamens logic! in other words the point of your
        debate is self aggrandizement and not a search for truth.
        >
        >
        >
        > ---------------------------------
        > Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.
        Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
        >
      • Lenny Flank
        ... Huh? What the fuck are you gibebring about? =================================== Lenny Flank There are no loose threads in the web of life Creation
        Message 3 of 23 , Aug 23, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          >
          >
          >
          > read your paper .you like to suggest ludicrous notions that
          > support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space
          > ship those are beneath even the connection of brain to eye
          > interaction, as usual much ado about nothing! all i ask is a
          > simple outhouse , they should be springing up occasionall . we
          > should have seen them by now! i think you lack integrity, in that
          > you will hold untenable positions in the face of common lamens
          > logic! in other words the point of your debate is self
          > aggrandizement and not a search for truth.
          >


          Huh? What the fuck are you gibebring about?



          ===================================
          Lenny Flank
          "There are no loose threads in the web of life"

          Creation "Science" Debunked
          http://www.geocities.com/lflank

          My Reptile Page
          http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
        • Michael E. Suttkus, II
          ... When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website back up, you will have earned a place. Can anyone translate this into English? I don t have a
          Message 4 of 23 , Aug 23, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
            <blugreeneyes38@...> wrote:
            >
            > read your paper .you like to suggest ludicrous notions that
            > support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space ship
            > those are beneath even the connection of brain to eye interaction,
            > as usual much ado about nothing! all i ask is a simple outhouse ,
            > they should be springing up occasionall . we should have seen them
            > by now! i think you lack integrity, in that you will hold untenable
            > positions in the face of common lamens logic! in other words the
            > point of your debate is self aggrandizement and not a search for
            > truth.

            When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website back up,
            you will have earned a place.

            Can anyone translate this into English? I don't have a clue what he's
            doing on about. Is this some lame variation on the
            tornado-in-a-junk-yard nonsense? Does he really think outhouses
            should just pop up if evolution is true? I mean, I've seen some dumb
            metaphors in my day but this is a classic.
          • Dick Busch
            Michael - Imagine, that website will NEVER, EVER lack for new material! ... Dick. ... ~SNIP!~
            Message 5 of 23 , Aug 23, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Michael -

              Imagine, that website will NEVER, EVER lack for new material!

              :-)

              Dick.


              --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, "Michael E. Suttkus, II"
              <suttkus@...> wrote:
              >
              > --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
              > <blugreeneyes38@> wrote:
              > >
              ~SNIP!~

              >
              > When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website back up,
              > you will have earned a place.
              >
              > Can anyone translate this into English? I don't have a clue what he's
              > doing on about. Is this some lame variation on the
              > tornado-in-a-junk-yard nonsense? Does he really think outhouses
              > should just pop up if evolution is true? I mean, I've seen some dumb
              > metaphors in my day but this is a classic.
              >
            • Stefan Lindstrom
              ... Yes please, get it back up! =) Always good for a luiagh or two, or to get you back on track when you seem to get your hopes up for humanity. :P ... I think
              Message 6 of 23 , Aug 23, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                > > read your paper .you like to suggest ludicrous notions that
                > > support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space ship
                > > those are beneath even the connection of brain to eye interaction,
                > > as usual much ado about nothing! all i ask is a simple outhouse ,
                > > they should be springing up occasionall . we should have seen them
                > > by now! i think you lack integrity, in that you will hold untenable
                > > positions in the face of common lamens logic! in other words the
                > > point of your debate is self aggrandizement and not a search for
                > > truth.
                >
                > When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website back up,
                > you will have earned a place.

                Yes please, get it back up! =)
                Always good for a luiagh or two, or to get you back on track when you seem
                to get your hopes up for humanity. :P

                > Can anyone translate this into English? I don't have a clue what he's
                > doing on about. Is this some lame variation on the
                > tornado-in-a-junk-yard nonsense? Does he really think outhouses
                > should just pop up if evolution is true? I mean, I've seen some dumb
                > metaphors in my day but this is a classic.

                I think that is exactly the garbage he's spewing. Sorta: "If evolution is
                true, random chance should have outhouses and whatnot spuriously pop up
                every now and then.".

