43 Dinosaur Eggs Discovered in China by Construction workers.

a reply to: borntowatch

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I see. you are, once again, ridiculing those who believe in science - verifiable, measurable, testable science. And I am talking about dinosaurs (and birds here), because that's the topic of the thread. The OP mentioned the anti-dinosaur cretin as a bit of light relief, as everyone thinks that she's an idiot. Except you? You also keep talking about the Big Bang. Fine, but that's not relevant to this thread - although we have more evidence in favour of that theory than any other alternative. But that's a topic for another thread.
So here's my relevant question - do you believe in dinosaurs? Because, as I pointed out earlier, a glance out of your window will show you their relatives as they perch on something.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I have to admit, it is a bit humorous how he always plays the victim card, but at the same time keeps attacking and ridiculing others that don't buy what he's selling.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: AreUKiddingMe
a reply to: peter vlar

I'm not a Ken Ham fan myself, it was an easy article to find. But the word dinosaur didn't even exist until recently, and more than likely were what was referred to "dragons" in the Bible.

That isn't evidence. That is an inference.

The story of Noah's ark and creation science has just as much if not more empirical evidence than the evolutionist theory.

It does. Does it? Care to post any? I'm actually curious where this evidence actually exists, because I've not seen a single piece of empirical evidence for either of those things, while seeing TONS of empirical evidence for evolutionary theory. This of course makes your statement above false.

Dinosaurs quite definitely lived millions of years ago and they quite definitively evolved.

If there were "TONS" of evidence for your evolution theory, it wouldn't be a theory anymore. The only reason you believe dinosaurs lived millions of years ago is because you believe our science is infallible. That's the problem with our science. People treat it as borderline religion and whenever it's in danger of being rewritten people have a cow over it and do everything to deny it. For a group of people that spend so much time frowning upon others for believing in something they cannot see, you sure do have a lot of faith in dinosaurs being millions of years old despite the only absolute way to be certain just how old they are is to be a 200 million year old human being. Until that 200 million year old human being turns up and explains everything to us, you have to settle for tests that half the time gives an answer that you "know" is wrong because everyone "KNOWS" dinosaurs are hundreds of millions of years old. So you sit there and test until you get the result you want.

30 years ago everyone "knew" dinosaurs were reptile in nature. No one ever conceived the idea that they or at least some had feathers. Imagine what we will know in the future that rewrites our books, but I wouldn't hold my breathe for that holy grail evidence that turns evolution theory into fact.

Evolutionists sure are faithful: They believe in something they cannot prove exists. So how are you any different from the rest of us? You can't sit there and preach that your theory is fact and that's why you're different. At least we have a book that is thousands of years old. Whether you believe it is legitimate or not is not the issue. It exists. What exists for you? Scientific testing on dinosaur fossils? Where the only way you can be sure the results are correct is to presume they are correct because "everyone knows dinosaurs are hundreds of millions of years old, it's the first thing we're taught in school!" ?

Hmm. Seems legit.

I won't get into any serious debate over this. As a matter of fact, I do not expect to come back to this thread after I hit post. I'm not an avid visitor of ATS. But I will leave with these final words: Even if my response above doesn't entirely involve the person I am replying to, it applies to someone(s), and it was worth my time. Your theory is a theory, and it will always be a theory, and you are no different from the people you bully for believing in a God. You are extremely faithful to evolution despite having no proof to make it a fact of life. Sure sounds like to me that creationists and evolutionists both rely on faith for what they believe in.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: borntowatch


I see. you are, once again, ridiculing those who believe in science - verifiable, measurable, testable science. And I am talking about dinosaurs (and birds here), because that's the topic of the thread. The OP mentioned the anti-dinosaur cretin as a bit of light relief, as everyone thinks that she's an idiot. Except you? You also keep talking about the Big Bang. Fine, but that's not relevant to this thread - although we have more evidence in favour of that theory than any other alternative. But that's a topic for another thread.
So here's my relevant question - do you believe in dinosaurs? Because, as I pointed out earlier, a glance out of your window will show you their relatives as they perch on something.

Whats with glancing out the window, what are you selling me, look out my window, look out your own window. Whats wrong with you

I think people who believe in the big bang are far more gullible, far more foolish and simple minded than people who believe dinosaurs didnt exist

Look out your window, into the stars at night, pick up a handful of dust from your vacuum cleaner, blow your nose and look at all this stuff and tell me it didnt all exist till one day from nothing it all exploded into everything.
Thats not science thats stupidity
It might be the best theory science has but its stupid

People who dont believe in dinosaurs are not thinking straight
People who believe in the big bang will never be able to think straight

Show me proof birds turned into lizards

originally posted by: Voldster
If there were "TONS" of evidence for your evolution theory, it wouldn't be a theory anymore.

