Who’s going to tell the “intelligent designer”?
Genes Show T. Rex Related to Chickens
An adolescent female Tyrannosaurus rex died 68 million years ago, but its bones still contain intact soft tissue, including the oldest preserved proteins ever found, scientists say.
And a comparison of the protein’s chemical structure to a slew of other species showed an evolutionary link between T. rex and chickens, bolstering the idea that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
The collagen proteins were found hidden inside the leg bone of the T. rex fossil, according to two studies published in the April 13 issue of the journal Science.
No, no, no, Oliver. Clearly, you’re forgetting the well-documented anti-Christian bias of Science. I bet they made it all up. Let’s look at the facts… 1) Tyrannosaurs never existed. You can look it up! (try the Bible) 2) Even if these dinosaurs DID exist, they would have been enormous! Are you aware that the average chicken weighs scarcely more than a few pounds?
Obviously six thousand years ago, just a couple days before the Designer created the chicken, He created thousands of T-Rex fossils, complete with chicken proteins, and hid them in deep rock strata so that they would look like they were millions of years old.
He did his intentionally to make Oliver Q. Willis look silly in the year of Him 2007.
Yeah, He’s that good.
Why don’t you ask them yourself. They’re staffing much of the current, very awful, administration–even editing NASA statements to conform with Creationist ideology.
Scientists may have found an adolescent dinosaur, but they haven’t found there way to this blog.
Humans are as closely related to flowers as they are to chimpanzees.
Big deal — so T. Rex is related to the non – flying chicken.
Where are all the flying birds?
And some of you have confused Creationism with Intelligent Design.
What’s next?
How did Noah get a T.Rex on the Ark?
Laughable.
Peanut Butter!
“there” should be “their”. Never let it be said that we “ignorant believers” can’t spell.
How did Noah keep the predators on the ark from eating prey? That’s what I’ve always wondered. Did the tigers agree to be vegetarian for a period of “trust me, it will stop raining soon?”
I’ve always wondered how Noah managed to get his hands on polar bears and kangaroos.
Nice one, midderpidge! Watch Frank chase his tail til he gets dizzy and falls over …
Intelligent Design is Creationism. That’s why ID has absolutely zero scientific standing. Science is more than open to alternate theories, but those alternate theories must be based on science and not belief.
“Humans are as closely related to flowers as they are to chimpanzees.”
I call shenanigans on you, Frank.
Also, you put mistakenly put apostrophes around the term ‘ignorant believer’ in your original post. Best to fix that.
I do believe that the conservative position is that Noah used T. Rex to chop down trees for the ark.
(Someone at t.o. actually made that argument back in the day. In the words of a certain columnist from Miami: I am not making this up.)
Oliver, the Creator deliberately made that chicken DNA similar to dinosaur DNA to test our faith and trick non-believers into going to hell.
What else would you expect from a loving God?
And speaking of Noah’s ark, who got the unenviable job of bringing along the dysentery microbes?
SpiderJ,
Genesis 6:21: “Take with you every kind of food…”. Some animals they brought more than 2 of.
Michael,
Noah pre-dates Pangea, which didn’t break up until after the Tower of Babel episode.
Ferris,
Riiiight. I’ll be anxiously awaiting the evidence that suggests that humans were around about 250 million years ago.
Speaking of the Tower of Babel episode… God’s kind of a dick, isn’t he?
Intelligent Design is Creationism
Sorry, Oliver, but no
Intelligent Design merely suggests that there was a Designer (a conscious Creator), who may even be responsible for Natural Selection, and the resultant proliferation of species.
Creationism generally refers to the fundamentalist, “six – day Creation” idea.
Oh yeah, midderpidge: Jelly!
By an coincidence, I’m reading my son “The Enormous Egg” as bedtime reading. For those who missed it as kids, it’s set on a New Hampshire farm in the early ’50s, when a hen’s egg hatches out a live triceratops.
I imagine if I told my son (who just turned ten) that there are grown up people with college degrees who believe that the world is less than a million years old, and that humans and dinosaurs coexisted – he would
a) assume I was joking, and
b) wonder why these people never learned anything in school.
Bananas!
Where are all the flying birds?
Ummmm…yeah. Look outside.
God’s kind of a dick, isn’t he?
When you piss him off, absolutely!
“Noah pre-dates Pangea, which didn’t break up until after the Tower of Babel episode.”
Wow. It’s like me saying “the founding of Valinor in the western continent of Aman by the Vala pre-dates the coming of the elves which the Vala saw in a vision” and expecting anyone to take me seriously.
Human beings have a tremendous capacity for narrative, a capacity born of our even greater need to give our lives some kind of meaning. It always amazes me that some people think pointing this out is somehow the most horribly, disrespectful thing someone can do.
“Noah pre-dates Pangea, which didn’t break up until after the Tower of Babel episode.”
But how could that be? If God made the world perfect, there couldn’t have been a Pangea at all. The world was created 6500 years ago just as we see it today.