                /Stefan

                "Kernel Panic in the linked library with the named pipe!"
                - Another exciting game of Cluesnix.
              • John Burman
                Stefan that is partly my point-that there should be something to see. the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate plea for evidence,.
                Message 7 of 23 , Aug 23, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Stefan that is partly my point-that there should be something to see. the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate plea for evidence,. scientific evidence only in support of intelligent design. it is everywhere.! i recently watched a video by two of the most brilliant minds alive today, interviewed by a respected journalist they made assertions,no i think they were quite clear, that evolution is proved incontrovertibly by variations in pigmentation and DNA which they  found to differ between Eskimos and Africans. these men are greatly to be respected,they have made magnificent contributions to our world .  and i have no doubt that their findings about the DNA  and the pigmentation are true, but this may be intelligent design just as easily as evolution.  the other part of my point t
                  Stefan Lindstrom <asmodean@...> wrote:
                  > > read your paper .you like to suggest ludicrous notions that
                  > > support your position. i wont ask for a power plant or a space ship
                  > > those are beneath even the connection of brain to eye interaction,
                  > > as usual much ado about nothing! all i ask is a simple outhouse ,
                  > > they should be springing up occasionall . we should have seen them
                  > > by now! i think you lack integrity, in that you will hold untenable
                  > > positions in the face of common lamens logic! in other words the
                  > > point of your debate is self aggrandizement and not a search for
                  > > truth.
                  >
                  > When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website back up,
                  > you will have earned a place.

                  Yes please, get it back up! =)
                  Always good for a luiagh or two, or to get you back on track when you seem
                  to get your hopes up for humanity. :P

                  > Can anyone translate this into English? I don't have a clue what he's
                  > doing on about. Is this some lame variation on the
                  > tornado-in-a- junk-yard nonsense? Does he really think outhouses
                  > should just pop up if evolution is true? I mean, I've seen some dumb
                  > metaphors in my day but this is a classic.

                  I think that is exactly the garbage he's spewing. Sorta: "If evolution is
                  true, random chance should have outhouses and whatnot spuriously pop up
                  every now and then.".

                  /Stefan

                  "Kernel Panic in the linked library with the named pipe!"
                  - Another exciting game of Cluesnix.


                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.

                • Roger Stanyard
                  ... He also deserves an immediate place on Fundies Say the Darndest Things. Roger
                  Message 8 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, "Michael E. Suttkus, II"
                    <suttkus@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
                    > <blugreeneyes38@> wrote:
                    > >
                    >> When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website back up,
                    > you will have earned a place.
                    >
                    He also deserves an immediate place on Fundies Say the Darndest Things.

                    Roger
                  • Stefan Lindstrom
                    ... And that is a very silly and informed point . ... Human chromosome 2/chimp chromosome 2p+2q? Nested and twin nested hierarchies? ERV-sequences? ... Such
                    Message 9 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, John Burman wrote:

                      > Stefan that is partly my point-that there should be something to see.

                      And that is a very silly and informed "point".

                      > the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate plea for
                      > evidence,.

                      Human chromosome 2/chimp chromosome 2p+2q? Nested and twin nested
                      hierarchies? ERV-sequences?

                      > ' scientific evidence only in support of intelligent design. it is
                      > everywhere.!

                      Such as?

                      > i recently watched a video by two of the most brilliant
                      > minds alive today, interviewed by a respected journalist they made
                      > assertions,no i think they were quite clear, that evolution is proved
                      > incontrovertibly by variations in pigmentation and DNA which they found
                      > to differ between Eskimos and Africans. these men are greatly to be
                      > respected,they have made magnificent contributions to our world . and i
                      > have no doubt that their findings about the DNA and the pigmentation
                      > are true, but this may be intelligent design just as easily as
                      > evolution. the other part of my point t

                      Assertions, assertions, assertions. Where's the *evidence* you talked
                      about?

