Darwinists rejoice: Missing link found

posted at 12:52 pm on May 19, 2009 by Allahpundit

Well, a missing link, not necessarily the missing link, although insofar as it seems to confirm Darwin’s speculation about transitional species, it’s a huge coup for fans of Uncle Charlie. I love the smell of fossilized monkeys in the morning. Smells like … victory. If anyone needs me, I’ll be at the bar drinking champagne with Charles Johnson.

Dude, what if Richard Dawkins planted it?

Based on previously limited fossil evidence, one big debate had been whether the tarsidae or adapidae group gave rise to monkeys, apes and humans. The latest discovery bolsters the less common position that our ancient ape-like ancestor was an adapid, the believed precursor of lemurs…

The discovery has little bearing on a separate paleontological debate centering on the identity of a common ancestor of chimps and humans, which could have lived about six million years ago and still hasn’t been found. That gap in the evolution story is colloquially referred to as the “missing link” controversy. In reality, though, all gaps in the fossil record are technically “missing links” until filled in, and many scientists say the term is meaningless.

Nonetheless, the latest fossil find is likely to ignite further the debate between evolutionists who draw conclusions based on a limited fossil record, and creationists who don’t believe that humans, monkeys and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

Sky News has the best piece on the fossil’s significance and how it ended up in scientists’ hands — it hung on someone’s wall for more than 20 years — but you’re better off poking around the ultra-slick website that’s been designed for it, especially the section “Who is Ida?” and “The Implications.” Click the image to proceed.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7 8

ynot4tony2 on May 19, 2009 at 6:12 PM

.
Where does Darwin make such a claim? Nowhere is the process “random”. Individual mutations may be random but populations evolve due to specific conditions and for specific reasons. Random mutations providing a specific survival advantage within a specific environmental condition.

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 6:21 PM

So which one of the evolution line up, knuckle draggers to Einstein, that I was taught in school as fact, is this monkey?

2Tru2Tru on May 19, 2009 at 6:28 PM

Looks like an ACORN fossil to me. Or since the brain is considerably smaller than human it could be a liberal democrat.

wepeople on May 19, 2009 at 6:41 PM

Another supposed missing link found, eh? How many does this now make and how short an amount of time will it take for this one to go by the wayside as purely hyped bunk?

Jockolantern on May 19, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Esthier on May 19, 2009 at 5:13 PM

Wow, great job.

get a life you sick wacko…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 5:49 PM

Here is some advice…when caught in a lie, just admit it like any good Christian would, and don’t attack the bearer of what you wrote.
Funny how someone thinks they can write whatever, then when held accountable, they point their finger and say “you are obsessed”.
Accountability is one of the standards of a Christian…you don’t like to be held accountable do you?
Well neither does “your father”…get it now?

right2bright on May 19, 2009 at 6:46 PM

Another supposed missing link found, eh? How many does this now make and how short an amount of time will it take for this one to go by the wayside as purely hyped bunk?

Jockolantern on May 19, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Every few years they find “the missing link” only to have missed the target.
I will post again the real missing link, the one that was in a museum for months, and right under the experts eyes was the answer. True story, it was in a museum and they never even saw the “truth” right before their eyes, evolution does exist, here is proof.
Here
This is the type of proof they have…

right2bright on May 19, 2009 at 6:50 PM

The evidence is 150 years of discovery that all support Evolution and the predictions that have been fulfilled by them as well as the Natural Sciences that have sprung from it such as Modern Biology and Genetics. Evolution has survived 150 years of falsification attempts. What do you have?

Oh really? Is that why methods keep on changing because “oh shit! The dating method we used for this thing didn’t give us the results we won’t so let’s keep changing them until we get the ‘right’ answer”? Is that why there is so many “it was once believed” stories in regards to macro evolution? Have scientist actually invented a time machine so that they can prove that their dating methods work?

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:06 PM

Occam’s Razor.

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Sure you want to go there?

Ever hear of primordial dwarves? They are really, really tiny humans. They are very rare but they do exist. Barely anyone as ever met/seen one before but they do exist. They are just like us except very tiny. Now picture a scientist thousands of years from now doing archilogical work. He finds the bones of a primordial dwarf. Keep in mind that since he is NOT a doctor he most likely has not heard of primordial dwarves let alone ever saw one. Do you think he would assume that it was some “species” of man or would he assume that it was a birth defect? Be honest.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:15 PM

Here is some advice…when caught in a lie, just admit it like any good Christian would, and don’t attack the bearer of what you wrote.

right2bright on May 19, 2009 at 6:46 PM

get a clue, I didn’t lie.

why don’t you post how I lied?? hmmmm??

go right ahead…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 7:18 PM

Is that why methods keep on changing because “oh shit! The dating method we used for this thing didn’t give us the results we won’t so let’s keep changing them until we get the ‘right’ answer”?

