73e632eff909…

As far as evolution goes, trying to figure out what happened and how is their job. If scientists just threw up their hands and said “flashbang 6-10 millenia ago” we would be as scientifically and technologically backward as the Muslim world is (if you discount all the advances they got from us).
My idea of a true scientist is one who, having just witnessed Christ’s Resurrection, runs up to Him and goes “How did You do that?” To which, Jesus responds, “It was a miracle.” And the scientist goes, “I know, but how did You do it?”

Lancer on September 24, 2007 at 10:33 PM

Again, no one is saying don’t try to study and figure out how things go… But as it is scientist ARE only saying “flashbang”, but instead of millenia they say billions of years ago… and instead of allowing the evidence to lead them there, they try to make the data fit that theory, and it’s all about proving everything “just happened” (= no God). See my examples above.. it’s all about hanging on to a ridiculous theory, by adjusting small parts of it. Not because the evidence says to, but because they need the evidence to fit, so they force it to.

You know why scientists keep crying “signs of life” more often than the Left cries “Bush lied”? Because that is what drums up publicity, which drums up money to finance their operations. Most of them hate it as much as we do, but unfortunately they do need money to continue their research. “Life on Mars” brings in a LOT more dough than “Rocks on Mars.”

As far as evolution goes, trying to figure out what happened and how is their job. If scientists just threw up their hands and said “flashbang 6-10 millenia ago” we would be as scientifically and technologically backward as the Muslim world is (if you discount all the advances they got from us).
My idea of a true scientist is one who, having just witnessed Christ’s Resurrection, runs up to Him and goes “How did You do that?” To which, Jesus responds, “It was a miracle.” And the scientist goes, “I know, but how did You do it?”

Don’t be too harsh on the guessers, mankind demands something, even if it has to be made up.

BL@KBIRD on September 24, 2007 at 9:23 PM

The problem is, these “guessers” you speak of aren’t going on “the best data available”… They’re going on an agenda, and a need to make the data fit the theory, rather than the other way around.

Do you remember all the hype about how we were on the verge of discovering life on Mars? No we weren’t, we were looking at something we didn’t understand, but scientists wanted water to be there, because they’ve convinced an idiotic public that “water = life”… This hype pops up every few months with new signs of water, with headlines alluding to extraterrestrial life, yet there isn’t a shred of evidence to support it. But it fits the evolution agenda.

Sadly, the evolutionists are admitting Mars is bone dry and has been for a long time:

http://creationsafaris.com/crev200709.htm#20070921a

Remember the “pictures of liquid water” a few months ago, that made headlines on every news show on the planet, headlines on everyone’s home page, including Drudge and here? Do you think they’ll be reporting this?

Everything then demanded explanation and description and with vague notions, the scholars made the best of it they could. Theory is a fancy word for informed best guess, unfortunately some think theory turns to truth with enough decades behind it.

I would be a little more confident if the best minds admitted that almost nothing is actually known about almost everything.

Don’t be too harsh on the guessers, mankind demands something, even if it has to be made up.

SHOCKING!!! Another scientific “fact” found to be nothing more than an incorrect theory. The same scientific community that claims they know how the entire universe began couldn’t get a drawing of a dinosaur correct.

But don’t take this claim too seriously either. Just wait a few years and they’ll change the “facts” again.

Gregor on September 24, 2007 at 5:47 PM

Gregor, you keep making sense like this, I may have to reconsider your NAU stuff.

You know. Make Sh** Up.

But don’t take this claim too seriously either. Just wait a few years and they’ll change the “facts” again.

BBBWWWwwwwaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaha

NOW THAT WAS FUNNY.

*This science was conducted by researchers at Columbia University. So take it for whatever it’s worth.

Ha ha….

*This science was conducted by researchers at Columbia University. So take it for whatever it’s worth.

More importantly, consider the fact that evolution proponents are DESPERATE to prove birds evolved from dinosaurs, and that is what this is all about. Not to mention the fact that the evidence couldn’t be further from conclusive, as always it’s just a bunch of irresponsible reporting based on limited study of one tiny bone sample with bumps on it.

This is like when they see something “odd” (or surprising, because it’s a closer view than we’d previously had) on another planet through a telescope or a flyby in space. Nothing about the observation suggests water, and it certainly doesn’t suggest life… but because the theory goes “evolution is true, so there are infinite planets with an infinite variety of life out there, and water = life”. What’s funny about this is, even if we were to buy in to the BS that is evolution on Earth, water doesn’t simply mean life. It would have taken a hell of a lot more going exactly right for life to come from non-life… but don’t let that stop explosive headlines that dominate for days and weeks at a time every 6 months or so saying things like “Signs of life on Mars?”, etc. When in reality, the only thing seen was something that can’t be identified, but scientists call it likely signs of water because they fee like water is their magic life creator, and suddenly we’re on the verge of discovering aliens. F-ing pathetic.

Anyway, as I said, this is more hype than data (as usual) but more importantly, despite the fact that the hype is derived from the whole “dinos to birds” theory that scientists are desperate to prove (especially as their human evolution picture has been falling apart all year), it would seem that this particular animal wouldn’t even be part of that supposed transition… by the scientists own admission, it would be on a completely different evolutionary track. They won’t highlight this, because then you wouldn’t be misled properly.

Also, how do we know they weren’t simply looking at a bird bone? Or, more specifically, a more recent bird bone? We can’t trust their dating, they’re constantly adjusting ages of things (after teaching the bogus ages as facts for decades) by tens of millions of years. Here’s the latest if you’re interested. Evidently, 3 million years ago is a better time (than the previously assumed and taught 30 million years ago) for the Ethiopian Plateau to have risen, at least if they’re looking for support for their theory of human evolution. So wave that magic wand:

http://creationsafaris.com/crev200709.htm#20070919a

Shazzam! Yet another evolution problem solved by adjusting ages by tens of millions of years! That’s not wild guessing to fit a a prewritten story, that’s just science baby, take that creationists!

LOL at this whole thread. I love HotAir!

They were MOVIES. That is, completely made up works of FICTION. You cant recreate dinos from ancient mosquitos in amber, you can’t “fill in” the gaps in the genome of an extinct species with frog DNA and you can’t tug on Superman’s cape.

Not yet.

Lovely plumage, the Utah raptor…

‘E’s pinin’ for the fjords.

Spielberg lied, Newman died.

LOL! Nicely done!