                      /Stefan

                      "Kernel Panic in the linked library with the named pipe!"
                      - Another exciting game of Cluesnix.
                    • Roger Stanyard
                      ... see. the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate plea for evidence,. scientific evidence only in support of intelligent design. it is
                      Message 10 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
                        <blugreeneyes38@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Stefan that is partly my point-that there should be something to
                        see. the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate plea
                        for evidence,. scientific evidence only in support of intelligent
                        design. it is everywhere.! i recently watched a video by two of the
                        most brilliant minds alive today, interviewed by a respected
                        journalist they made assertions,no i think they were quite clear,
                        that evolution is proved incontrovertibly by variations in
                        pigmentation and DNA which they found to differ between Eskimos and
                        Africans. these men are greatly to be respected,they have made
                        magnificent contributions to our world . and i have no doubt that
                        their findings about the DNA and the pigmentation are true, but this
                        may be intelligent design just as easily as evolution. the other
                        part of my point t
                        How can John Burman recognise what a brilliant mind is?

                        Who are these brilliant minds?

                        Here is a big word that you might understand - DOVER. And another
                        one - LOST.

                        Roger
                      • Shalini
                        ... If this keeps up he may win the Darwin Award someday. Shalini
                        Message 11 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, "Michael E. Suttkus, II"
                          > <suttkus@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
                          > > <blugreeneyes38@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > >> When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website back up,
                          > > you will have earned a place.
                          > >
                          > He also deserves an immediate place on Fundies Say the Darndest Things.
                          >
                          > Roger
                          >
                          If this keeps up he may win the Darwin Award someday.

                          Shalini
                        • Michael E. Suttkus, II
                          ... Thousands of observed new species, thousands of beneficial mutations, hundreds of adaptive organ changes, thousands of transition fossils... but nothing
                          Message 12 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
                            <blugreeneyes38@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Stefan that is partly my point-that there should be something to
                            > see.

                            Thousands of observed new species, thousands of beneficial
                            mutations, hundreds of adaptive organ changes, thousands of
                            transition fossils... but nothing you can see with your eyes closed
                            and your fingers in your ears while screaming "DOES NOT!", so Burman
                            remains blind.

                            > the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate plea
                            > for evidence,. scientific evidence only in support of intelligent
                            > design. it is everywhere.!

                            Like how humans have a vitamin C gene that doesn't work, the same
                            way that the Chimpanzee gene doesn't work. The intelligent designer
                            gave us both a broken gene! He's brilliant! The intelligent
                            designer LOVES it when people die of scurvy, it shows the
                            intelligence of His design! Go praise the Designer's intelligence
                            by getting scurvy right now!

                            > i recently watched a video by two of the most brilliant minds
                            > alive today, interviewed by a respected journalist they made
                            > assertions,no i think they were quite clear, that evolution is
                            > proved incontrovertibly by variations in pigmentation and DNA
                            > which they found to differ between Eskimos and Africans.

                            No, you don't understand what they were saying. No big surprise
                            there. It's proven by the WAY in which the DNA varies, showing
                            changes from a common ancestor.

                            Intelligent designers build in piecemeal fashion. You take the
                            parts you want and stick them in. Nobody says "Oh, we put power
                            steering in trucks, so we can't put it in cars". But this is
                            exactly what the IDer does all the time! They can't pick the best
                            parts, only pick and choose stuff very like what was already
                            present. It's called the nested hierarchy and it's one of the most
                            powerful evidences for common descent. Not that you have ever heard
                            of it in your extensive *cough* studies.
                          • John Burman
                            thousands of separate species. no linking one to another name one thousands of recently observed species yes,but again I ask you wheres the links? i have no
                            Message 13 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              thousands of separate species. no linking one to another  name one thousands of recently observed species yes,but again I ask you wheres the links?   i have no problem with DNA variation if your term evolution suggests adaptation why not ? the problem occurs when you choose to suggest descent .  fresh species arriving  directly out of stale. the chimp or possibly the ape may share DNA similarities closer than any other species with man , but they cant breed with us  God forbid anyone should try.  they are a separate specie and no amount of  minor DNA variation on a level such as climate or diet is going to make a new species.  as to mans suffering if your mad at god take it up with Him it is true i am here to expand my horizons as my studies are as biased as your own. but I'm not here to sway anyone to my camp it is precisely as you say for the most part i dont know what your talking about this is ignorance not stupidity  your reference to the auto is a good analogy,but remember they all need wheels, some wheels are different  but wheels alone cant make a chevy out of a buick.  im still looking for how these recent developements prove something new a claim i have heard before


                              "Michael E. Suttkus, II" <suttkus@...> wrote:
                              --- In DebunkCreation@ yahoogroups. com, John Burman
                              <blugreeneyes38@ ...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Stefan that is partly my point-that there should be something to
                              > see.