Evidence for this please?

Is that why there is so many “it was once believed” stories in regards to macro evolution?

It was once believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. Does that mean that we shouldn’t trust scientists who say this isn’t so?

Have scientist actually invented a time machine so that they can prove that their dating methods work?

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:06 PM

No, but fortuantely that isn’t necessary. Scientists can test the accuracy of carbon datin by testing it against other methods of dating, like tree rings. And they can test the accuracy of Argon dating and similar methods by dating known historical events, like the lava flow from the Pompeii eruption.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 7:19 PM

right2bright on May 19, 2009 at 6:46 PM

oh and if you think esthier did a ‘great job’ then you’re a nut-case too.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 7:21 PM

to some, a literal interpretation of the Bible is a central part of their faith. As near as I can tell, this frequently requires the denial of scientific facts, logic and reason.

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 6:17 PM

Yeah, I seem to recall they imprisoned some dude who had a theory that the Earth revolved around the Sun instead of the entire universe revolving around the flat plane of God’s creation too… Turns out he was right, but some will always find a way to be against science in order to be for God, as if you couldn’t possibly suppose God designed this incredibly huge playground just to keep our minds entertained until it’s time to go home.

Woody on May 19, 2009 at 7:23 PM

Funny how someone thinks they can write whatever, then when held accountable, they point their finger and say “you are obsessed”.

right2bright on May 19, 2009 at 6:46 PM

this isn’t the first time esthier has followed me around in threads…and yes she is sick and obsessed…anyone who would do that is…and 2 of her examples were total BS…why am I not surprised that you would say things like this though?

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 7:23 PM

Evidence for this please?

I’m told all the time by macro evolunists that “oh, well that method isn’t used because it only measures something until it’s such-and-such age”. Plus, just do a wiki-search on dating methods.

It was once believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. Does that mean that we shouldn’t trust scientists who say this isn’t so?

Hey, I was just responding to someone saying “The evidence is 150 years of discovery that all support Evolution and the predictions that have been fulfilled by them as well as the Natural Sciences that have sprung from it such as Modern Biology and Genetics. Evolution has survived 150 years of falsification attempts.”

No, but fortuantely that isn’t necessary. Scientists can test the accuracy of carbon datin by testing it against other methods of dating, like tree rings. And they can test the accuracy of Argon dating and similar methods by dating known historical events, like the lava flow from the Pompeii eruption.

Oh, so is that why when the age of anything over, say, 10,000 years old is show it’s always shown in a looooooooong range (and I’m talking one item, not ‘such and such a species has lived…’). Oh, and testing it against trees that lived for hundreds of years is quite different from dating things that are “millions” of years old.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:25 PM

18For (AJ)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (AK)suppress the truth in unrighteousness,

19because (AL)that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.

20For (AM)since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, (AN)being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

21For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (AO)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22(AP)Professing to be wise, they became fools,

23and (AQ)exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24Therefore (AR)God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be (AS)dishonored among them.

25For they exchanged the truth of God for a (AT)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, (AU)who is blessed forever. Amen.

26For this reason (AV)God gave them over to (AW)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,

27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (AX)men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, (AY)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

29being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (AZ)gossips,

30slanderers, (BA)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (BB)disobedient to parents,

31without understanding, untrustworthy, (BC)unloving, unmerciful;

32and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (BD)death, they not only do the same, but also (BE)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

G. on May 19, 2009 at 7:26 PM

The evidence is 150 years of discovery that all support Evolution and the predictions that have been fulfilled by them as well as the Natural Sciences that have sprung from it such as Modern Biology and Genetics. Evolution has survived 150 years of falsification attempts. What do you have?

Oh really? Is that why methods keep on changing because “oh shit! The dating method we used for this thing didn’t give us the results we won’t so let’s keep changing them until we get the ‘right’ answer”? Is that why there is so many “it was once believed” stories in regards to macro evolution? Have scientist actually invented a time machine so that they can prove that their dating methods work?