Off to a great start by not at all understanding what "theory" actually means in a scientific sense.

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.

The only reason you believe dinosaurs lived millions of years ago is because you believe our science is infallible.

Not at all true. One of the biggest differences between science and theology is the ability of scientists to be constantly testing for flaws and the willingness to address errors by adjusting theories, laws and hypothesis whenever new information or data sets are verified.

That's the problem with our science. People treat it as borderline religion and whenever it's in danger of being rewritten people have a cow over it and do everything to deny it.

Couldn't be farther from the truth. In science, we embrace the fact that we are always looking for more information. It's the truth that we are after, not the protection of pet hypothesis and theory. Just because people will defend something doesn't mean they're not open to changing something. It just means that to completely alter something then you need to be able to back it up and it must be able to pass peer review, that pesky thing where peers in your field or related fields scour your data looking for flaws to make sure you didn't screw up somewhere along the way and that your data actually holds up under scrutiny. To me, one of the greatest aspects of the scientific method is the ability to self correct.

For a group of people that spend so much time frowning upon others for believing in something they cannot see, you sure do have a lot of faith in dinosaurs being millions of years old despite the only absolute way to be certain just how old they are is to be a 200 million year old human being. Until that 200 million year old human being turns up and explains everything to us, you have to settle for tests that half the time gives an answer that you "know" is wrong because everyone "KNOWS" dinosaurs are hundreds of millions of years old. So you sit there and test until you get the result you want.

Absolute BullS# please cite examples to support that statement. Multiple tests are ALWAYS done. No one test is acceptable on its own. Before any dating is accepted, a variety of tests are run to see if the same time frame is reached under differing methods. It's a pretty simple concept.

30 years ago everyone "knew" dinosaurs were reptile in nature. No one ever conceived the idea that they or at least some had feathers. Imagine what we will know in the future that rewrites our books, but I wouldn't hold my breathe for that holy grail evidence that turns evolution theory into fact.

And even with feathers, it is still known that they are a group of reptiles. Much like Pterosaurs(pterodactyl, pteranodon etc...) are reptiles but not dinosaurs despite being contemporaneous.

Evolutionists sure are faithful

Evolutionist is not an actual descriptor, its a slur. Believing in the validity of the biologicol sciences is now a bad thing huh?

They believe in something they cannot prove exists.

Your own inability to understand and accept the science in question

So how are you any different from the rest of us?

because as an Anthropologist, I'm willing to be wrong, make mistakes, learn from them and keep looking when faced with being incorrect in the search for answers. I don't get the impression that in your smug replies, you are also willing to be wrong about what you believe, not willing to adjust your stance if testable, repeatable observable and verifiable evidence plops itself in your lap.

You can't sit there and preach that your theory is fact and that's why you're different. At least we have a book that is thousands of years old. Whether you believe it is legitimate or not is not the issue. It exists.

that is the most ridiculous rationalized bit of circular reasoning I've seen in quite awhile on ATS. All I can say is 'WOW'
You don't have any evidence and can't support your beliefs but hey... you've got a book!!! Why exactly is YOUR book(which is actually a compilation of multiple books written by many authors over a period of 1600-1800 years) THE book? Why not older Vedic texts? Why not older Sumerian mythos from which big chunks of the OT are "borrowed" from? Why is YOUR version of god THE version of god and not the versions that came earlier? Why not Paleolithic animism? Seriously, the degree of arrogant, cognitive disconnect is mind numbing in its level of unadulterated ignorance.

What exists for you? Scientific testing on dinosaur fossils?

Right...because the only evidence in favor of Modern Evolutionary Synthesis is dinosaur remains. Yawn...

Where the only way you can be sure the results are correct is to presume they are correct because "everyone knows dinosaurs are hundreds of millions of years old, it's the first thing we're taught in school!" ?
Hmm. Seems legit.

You really don't know or understand any of the science involved do you? It always fascinates me when someone talks S# about something they don't understand at the most basic level in an attempt to make a corollary inferring the other party doesn't know what they're talking about. You keep pussy footing around the subject so I've got to assume you're implying that none of the dating techniques are valid in an effort to make your point stick. Am I wrong in that assumption?

I won't get into any serious debate over this. As a matter of fact, I do not expect to come back to this thread after I hit post.