                              Thousands of observed new species, thousands of beneficial
                              mutations, hundreds of adaptive organ changes, thousands of
                              transition fossils... but nothing you can see with your eyes closed
                              and your fingers in your ears while screaming "DOES NOT!", so Burman
                              remains blind.

                              > the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate plea
                              > for evidence,. scientific evidence only in support of intelligent
                              > design. it is everywhere.!

                              Like how humans have a vitamin C gene that doesn't work, the same
                              way that the Chimpanzee gene doesn't work. The intelligent designer
                              gave us both a broken gene! He's brilliant! The intelligent
                              designer LOVES it when people die of scurvy, it shows the
                              intelligence of His design! Go praise the Designer's intelligence
                              by getting scurvy right now!

                              > i recently watched a video by two of the most brilliant minds
                              > alive today, interviewed by a respected journalist they made
                              > assertions,no i think they were quite clear, that evolution is
                              > proved incontrovertibly by variations in pigmentation and DNA
                              > which they found to differ between Eskimos and Africans.

                              No, you don't understand what they were saying. No big surprise
                              there. It's proven by the WAY in which the DNA varies, showing
                              changes from a common ancestor.

                              Intelligent designers build in piecemeal fashion. You take the
                              parts you want and stick them in. Nobody says "Oh, we put power
                              steering in trucks, so we can't put it in cars". But this is
                              exactly what the IDer does all the time! They can't pick the best
                              parts, only pick and choose stuff very like what was already
                              present. It's called the nested hierarchy and it's one of the most
                              powerful evidences for common descent. Not that you have ever heard
                              of it in your extensive *cough* studies.



                              Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

                            • Roger Stanyard
                              ... name one thousands of recently observed species yes,but again I ask you wheres the links? Who told you this rubbish. In the case of the humanoid ancestors
                              Message 14 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
                                <blugreeneyes38@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > thousands of separate species. no linking one to another
                                name one thousands of recently observed species yes,but again I ask
                                you wheres the links?

                                Who told you this rubbish. In the case of the humanoid ancestors to
                                us, the fossil ebedeicne is now so good that in places it is barely
                                possible to distinguish netween species. The "missing links" have
                                been found.

                                i have no problem with DNA variation if your term evolution
                                suggests adaptation why not ? the problem occurs when you choose to
                                suggest descent . fresh species arriving directly out of stale.

                                What's "stale"?

                                the chimp or possibly the ape may share DNA similarities closer than
                                any other species with man , but they cant breed with us God forbid
                                anyone should try.

                                Alas, mankind has been there, done that and got the medal. Several
                                million years ago, to be precise. If you had followed this group in
                                recent months you will have found that eveidence has emerged that our
                                ancestors mated with ancestors of chimpanzees (IIRC) even thoufgh
                                they were basically sperate species,

                                they are a separate specie and no amount of minor DNA variation on
                                a level such as climate or diet is going to make a new species.

                                Can't understand what you mean.


                                to mans suffering if your mad at god take it up with Him it is true i
                                am here to expand my horizons as my studies are as biased as your own.

                                What studies of yours? They haven't included biology from what I can
                                see. Do you think going to Church teaches you science? Or watching
                                Kent Hovind DVDs?

                                but I'm not here to sway anyone to my camp it is precisely as you
                                say for the most part i dont know what your talking about this is
                                ignorance not stupidity your reference to the auto is a good
                                > analogy,but remember they all need wheels, some wheels are
                                different but wheels alone cant make a chevy out of a buick. im
                                still looking for how these recent developements prove something new
                                a claim i have heard before
                                >

                                Well, I've never seen a fundie yet who is not interested in preaching
                                and converting. And I've never seen one in any group like this who
                                has the slightest interest in learning anything.

                                In fact all of them seem quite incapable of learning and all of them
                                lie when they say that they are interested in learning.