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:06 PM

One thing that has changed is the definition of “missing link” The orginal definition was that half man/ half ape creature.
Neanderthal man turned out to be a separate species so that proof is gone.
What we have is a duck with teeth that they say is proof
Now we have a lemur/monkey thing they say is proof. Big f**ckin deal

kangjie on May 19, 2009 at 7:26 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:25 PM

I like how they just confirmed finding hemoblogin in an 80 million year old dinosaur….there no way soft tissue could last that long…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 7:27 PM

I don’t see the conflict between creation and evolution.
-
Time, as we know it, only exists in our physical universe.
-
Time exists because space exists.
-
A supreme being would exist outside of time
and could create a universe in which evolution would be part of the “creation” process.
-
Six days could be billions of years or an infinitude of our time outside of our universe.
-
Here’s one for you. What if the big bang and our universe is just one of many, a localized event. Other universes could be expanding in our direction with eventual collision providing the mass and energy to start a big crunch which would lead to another big bang.

esblowfeld on May 19, 2009 at 7:28 PM

One thing that has changed is the definition of “missing link” The orginal definition was that half man/ half ape creature.
Neanderthal man turned out to be a separate species so that proof is gone.
What we have is a duck with teeth that they say is proof
Now we have a lemur/monkey thing they say is proof. Big f**ckin deal

Notice, too, on the site that most of the “ancestors” had only skulls, fragments, teeth, etc. that were found. Apparently scientist know exactly what they looked like with that tiny bit of evidence. They don’t even find full skeletons until the ones that actually look like humans (who they assume were hairy). Oh, and birth defects/deformities didn’t exist back then apparently.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:28 PM

Just read it.Mock if you will/must.

G. on May 19, 2009 at 7:30 PM

I’m told all the time by macro evolunists that “oh, well that method isn’t used because it only measures something until it’s such-and-such age”.

Uh, that’s right, radiometric dating, like all tools, have limits to their use. Do you think we should throw out all rulers because they are useless for measeauring things that are 13 inches long?

Oh, and testing it against trees that lived for hundreds of years is quite different from dating things that are “millions” of years old.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:25 PM

First off all, carbon dating is only good for about 50,000 years or so. Secondly, we can count back tree rings farther than 12,000 years, so it’s a fairly good way to test this method.

Also we have about 40 different ways to date the Earth, all using different techniques and methods, and they all match.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 7:32 PM

25For they exchanged the truth of God for a (AT)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator,…

26For this reason (AV)God gave them over to (AW)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,

27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (AX)men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

G. on May 19, 2009 at 7:32 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:15 PM

.
So you’re a doctor? No? Hmmm. Me neither yet, I know what a dwarf is and if I were an Paleontologist I would know the difference between a dwarf and a small human. How a even more ridiculous post supports your previous ridiculous post is beyond me.
“Hobbit” different species

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 7:32 PM

28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, (AY)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

29being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (AZ)gossips,

30slanderers, (BA)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (BB)disobedient to parents,

31without understanding, untrustworthy, (BC)unloving, unmerciful;

32and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (BD)death, they not only do the same, but also (BE)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

G. on May 19, 2009 at 7:33 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:28 PM

.
You clearly are a great undiscovered scientific prodigy…

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 7:34 PM

I betting that it’s yet another hoax. If darwinism were even close to the facts the fossil record would be overrun with transitional creatures. If this actually turns out to be a transitional species we will have identified a grand total of…….one.

conservativecaveman on May 19, 2009 at 7:35 PM

Uh, that’s right, radiometric dating, like all tools, have limits to their use.

But yet you’re 100% sure that they are accurate on anything that’s “millions” of years old? Interesting.

First off all, carbon dating is only good for about 50,000 years or so. Secondly, we can count back tree rings farther than 12,000 years, so it’s a fairly good way to test this method.

Also we have about 40 different ways to date the Earth, all using different techniques and methods, and they all match.

Actually they don’t “match”. Yeah, he says “only by a small percentage” but a small percentage is still millions and millions of years. Also, let’s see these 40+ methods that all say something is such-and-such million years old. People talk about them but never actually say what they are. Or they do but they never back up numbers.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:38 PM

So you’re a doctor? No? Hmmm. Me neither yet, I know what a dwarf is and if I were an Paleontologist I would know the difference between a dwarf and a small human. How a even more ridiculous post supports your previous ridiculous post is beyond me.
“Hobbit” different species

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 7:32 PM

I said PRIMORDIAL dwarf.