Ahhh... the old duck and run technique where you get to make unsubstantiated claims based on sheer ignorance, usually of the willful variety and then run like hell so you don't have to defend or support your trite and silly claims. Well done!

I'm not an avid visitor of ATS. But I will leave with these final words: Even if my response above doesn't entirely involve the person I am replying to, it applies to someone(s), and it was worth my time.

Your theory is a theory, and it will always be a theory, and you are no different from the people you bully for believing in a God.

Let me guess, you're one of the chosen few who don't understand the difference between a scientific theory and the laymans version and think a scientific law trumps a theory? how'm I doin' so far? Gravity too is "only a theory" but I'm betting you don't ever jump off the roof of a skyscraper without a chute on your back. As I noted earlier when I provided the definition of a scientific theory, it's based on testable, observable and repeatable data. Whether you want to accept it or not, evolution is indeed a fact with the supporting data to prove it. Modern Evolutionary Synthesis is one of, if not THE, most heavily supported and verifiable theories in the history of science.

a reply to: peter vlar

You are extremely faithful to evolution despite having no proof to make it a fact of life. Sure sounds like to me that creationists and evolutionists both rely on faith for what they believe in.

Your inability to understand let alone accept the evidence does not change reality. Evolution is happening every second of every day to every group of organisms living on this little sphere called Earth. There is over a century and a half of excellent proof demonstrating this fact. There is absolutely no faith based aspect to understanding or accepting the reality of the biological process at hand. It all boils down to 3 simple words. Testable. Observable. Repeatable.

originally posted by: borntowatch

Whats with glancing out the window, what are you selling me, look out my window, look out your own window. Whats wrong with you

Look out your window at the birds is the message at hand. 65 MA after their forbearers perished, they are still here chirping away from the trees outside your window.

I think people who believe in the big bang are far more gullible, far more foolish and simple minded than people who believe dinosaurs didnt exist

What exactly is gullible about BBT and why do you believe it is incorrect?

Look out your window, into the stars at night, pick up a handful of dust from your vacuum cleaner, blow your nose and look at all this stuff and tell me it didnt all exist till one day from nothing it all exploded into everything.

Thats not science thats stupidity

If that was actually what the BBT postulated you would be right. However, it doesn't state or imply that there was nothing and then there was everything. The only stupidity is thinking that's what is being taught.

It might be the best theory science has but its stupid

Why exactly is it stupid? I'm genuinely curious what led you to this conclusion. Is there a fault in the science or is it merely a religious objection?

People who dont believe in dinosaurs are not thinking straight
People who believe in the big bang will never be able to think straight

Really? Because there's a pretty fair amount of evidence in favor of it but hey...to each their own I guess.

Show me proof birds turned into lizards

How can someone show you proof of something that didn't happen? You've got it all backwards here. Dinosaurs, namely maniraptoran theropods, evolved into birds.

originally posted by: Cuervo
a reply to: Sublimecraft

They are in China, Khaleesi... they're in China.

I would give this 1000 stars if I could

Thanks for the

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: borntowatch

Whats with glancing out the window, what are you selling me, look out my window, look out your own window. Whats wrong with you

Look out your window at the birds is the message at hand. 65 MA after their forbearers perished, they are still here chirping away from the trees outside your window.

I think people who believe in the big bang are far more gullible, far more foolish and simple minded than people who believe dinosaurs didnt exist

What exactly is gullible about BBT and why do you believe it is incorrect?

Look out your window, into the stars at night, pick up a handful of dust from your vacuum cleaner, blow your nose and look at all this stuff and tell me it didnt all exist till one day from nothing it all exploded into everything.

Thats not science thats stupidity

If that was actually what the BBT postulated you would be right. However, it doesn't state or imply that there was nothing and then there was everything. The only stupidity is thinking that's what is being taught.

It might be the best theory science has but its stupid

Why exactly is it stupid? I'm genuinely curious what led you to this conclusion. Is there a fault in the science or is it merely a religious objection?

People who dont believe in dinosaurs are not thinking straight
People who believe in the big bang will never be able to think straight

Really? Because there's a pretty fair amount of evidence in favor of it but hey...to each their own I guess.

Show me proof birds turned into lizards

How can someone show you proof of something that didn't happen? You've got it all backwards here. Dinosaurs, namely maniraptoran theropods, evolved into birds.

Peter I am not interested in your religious views.

Without evidence yours is a faith, a simple belief

You have no evidence so use these I am smarter, superior and better than you tactics to bully your religion.