                                So how many of Lenny's references did you follow up and what have you
                                learned from them?

                                (Watch him not reply to this.)
                              • Dick Busch
                                Good news, Roger! Fundies Say the Darnedest Things is coming to the boob tube soon! Its debut guest will be Pat Robertson, God s own psychotic! Can t wait...
                                Message 15 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Good news, Roger! "Fundies Say the Darnedest Things" is coming to the boob tube soon! Its debut guest will be Pat Robertson, God's own psychotic! Can't wait...

                                  Dick.
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  Posted by: "Roger Stanyard" roger@...   Thu Aug 24, 2006 12:09 am (PST)

                                  --- In DebunkCreation@ yahoogroups. com, "Michael E. Suttkus, II" wrote:
                                  >
                                  > --- In
                                  href="mailto:DebunkCreation%40yahoogroups.com">DebunkCreation@ yahoogroups. com, John Burman
                                  > <blugreeneyes38@ > wrote:
                                  > >
                                  >> When I get my Great Moments in Strange Creationism website
                                  back up,
                                  > you will have earned a place.
                                  >
                                  He also deserves an immediate place on Fundies Say the Darnedest Things.

                                  Roger
                                • Michael E. Suttkus, II
                                  ... I ve already answered. Amphicyon, diarthognathus, diadactes, archaeopteryx, compsognathus, icthyostega, ambulocetus, the miacids, protoceratops,
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, John Burman
                                    <blugreeneyes38@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > thousands of separate species. no linking one to another
                                    > name one thousands of recently observed species yes,but again I
                                    > ask you wheres the links?

                                    I've already answered. Amphicyon, diarthognathus, diadactes,
                                    archaeopteryx, compsognathus, icthyostega, ambulocetus, the miacids,
                                    protoceratops, psitacosaurus, every single therapsid, how many do
                                    you want? We have literally thousands. Anyone who tells you
                                    otherwise is lying.

                                    > i have no problem with DNA variation if your term evolution
                                    > suggests adaptation why not ?

                                    Because the style of adaptation shows evolution from a common
                                    ancestor, not design. A designer could do so much better than to
                                    saddle us with the same non-functional vitamin C gene chimps have,
                                    not to mention the genes that give Chimps fur and keep their brains
                                    smaller than ours, all of which we have in non-functional form. Why
                                    did the intelligent designer give us genes we don't want, with
                                    disease organisms stuck in them? Tis a mystery, for creationists at
                                    least.

                                    > the problem occurs when you choose to suggest descent .

                                    Yep. We choose facts, you choose to ignore them.

                                    > fresh species arriving directly out of stale.

                                    Huh?

                                    > the chimp or possibly the ape may share DNA similarities closer
                                    > than any other species with man , but they cant breed with us

                                    So? Diamondback terapins in Pensacola can't breed with diamondback
                                    terapins from St. Augustine, despite there being a continuous
                                    gradient of interbreeding forms around the coast of Florida.

                                    > God forbid anyone should try.

                                    I prefer my women a little more svelt.

                                    > they are a separate specie and no amount of minor DNA variation
                                    > on a level such as climate or diet is going to make a new
                                    > species.

                                    Um, idiot, you've been told three times that we HAVE DIRECTLY
                                    OBSERVED THE FORMATION OF NEW SPECIES.

                                    And you accuse us of not responding!

                                    By the way, creationists need speciation more than scientists do.
                                    You have to stuff all of life's diversity onto a single ark. You
                                    cannot do this without SERIOUSLY RAPID SPECIATION. Even most
                                    creationist organizations now recognize the need for speciation.
                                    Answers in Genesis calls people who deny speciation "uneducated
                                    scoffers". That's you they're talking about. Creationists are
                                    calling you stupid.

                                    > as to mans suffering if your mad at god take it up with Him

                                    I'm not mad, but then I don't worship the petty, spiteful, diety
                                    fundamentalists do, one who goes out of his way to stick stupid
                                    design features in us.

                                    > it is true i am here to expand my horizons as my studies are as
                                    > biased as your own.

                                    I've studied both sides extensively. In fact, I lay you odds I've
                                    read more creationist literature than you have! I certainly know
                                    more about creationism than you do, oh fool who denies speciation.

