Subject:
|
Re: Mormon bashing again
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 3 Mar 2000 21:11:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
864 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bill Farkas writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:
> >
> > >
> > > > Not to mention that there
> > > > is no evidence of intermediary life forms necessary to support the THEORY -
> > > > only clearly delineated specific and vastly different species that reproduce
> > > > "after their kind" just like the primitive bible states.
> > >
> > > Anti-logic. Again, your position is depending on what evolutionary theory lacks.
> > >
> > > Incidentally, the "intermediary life-forms" argument is an old chestnut in the
> > > Creationist trove--it dates from before the discovery of Archaeopteryx, from before
> > > the discovery of late synapsid reptiles (the intermediaries between reptiles and
> > > mammals--palaeontologists *still* can't decide what they were) and from before
> > the
> > > theory of punctuated equilibrium.
> >
> > 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 intermediary forms; the creationist simply do not admit to
> > them.
> >
> > Bruce
>
> These were also admitted to be a hoax shortly after being released.
>
> Bill
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
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
541 Messages in This Thread: (Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|