Except with dinosaurs.
Right?
God’s kind of a dick, isn’t he?
Never let it be said he doesn’t have a sense of humor.
Intelligent Design is Creationism
Sorry, Oliver, but no
Frank’s right. Creationism is for Christian morons. So-called Intelligent Design is for Christians who are too stupid to be morons.
Okay, so Noah took two of every animal except those that were to be fed to other animals. Of those feeder animals, he brought enough of them to last 40 days and nights.
I don’t have the time to do all the calculations here, because you have to list every single carnivore, including any that are now extinct, and determine how much prey they consumed per day…then add the individual totals up and multiply that by forty…just to figure out how many animals were eaten on the Ark before the waters receded.
It must have been a swell time to be a rabbit on the ol’ Ark, trying to be as cute as possible so that Noah would pick you as one of the last two, destined to multiply instead of be eaten.
“I don’t have the time to do all the calculations here because you have to list every single carnivore…”
and don’t forget all the poop, 40 days and 40 nights of from every single animal in existence… the mind (and nose) boggles …
Really, the Ark must have been a marvel of engineering. Which makes me wonder why Noah didn’t bother to pass his knowledge down to his children and to what was left of society…I mean, the Vikings and Romans had to start all over with triremes. That’s hardly fair.
Way to go, ND, your comments are getting more ridiculous as time goes by!
Robert: You’re threatening the very core of the anti – Intelligent Design argument: That if we teach that in school, it will somehow make our next generation dumb.
After all, we have tons of evidence that questioning Darwin is injurious to your health.
Here’s a question for you: When Global Warming is finally shown to be hogwash, will it be easier or harder to convince people that Intelligent Design is just not scientific?
Frank, the basis of science is a hypothesis and repeated testing. While you can hypothesize that there is a Creator, you cannot test that hypothesis. Until the I-D folks invent a machine that can be used to gather empirical data on the existence of a designer, it remains Not Science.
Evolution(the adaptation of life to changing circumstances over time) is a fact. Natural Selection is the theory.
ID contains no testable hypothesis. How can a scientific “theory” be untestable?
ID contains no testable hypothesis.
It’s worse than that. It seems more like an opinion than a theory.
Here’s guessing Frank thinks Global Warming Is Hogwash because, GASP, Al Gore says it isn’t.
And we all know that conservative facts are only valid when the identity of the messenger is conservative.
Right, Frank? It’s not the fact, it’s the man?
That’s conservatism for you.
Dr. Squid: Let me know when I can join in the conversation you’re having with yourself.
Hypothesis, schmythosesis
When any of you have tested the hypothesis that the world has developed at random (and yet somehow became orderly, after we began to notice), you let me know.
Just because Al Gore invented the Internet, and was the inspiration for “Love Story”, doesn’t mean he knows diddly about climate change (global warming’s new name, now that it doesn’t seem to be getting any warmer — but there’s always next year, right, guys?).
Oh. This must be the cranky incoherent Frank I’d heard so much about. G’bye.
Mmmm, tastes like T. Rex…
I like mine extra crispy.
Frank,
one of the components of Intelligent Design that differentiates it from Creationism is that the Creator (in ID) isn’t necessarily the Christian God.
While I am not an expert on Christianity, it is my understanding that one of the main tenets (if not THE main one) is that the Christian God is the creator of the universe. You shall have no other gods before me, or whatever.
If the Christians who are pushing Intelligent Design are genuine in their assertions then they have voided their own religion.
So these moronic Christian Creationists pushing ID are either lying in an effort to sneak their creationist bullshit into our schools, or they really are idiots who believe it’s possible that their god isn’t the one true god.
Any way you slice it, it’s still baloney.
First off, Frank, way to tread off-topic with the global warming attacks. Secondly, Al Gore doesn’t need to know “diddly” about climate change, he (as with the rest of us who are not climatologists) only needs to understand that reputable scientists do, and not ignore their findings. Three, by stating…
“When any of you have tested the hypothesis that the world has developed at random (and yet somehow became orderly, after we began to notice), you let me know”
you have again demonstrated your profound ignorance on the topic of evolution by natural selection. For the umpteenth time, no one is claiming that the world is random, or that it ever was. Natural selection is a decidedly non-random process. If you want to be even more basic about it, the movement of particles that comprise all matter in the universe behave in a decidedly non-random way. This is why you didn’t spontaneously disintegrate after your birth. Additionally, analysis of the geological and fossil evidence is “testing the hypothesis of evolution by natural selection.” Besides THAT, I don’t have to conduct my own scientific testing of the theory of natural selection if I can comprehend the analysis of scientists who study it. Four, “global warming” refers to the average temperature of the whole Earth… no one disputes that the Earth has trended upwards in temp over the past century or so. Just because much of the continental U.S. is in a deep freeze doesn’t mean that the Earth’s overall temp is down. One of the predictions of climate change theory is that weather will become more extreme. Perhaps we’re seeing that right now with frigid temps and major snowfall in April. Finally, you’re an idiot. You’re so thoroughly wrong, so often… why do you even bother posting? I can only conclude that you’re a sick, sad man.