I dont care about your beliefs, intelligence or argument.

Show the evidence
Simple, just show the scientific evidence

Dont get all huffy and defensive, dont get all amateur dramatic, no hissy fits

Show the science

I am bored of your religious nonsense


You cant show the evidence of your religion, all you can do is attack as a defense


No arguments, no make believe
scientific evidence or take it to the rant thread

i don't remember anyone addressing the fossil record at church: it was assumed "science" was explaining it.

As a Christian, it seems obvious that the fossil record points to a sudden global event like a flood, based on how many varieties of bones are found in one area, many whale and fish fossils (these animals decay rapidly and float when dead unless buried in mud), polystrate trees, etc

dinos are mentioned many times in the Bible and were called "dragons." Marco Polo and Alexander the Great's men reported seeing large dangerous dragons. They co-existed with us until the creation fell to a level where their large size was not very compatible with changing seasons, lower oxygen levels, etc

originally posted by: borntowatch

Peter I am not interested in your religious views.

good because I don't have any.

Without evidence yours is a faith, a simple belief

mirror mirror on the wall, who is the silliest Troll of them all.

You have no evidence so use these I am smarter, superior and better than you tactics to bully your religion.

What the hell are you even talking about? I'm not bullying anything. Take off your sissy pants and deal with the comments and questions before you go wagging your fingers at others. I was trying to have a civil discussion with you but you clearly have no interest in that as you attempt to rephrase the entire conversation into ad hominem dingo dango aimed my way. If you feel dumber and inferior in regards to my comments and questions, that's on you not me because what you accuse me of is not the reality of things. That's what I get for trying to understand what you meant and what was behind your statements. Remember, you're the one who refuses to qualify your own comments when asked for clarification. That's got nothing to do with me.

I dont care about your beliefs, intelligence or argument.

You really are a child if that's your attitude. What's the point of posting if you're not interested in a dialogue? All you do is deny evidence presented and point your finger while making some of the most hypocritical accusations I've seen in years. Maybe you need to change your diaper and that's why you're cranky? I'm not sure what exactly petty personal dig has to do with my comments or questions. Do you type this crap with a straight face? Because what you keep accusing myself and others of is precisely what you are doing. Is there a WiFi hotspot under your bridge?

Show the evidence
Simple, just show the scientific evidence

I and many others have done so repeatedly. I can lead the horse to water but I can't make you drink it. If you refuse to accept the science of the day, then there is no science to show you.

Dont get all huffy and defensive, dont get all amateur dramatic, no hissy fits

Awww... you're so cute when you've got the stick from the hobby horse snugly fitted into your rectum.

Show the science

It's been shown to you ad nauseum, there are pages and pages of replies from me to you doing so and countless more pages from others. Half the time you ignore and the other half of the time you straight up admit you refuse to read it so why on earth would I do it again? So you can mock it again? Ignore it again? No thanks.

I am bored of your religious nonsense

Huh... and here I thought that as an agnostic I didn't have a religion. Thanks for clearing that up for me!

You cant show the evidence of your religion, all you can do is attack as a defense

Can I get what you're smoking? It's got to be some nice S#

No arguments, no make believe

Make believe is your domain. You would have loved taking a ride on Trolley in Mr. Rogers Neighborhood.

scientific evidence or take it to the rant thread

So that's a big no to actually responding to my questions as you spew vitriolic hypocrisy while pointing the finger of blame my way?

hmmmmm. I dunno if it is appropriate. i am a religious person. I also enjoy and understand science. and i will only address religious tangents (in a science thread) if someone has made the typical ass out of themselves by attacking the religious (in general) in a scientific thread. otherwise i prefer to discuss science in threads about a scientific subject. on the other hand i am not familiar with the purpose of this subforum. if it is all about about evolution as an attack of the faithful's religious views of creation then i suppose it's ok though i am not interested (in a scientific thread.) But I thought the thread was about a clutch of dinosaur eggs which somewhat dissappointingly were all fossils.

so what's it about? science? religion? or bashing religion? or bashing science? bashing religion is an activity promulgated by overbearing boorish louts. Bashing science is an activity promulgated by the very caricatures of religion and science illiterate idiots that make juicy targets for the former.

I liked this thread from the first post and up. Not down. Everything mustn't be just black and white. Sometimes science isnt perfect. And sometimes religion isnt perfect. Otherwise we wouldnt have wars over it if the above could be acceptable.

The best solution would be to accept that both polarities agree to disagree and move on And let each pursue their own activities on their own.

