 | | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
| (...) Like? (...) Anti-logic. Evolution and biblical Special Creation aren't the only two choices. And evolution does not "like" or "dislike" the fossil record (although we all can dream of having every creature that ever lived preserved somehow, (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
| (...) lacks. (...) before (...) and (...) the (...) And they have in fact found intermediary forms that predate Archaeopteryx recently in China (or was it Mongolia, sorry, I forget). A more definite mix of dinosaur and bird. There are plenty of (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
| (...) reproduce (...) the (...) before (...) These were also admitted to be a hoax shortly after being released. Bill (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
| (...) - (...) to (...) See what I mean? If you mean the proto-birds, that's not true (your source, please). If you mean something else, you'll have to clue me in since I mention no other specific example and neither do you. Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
| (...) I heard it on the radio news - AP or USA - they were going to exhibit them and then it was announced that they were fake. Best I can do. Bill (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
| (...) See July 98 National Geographic, "Dinosaurs Take Wing". I have seen no report of them being fake in any scientific journal, newspaper, or on-line source. Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