The world, as is the universe is anything but orderly.
mambochicken: I forgot, you’re not always right,but you’re never wrong.
I can only conclude that you’re a sick, sad man.
Except sometimes you’re so wrong, you should turn in your Clinical Psychologist’s smock.
By the way, Duros disagrees with you: Is he a sick, sad man, too?
I was just fooling about Al Gore — I know he didn’t invent the Internet, or inspire “Love Story”.
Don’t get me started on how many climatologists think the “danger” of global warming is overblown, and how many don’t think it is even worth worrying about.
I can only conclude that you could use some time in therapy, but you know that that would be a false conclusion, because I don’t know you. I’ve never even met you. And I follow “the Goldwater rule”:
I am not an expert on Christianity
No, ND, you are not.
Ooh. Biting retort, Frank.
Well played.
Frank, (and SaveFarris)
ID is not science.
If you would like to understand why, please read the book “Finding Darwin’s God,” by cell biologist and devout Catholic Ken Miller.
Miller explains why there is overwhelming scientific evidence that evolution is right on the money; why ID is not science; and how a Christian can maintain a belief in (Biblical) God while accepting evolutionary theory as scientific fact.
If you really have a desire to understand these things, please take a look at Miller’s book.
If you just want to throw silly fundamentalist nonsense around then, nevermind.
“When Global Warming is finally shown to be hogwash, will it be easier or harder to convince people that Intelligent Design is just not scientific?”
Hilarious. Frank’s approach to logic: If A is proven incorrect it stands to reason that B will gain in credibility, despite being totally unrelated in anyway shape or form. OF course we can plumb the full depths of frank;s infantile understanding of the world in this statement:
Frank, the universe became “orderly” exactly at the time we began to notice because we use terms like “order” and “laws” and “design” metaphorically to explain what is essentially random, orderless and utterly meaningless. Like all IDers, Frank can’t see passed the metaphors that humans use to communicate concepts. Here’s the average ID argument in a nutshell: Scientists have shown that the universe is governed by certain “laws of nature” and only intelligent beings can create laws so the universe must have been created by an intelligent designer. What they don’t get is that when applied to physics or any other natural phenomenon, “laws” is a metaphor. The “laws of nature” is an entirely human concept designed to make sense of what is utterly and totally random.
The order you think you see Frank doesn’t exist, it is a human projection onto a massive system that we call the universe, but even calling it a system is to fall into the trap of metaphor.
ID mistakes the means of communicating about something for the thing itself and then holds that error out as evidence of something. It’s total sophistry.
i think my post needs some clarification in response to mambochicken’s post about the non-random nature of the universe.
What i mean is not that the functioning of gravity, say, is random but that the fact of gravity itself is utterly random. We call it the Law of Gravity but it isn’t really a “law” because law is a manmade concept and laws are manmade things. The human concept of law becomes a metaphor for explaining how gravity works but what IDers do is take that metaphor and extend it beyond all logic to claim that gravity must have been something “created” by an intelligent being because only intelligent beings create laws. But law, again, is only a metaphor, as per the dictionary: “a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature.”
By the way, Duros disagrees with you: Is he a sick, sad man, too?
I just said the universe isn’t orderly. Didn’t mean the universe doesn’t have rules to follow.
Entropy always favors chaos.
ID shouldn’t even be classified as worthy of scientific thought.
ID is an opinion, thus it should not be taught in schools.
southern quaker: I just read the book…
frameone: You’re right.
Intelligent Design is creationism. The top ID text book was a creationist screed:
Global warming, and much other scientific theories, are subject to peer review and scientific scrutiny. Find contrary evidence and the theory is modified. It’s called science.
frameone: You’re right.
Posted by: fd10801 |
Wow. Satan is ice skating.
When you claim that there is a ‘hypothesis’ that the world developed at random, it means that the conservative position is that lying is OK as long as it benefits conservatives.
There is no hypothesis or theory or anything that says the world developed at random. To say otherwise is quite simply a lie.
So Frank, why do you lie? Is it because that’s the conservative position?
Entropy always favors chaos.
Ahem…
Entropy is not a measure of disorder. It is rather a measure of freedom of motion.
And I follow “the Goldwater rule”:
Which you conservatives promply ignore when it comes time to question your opponents’ sanity. Re: Charles Krauthammer.
The only standards conservatives have is that anything that helps a conservative must be good.
I sit corrected, Dr. Squid, though I did not mean to imply that entropy is a measurement of disorder. I understand what you are saying.
What I mean is, if I have a box full of red marbles on one side and green marbles on the other, and I shake it up, the marbles will get mixed up in a “random” fashion (freedom of motion). No matter how much I shake the box, the odds of them separating themselves by color (order) is pretty fucking remote.
That’s what I meant.
Re: Charles Krauthammer.
Speaking of chaos theory…