Which came first. The chicken or the egg?

I personally believe they both came at the same time. Concurrently existing in what form they held together.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: borntowatch

Peter I am not interested in your religious views.

good because I don't have any.

Without evidence yours is a faith, a simple belief

mirror mirror on the wall, who is the silliest Troll of them all.

You have no evidence so use these I am smarter, superior and better than you tactics to bully your religion.

What the hell are you even talking about? I'm not bullying anything. Take off your sissy pants and deal with the comments and questions before you go wagging your fingers at others. I was trying to have a civil discussion with you but you clearly have no interest in that as you attempt to rephrase the entire conversation into ad hominem dingo dango aimed my way. If you feel dumber and inferior in regards to my comments and questions, that's on you not me because what you accuse me of is not the reality of things. That's what I get for trying to understand what you meant and what was behind your statements. Remember, you're the one who refuses to qualify your own comments when asked for clarification. That's got nothing to do with me.

I dont care about your beliefs, intelligence or argument.

You really are a child if that's your attitude. What's the point of posting if you're not interested in a dialogue? All you do is deny evidence presented and point your finger while making some of the most hypocritical accusations I've seen in years. Maybe you need to change your diaper and that's why you're cranky? I'm not sure what exactly petty personal dig has to do with my comments or questions. Do you type this crap with a straight face? Because what you keep accusing myself and others of is precisely what you are doing. Is there a WiFi hotspot under your bridge?

Show the evidence
Simple, just show the scientific evidence

I and many others have done so repeatedly. I can lead the horse to water but I can't make you drink it. If you refuse to accept the science of the day, then there is no science to show you.

Dont get all huffy and defensive, dont get all amateur dramatic, no hissy fits

Awww... you're so cute when you've got the stick from the hobby horse snugly fitted into your rectum.

Show the science

It's been shown to you ad nauseum, there are pages and pages of replies from me to you doing so and countless more pages from others. Half the time you ignore and the other half of the time you straight up admit you refuse to read it so why on earth would I do it again? So you can mock it again? Ignore it again? No thanks.

I am bored of your religious nonsense

Huh... and here I thought that as an agnostic I didn't have a religion. Thanks for clearing that up for me!

You cant show the evidence of your religion, all you can do is attack as a defense

Can I get what you're smoking? It's got to be some nice S#

No arguments, no make believe

Make believe is your domain. You would have loved taking a ride on Trolley in Mr. Rogers Neighborhood.

scientific evidence or take it to the rant thread

So that's a big no to actually responding to my questions as you spew vitriolic hypocrisy while pointing the finger of blame my way?

You could have simply stated

Sorry btw I dont have any evidence that is valid, thats why its a theory.

Sadly you go off on a rant

I am just asking for evidence

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
hmmmmm. I dunno if it is appropriate. i am a religious person. I also enjoy and understand science. and i will only address religious tangents (in a science thread) if someone has made the typical ass out of themselves by attacking the religious (in general) in a scientific thread. otherwise i prefer to discuss science in threads about a scientific subject. on the other hand i am not familiar with the purpose of this subforum. if it is all about about evolution as an attack of the faithful's religious views of creation then i suppose it's ok though i am not interested (in a scientific thread.) But I thought the thread was about a clutch of dinosaur eggs which somewhat dissappointingly were all fossils.

so what's it about? science? religion? or bashing religion? or bashing science? bashing religion is an activity promulgated by overbearing boorish louts. Bashing science is an activity promulgated by the very caricatures of religion and science illiterate idiots that make juicy targets for the former.

This thread if you read the opening post was about bashing people because they dont believe in dinosaurs. The fossilised eggs was an excuse to start the bashing.

If dinosaurs were or were not real and a person chooses not to believe in them, well good luck to her. Its her choice.

I personally think people who believe that the universe came from and let me quote

The Big Bang

Most astronomers believe the Universe began in a Big Bang about 14 billion years ago. At that time, the entire Universe was inside a bubble that was thousands of times smaller than a pinhead. It was hotter and denser than anything we can imagine.

