Peanut Gallery - AronRa/Enyart - Phylogeny

[Squawk]

Hey Bob. I hear you're looking for a person who criticises the posts of people who are supposed to be on the same "side".

Lets check my status around here, then go read some of my posts. Now how did I become a mod after so much disagreement with people?

 

[australopithecus]

Now how did I become a mod after so much disagreement with people?

That's between you, Spork and a weekend in Paris.

 

[Squawk]

Now how did I become a mod after so much disagreement with people?

That's between you, Spork and a weekend in Paris.

You promised you'd never tell!!!

 

[Inferno]

I really don't know what the problem is with Bob Enyart beating a child, after all he's just being Christian.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

I would like to get this peanut gallery back on track.

This is something I missed the first time I read BobEnyart's third post; in AronRa's first and second post, AronRa pointed out many factual errors BobEnyart made in the radio show. This debate is supposed to be about correcting the falsehoods stated on the radio show. I would like to know if BobEnyart is going to ever acknowledge the falsehoods that have been pointed out thus far? Ignoring the soft tissue issue for the moment, there are many other issues BobEnyart has been in error about but has simply ignored (e.g. Mendel rejecting evolution, the discovery of dinosaur precursors, the age for Y-chromosomal Adam, etc"¦). There are even examples of new falsehoods he brought up in his second post which were not mentioned in the debate (e.g. Richard Sternberg losing his job). BobEnyart has even brought up more falsehoods in his third post (Grand Canyon being evidence of rapid sedimentation, Carbon-14 found everywhere equaling a young earth, and BobEnyart's general ignorance of genomics).

BobEnyart, will we ever see a concession of any of these falsehoods in this debate or your website? Remember the subject of this debate is to correct falsehoods said on air, not bury the opposition on one subject. The least you could have done in your third post was concede the errors you have made thus far, and then discuss the dinosaur soft tissue.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

By chiping away the top layer of the rock most likely. That seems to be the preferred method of the Anasazi (google, ye wonderous thing). Like this nice cougar.

That doesn't really appear to be the case though here does it?

It looks more as though the stone has been bleached, what with the fussy edges and continuous rock features. Of course it's very possible that I'm wrong, I'm currently trying to contact the NPS to verify how this was made. I'll let you know what they tell me.

By now you've probably all forgotten that this conversation ever happened, but I did get a reply back from the NPS, and they directed me to this website:
http://www.palaeo-electronica.org/2011_1/236/index.html

 

[Isotelus]

Ironically, I found this clip just after my last post on our possible poo-flinging tendencies, and thought I may as well post it today.



LoR. We're all just a bunch of animals.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

LoR. We're all just a bunch of animals.

Perhaps Bob is a little confused as to the specific biological Kingdom that we belong to. :lol:

Sorry,

Didn't mean to derail the very specific thread topic of Phylogeny. :lol:

 

[australopithecus]

Bob calling us animals is the most accurate statement he's made with regards to biology.

 

[Visaki]

By now you've probably all forgotten that this conversation ever happened, but I did get a reply back from the NPS, and they directed me to this website:
http://www.palaeo-electronica.org/2011_1/236/index.html

Nice one. I'm reading it through right now but one thing cought my eye:

The images comprise rock paintings (composed of pigments) and petroglyphs formed by pecking, abrading, incising, and scratching.

Yay, I was right. I've never heard of more or less ancient people making pictographs with some sort of caustic chemical (which of course doesn't mean that some of them didn't). I guess since this is a narrowminded atheist forum you'll now have to ban me, lock or delete this thread and pretend it never happened. You being wrong that is. (Yes, I'm joking.)

 

[Anachronous Rex]

By now you've probably all forgotten that this conversation ever happened, but I did get a reply back from the NPS, and they directed me to this website:
http://www.palaeo-electronica.org/2011_1/236/index.html

Nice one. I'm reading it through right now but one thing cought my eye:

The images comprise rock paintings (composed of pigments) and petroglyphs formed by pecking, abrading, incising, and scratching.

Yay, I was right. I've never heard of more or less ancient people making pictographs with some sort of caustic chemical (which of course doesn't mean that some of them didn't). I guess since this is a narrowminded atheist forum you'll now have to ban me, lock or delete this thread and pretend it never happened. You being wrong that is. (Yes, I'm joking.)

Yep, not only that but edit our posts so that our positions are reversed, and also make sure every knows that we have alway been at war with East Asia.

 

[National Acrobat]

This thread is moronic.

 

[bluejatheist]

This thread is moronic.

I agree! Has anyone considered a brand new one that is strictly kept on topic?

 

[Laurens]

Bob calling us animals is the most accurate statement he's made with regards to biology.

:lol:

 

[australopithecus]

This thread is moronic.

I agree! Has anyone considered a brand new one that is strictly kept on topic?

31 pages in, I don't think it's worth it. Plus, it has a nice symmetry with the pointlessness of the actual debate thread.

 

[Inferno]

Absolutely smashing reply from AronRa, the only mistakes I can find are spelling errors.
On a side note Aron, is there any way to see/read/listen to your debate with the "ornithological systematist from the Arizona Tree of Life project"? I'd love to see that and I'm sure that many others would like to, too.

 

[Prolescum]

Stonking.

 

[rareblackatheist]

And I remind you that if actual original unfossilized and undecomposed biological materials ever are confirmed, that will not help you, because we have a great many conclusive ways of proving that the earth is billions of years old and that the universe is billions of years older than that.

But that still does not mean anything because creationists believe that every method that dates the earth any older than 10,000 years old is wrong. In order for them to be right it seems every single thing about science has to be wrong. Not just evolution, not just cosmology but all of it!

 

[Inferno]

But that still does not mean anything because creationists believe that every method that dates the earth any older than 10,000 years old is wrong. In order for them to be right it seems every single thing about science has to be wrong. Not just evolution, not just cosmology but all of it!

As AronRa has said:

1st FFoC[/url]"]Regardless which religion they claim, creationism can be collectively defined as the fraction of religious believers who reject science, not just the conclusions of science, but its methods as well, and I mean all of them, from uniformitarianism and methodological naturalism to the peer review process and requirement that all positive claims be based on testable evidence. These people rely instead on blind faith in the assumed authority of their favored fables. In all cases, creationism is an obstinate and dogmatic superstitious belief which holds that members of most seemingly-related taxonomic groups did not evolve naturally, but were created magically, -that plants and animals were literally poofed out of nothing fully-formed, in their current state, unrelated to anything else,despite all indications to the contrary.

 

[DutchLiam84]

I'm wondering whether Bob will now accept that birds are a subset of dinosaurs after what he posted.