                                    > but I'm not here to sway anyone to my camp it is precisely as you
                                    > say for the most part i dont know what your talking about this is
                                    > ignorance not stupidity

                                    Ignorance is not knowing what you are talking about.

                                    Stupidity is asserting things when one is ignorant about the subject.

                                    You are stupid and ignorant.

                                    > your reference to the auto is a good analogy,but remember they
                                    > all need wheels, some wheels are different but wheels alone
                                    > cant make a chevy out of a buick.

                                    Um, so? I can put chevy wheels on a buick if I want. The
                                    intelligent designer is apparently incapable of the same trick,
                                    since he can't give Kiwi fur, when they really need it, and likewise
                                    couldn't manage to give bat wings to the birds that could benefit
                                    from them. The designer is stuck in a rut.

                                    > im still looking for how these recent developements prove
                                    > something new a claim i have heard before

                                    You can produce a sentence like that and still claim your words are
                                    clear?

                                    Sheesh.

                                    Transition fossils are still found here:
                                    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

                                    Deny them all you want, they still won't go away.
                                  • Mikey Brass
                                    ... God of Gaps, eh? ... The claim that humans and chimps cannot produce a fertile offspring is hearsay. However, none of that changes the fact that humans and
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      John Burman wrote:
                                      > name one
                                      > thousands of recently observed species yes,but again I ask you wheres
                                      > the links?

                                      God of Gaps, eh?

                                      > fresh species arriving directly out of stale. the
                                      > chimp or possibly the ape may share DNA similarities closer than any
                                      > other species with man , but they cant breed with us

                                      The claim that humans and chimps cannot produce a fertile offspring is
                                      hearsay. However, none of that changes the fact that humans and chimps
                                      share a common ancestor and diverged via speciation.
                                    • Torfinn Ørmen
                                      ... In effect a ring species? Nice to have yet another example from yet another group. :-) ... I somehow don t think that even a megaphone can get through the
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        >So? Diamondback terapins in Pensacola can't breed with diamondback
                                        >terapins from St. Augustine, despite there being a continuous
                                        >gradient of interbreeding forms around the coast of Florida.

                                        In effect a ring species? Nice to have yet another example from yet another
                                        group. :-)

                                        >Um, idiot, you've been told three times that we HAVE DIRECTLY
                                        >OBSERVED THE FORMATION OF NEW SPECIES.

                                        I somehow don't think that even a megaphone can get through the wax in in
                                        that one's ears.


                                        Cheers
                                        Torfinn
                                      • Michael E. Suttkus, II
                                        ... Well, technically they can t be a ring species since they don t meet up on each end. Unless Florida breaks away to form it s own little island, which I,
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, Torfinn Ørmen <torf-o@...>
                                          wrote:
                                          >
                                          > >So? Diamondback terapins in Pensacola can't breed with diamondback
                                          > >terapins from St. Augustine, despite there being a continuous
                                          > >gradient of interbreeding forms around the coast of Florida.
                                          >
                                          > In effect a ring species? Nice to have yet another example from
                                          > yet another group. :-)

                                          Well, technically they can't be a ring species since they don't meet
                                          up on each end. Unless Florida breaks away to form it's own little
                                          island, which I, personally, would vote for.

                                          Examples aren't really uncommon. Any sufficiently large island is
                                          likely to develop some interesting examples. there are some lizards
                                          who perform the neat trick of having CONTINUOUS breeding in a
                                          complete ring, despite being incompatible with lizards on the
                                          opposite side. I don't remember where those were anymore.

                                          > >Um, idiot, you've been told three times that we HAVE DIRECTLY
                                          > >OBSERVED THE FORMATION OF NEW SPECIES.
                                          >
                                          > I somehow don't think that even a megaphone can get through the
                                          > wax in in that one's ears.