Then it suddenly exploded. The Universe that we know was born. Time, space and matter all began with the Big Bang. In a fraction of a second, the Universe grew from smaller than a single atom to bigger than a galaxy. And it kept on growing at a fantastic rate. It is still expanding today.
www.esa.int...


are stupid, it has no evidence and is based on what exactly ?
But you are welcome to believe that a big bang brought you here

This thread is about bashing peoples views, be they right or wrong, hence why its in the origin and creation forum


Typical hatemongering
Typical i am smarter than you because I believe what I believe and you dont childishness

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
hmmmmm. I dunno if it is appropriate. i am a religious person. I also enjoy and understand science. and i will only address religious tangents (in a science thread) if someone has made the typical ass out of themselves by attacking the religious (in general) in a scientific thread. otherwise i prefer to discuss science in threads about a scientific subject. on the other hand i am not familiar with the purpose of this subforum. if it is all about about evolution as an attack of the faithful's religious views of creation then i suppose it's ok though i am not interested (in a scientific thread.) But I thought the thread was about a clutch of dinosaur eggs which somewhat dissappointingly were all fossils.

so what's it about? science? religion? or bashing religion? or bashing science? bashing religion is an activity promulgated by overbearing boorish louts. Bashing science is an activity promulgated by the very caricatures of religion and science illiterate idiots that make juicy targets for the former.

This thread if you read the opening post was about bashing people because they dont believe in dinosaurs. The fossilised eggs was an excuse to start the bashing.

If dinosaurs were or were not real and a person chooses not to believe in them, well good luck to her. Its her choice.

I personally think people who believe that the universe came from and let me quote

The Big Bang

Most astronomers believe the Universe began in a Big Bang about 14 billion years ago. At that time, the entire Universe was inside a bubble that was thousands of times smaller than a pinhead. It was hotter and denser than anything we can imagine.

Then it suddenly exploded. The Universe that we know was born. Time, space and matter all began with the Big Bang. In a fraction of a second, the Universe grew from smaller than a single atom to bigger than a galaxy. And it kept on growing at a fantastic rate. It is still expanding today.
www.esa.int...


are stupid, it has no evidence and is based on what exactly ?
But you are welcome to believe that a big bang brought you here

This thread is about bashing peoples views, be they right or wrong, hence why its in the origin and creation forum


Typical hatemongering
Typical i am smarter than you because I believe what I believe and you dont childishness

I'm with Peter on this one. You ARE a troll. You have been shown proof on thread after thread after thread - links, pictures, documents, images - and yet you always fall back to the same position: "Where's the proof? We haven't been shown any!"
You're a creationist. Fine, fair enough, it's a free universe. Your need to defend this position by ignoring everything that stands against it is deeply dishonest in my opinion, but you have a right to your own (flawed) vision of the universe. But you don't get to claim that no proof to the contrary has been shown to you, because it has.
Birds.
And birds.
And birds.
And more birds.
And yet more birds.
By the way, your tactic of pointing at the Big Bang and squeaking 'It makes no sense!' a) has nothing to do with this thread and b) ignores yet more facts. I have a question: Does science threaten you? I can't think why you would attack it so much otherwise.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

It's really sad to see that people still believe in fairy tales concocted thousands of years ago to the point it effects their ability to critically think.

originally posted by: dr1234
a reply to: Sublimecraft

It's really sad to see that people still believe in fairy tales concocted thousands of years ago to the point it effects their ability to critically think.

This is the sort of unnecessarily belligerent tripe that causes people who ordinarily would not derail a thread on religious grounds to do so. Good job, you enlightened intellectual person you.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
I have a question: Does science threaten you? I can't think why you would attack it so much otherwise.

Thats a typical strawman, you say something that is not true and infer its my opinion.

I like science, just not the pseudo religion science like the theory of evolution.

Why make these simple lies up. Why say things about me that aren't true.

I think it shows you have no real answers, evidence, so you attack me personally..


Evidence to the big bang and evolution will win me over, preaching evolution as a science is a lie, its a cult.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg


I'm with Peter on this one. You ARE a troll. You have been shown proof on thread after thread after thread - links, pictures, documents, images - and yet you always fall back to the same position: "Where's the proof? We haven't been shown any!"
You're a creationist. Fine, fair enough, it's a free universe. Your need to defend this position by ignoring everything that stands against it is deeply dishonest in my opinion, but you have a right to your own (flawed) vision of the universe. But you don't get to claim that no proof to the contrary has been shown to you, because it has.
Birds.
And birds.
And birds.
And more birds.
And yet more birds.
By the way, your tactic of pointing at the Big Bang and squeaking 'It makes no sense!' a) has nothing to do with this thread and b) ignores yet more facts. I have a question: Does science threaten you? I can't think why you would attack it so much otherwise.

Yeah nut no, its a religious belief, you have shown no evidence.

Prove dating techniches are valid.

Hell I think maybe those fossilised eggs are planted by the Easter Bunny so dumb people believe in dinosaurs