                                          If I send it in HTML, I could increase the font size, make them
                                          bold, in bright colors, maybe add a blink tag...
                                        • Dave Oldridge
                                          ... There is plenty to see. When scientists complain about missing intermediate fossils they are complaining about the shortage (not complete lack) of smooth
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            On 23 Aug 2006 at 23:49, John Burman wrote:

                                            > Stefan that is partly my point-that there should be something to
                                            > see. the other part is missed if you did not read the passionate

                                            There is plenty to see. When scientists complain about missing
                                            intermediate fossils they are complaining about the shortage (not
                                            complete lack) of smooth species-to-species transitions. It
                                            turns out that a great many of those take place too fast to get
                                            caught in fine detail in the fossil record. In instances where
                                            the record is actually fine enough, we do find them. But at the
                                            level of genus and above, almost all fossils are intermediate.

                                            Think about it. Any fossil not at the end of an extinct lineage
                                            is actually intermediate.


                                            --

                                            Dave Oldridge
                                            ICQ 1800667
                                            VA7CZ
                                          • Stefan Lindstrom
                                            ... FFS! You ve gotten heaps of examples of speciation events. OBSERVED speciation events,. WTF do you call that, klatchian mist? ... Only a problem for the
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Aug 24, 2006
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, John Burman wrote:

                                              > thousands of separate species. no linking one to another
                                              > name one thousands of recently observed species yes,but again I ask
                                              > you wheres the links?

                                              FFS! You've gotten heaps of examples of speciation events. OBSERVED
                                              speciation events,. WTF do you call that, klatchian mist?

                                              > i have no problem with DNA variation if your
                                              > term evolution suggests adaptation why not ? the problem occurs when you
                                              > choose to suggest descent .

                                              Only a problem for the ignorant.

                                              > fresh species arriving directly out of
                                              > stale. the chimp or possibly the ape may share DNA similarities closer
                                              > than any other species with man , but they cant breed with us God
                                              > forbid anyone should try.

                                              It's impossible? I think you should take it up with the ascientist who
                                              seems to think it's very feasible. For instance:

                                              "As far back as 1977, researcher J. Michael Bedford [1] discovered that
                                              human sperm could penetrate the protective outer membranes of a gibbon
                                              egg. Among the apes, the gibbon is the farthest from humans. "

                                              And that's a frikkin gibbon.

                                              > they are a separate specie

                                              Doh! Of course they are. That's why there's been speciation!

                                              >and no amount of minor DNA variation on a
                                              > level such as climate or diet is going to make a new species.

                                              This is ignorant beyond belief. You've gotten heaps of instances of
                                              observed speciation events, and all you can do is stick your fingers in
                                              your ears and go "No! Never happened!".

                                              /Stefan

                                              "He's got a mind like concrete. All mixed up, and permanently set."
                                            • Shalini
                                              ... Some cute pictures of Mickey and Minnie Mouse MAY get the message across... Shalini
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Aug 25, 2006
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, "Michael E. Suttkus, II"
                                                <suttkus@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, Torfinn Ørmen <torf-o@>
                                                > wrote:
                                                > >
                                                > > >So? Diamondback terapins in Pensacola can't breed with diamondback
                                                > > >terapins from St. Augustine, despite there being a continuous
                                                > > >gradient of interbreeding forms around the coast of Florida.
                                                > >
                                                > > In effect a ring species? Nice to have yet another example from
                                                > > yet another group. :-)
                                                >
                                                > Well, technically they can't be a ring species since they don't meet
                                                > up on each end. Unless Florida breaks away to form it's own little
                                                > island, which I, personally, would vote for.
                                                >
                                                > Examples aren't really uncommon. Any sufficiently large island is
                                                > likely to develop some interesting examples. there are some lizards
                                                > who perform the neat trick of having CONTINUOUS breeding in a
                                                > complete ring, despite being incompatible with lizards on the
                                                > opposite side. I don't remember where those were anymore.
                                                >
                                                > > >Um, idiot, you've been told three times that we HAVE DIRECTLY
                                                > > >OBSERVED THE FORMATION OF NEW SPECIES.
                                                > >
                                                > > I somehow don't think that even a megaphone can get through the
                                                > > wax in in that one's ears.
                                                >
                                                > If I send it in HTML, I could increase the font size, make them
                                                > bold, in bright colors, maybe add a blink tag...
                                                >

                                                Some cute pictures of Mickey and Minnie Mouse MAY get the message
                                                across...

                                                Shalini
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.