BTW, you seem to have no problem calling a larger human a different species.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:40 PM

You clearly are a great undiscovered scientific prodigy…

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 7:34 PM

Translation: I don’t have a good response so I’ll just insult you.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:40 PM

So you’re a doctor? No? Hmmm. Me neither yet, I know what a dwarf is and if I were an Paleontologist I would know the difference between a dwarf and a small human. How a even more ridiculous post supports your previous ridiculous post is beyond me.
“Hobbit” different species

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 7:32 PM

Uh Neanderthal different species
Duck with teeth different species
Lemur/monkey thing different species
Yet they say all these things are proof somehow that HUMANS
evolved from apes.
Yet, everbody else is stupid but some internet tough guy named ronsfi and his thumb sucking evo crowd.
You guys want macro evoultion to be true so bad so you can run around and say see there is no god. Admit it.

kangjie on May 19, 2009 at 7:47 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:40 PM

.
The problem is you don’t approach coherence so meaningful response is impossible. PRIMORDIAL Dwarfs are NOT just miniature replicas of average sized humans and their skeletons would never be mistaken for such. Discovery Channel does not an education make.

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 7:48 PM

But yet you’re 100% sure that they are accurate on anything that’s “millions” of years old? Interesting.

I’m as confident as you are when you use a ruler to measure something at eleven inches.

Also, let’s see these 40+ methods that all say something is such-and-such million years old. People talk about them but never actually say what they are. Or they do but they never back up numbers.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 7:38 PM

That article I linked to has all the data. But even if you were to take radiometric dating off the table, you could prove that the Earth is at bare miniumum tens of thousands or millions of years old using ice layers, rock varnish, geomagnetic reversal, seafloor spreading, continental drift, erosion, etc. etc.

The fact that the Earth is a very, very old place was obvious to scientsts (Christian, creationist scientists too) fifty years before radioactivity was even discovered.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 7:50 PM

No, but fortuantely that isn’t necessary. Scientists can test the accuracy of carbon datin by testing it against other methods of dating, like tree rings. And they can test the accuracy of Argon dating and similar methods by dating known historical events, like the lava flow from the Pompeii eruption.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 7:19 PM

They can also find the age of fossils based on the radiometric dating. But don’t worry, they can test the accuracy of radiometric dating based on the types of fossils they find near the materials tested.

And, if the results from radiometric dating don’t match up to the expected range, then those results need to be discarded, since there was obviously some sort of contamination.

Daggett on May 19, 2009 at 7:55 PM

First off all, carbon dating is only good for about 50,000 years or so.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 7:32 PM

That’s why there is no C14 in coal, which is much older…

Oh, wait…

Daggett on May 19, 2009 at 7:59 PM

They can also find the age of fossils based on the radiometric dating. But don’t worry, they can test the accuracy of radiometric dating based on the types of fossils they find near the materials tested.

Daggett on May 19, 2009 at 7:55 PM

I see that creationits haven’t updated their misinformed talking points in about three decades.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 8:02 PM

That’s why there is no C14 in coal, which is much older…

Oh, wait…

Daggett on May 19, 2009 at 7:59 PM

I hope you don’t have any children who are being taught this crap. C14 in coal is produced by micro organisms in the coal. This is no big mystery to geologists.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 8:06 PM

George Bush was responsible for this monkey’s death!

Herb on May 19, 2009 at 8:14 PM

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 8:02 PM

There is always another Biblical Inerrancy Cult site recycling the same decades old, long ago debunked lies, distortions, junk science and fallacies to a new gaggle of soft skulls.

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 8:15 PM

Anyone remember the Jesus Ossuary?

corona on May 19, 2009 at 8:21 PM

There is always another Biblical Inerrancy Cult site recycling the same decades old, long ago debunked lies, distortions, junk science and fallacies to a new gaggle of soft skulls.

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 8:15 PM

Yeah, it’s like living in a country where half the people are Geocentrists. And their pressure to detoriate the quality of science education is unrelenting, like we contiue to witness this year with the Texas School Board. I hope their numbers die down by the time my daughter starts going to high school in about a decade.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 8:22 PM

I bet God … He’s a sneaky one, always trying to trick us that guy.

Woody on May 19, 2009 at 3:33 PM

I don’t know about sneaky, but in my experience, God does at times demonstrate a wicked sense of humor.

God designed this incredibly huge playground just to keep our minds entertained until it’s time to go home.

Woody on May 19, 2009 at 7:23 PM

At times Life is such a wonderfully beautiful place to play and enjoy. Would that it was just a playground, though. Yet, it is also a puzzle so complex, that no matter how many times our greatest minds think they can explain it, we are again presented with something that demonstrates we do not fully understand.

O God, Thy sea is so great, and my boat is so small.

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 8:22 PM

I took an Anthropology course in college as an elective from a “nationally renowned professor.”

Aside from some usefulness in producing data for sizing clothes and conducting CSI-style forensic studies (both activities based upon data from live subjects), I found most of the subject matter very, very thin on facts and extremely long on pure conjecture.

This fossil proves nothing. It is yet another case where theory is piled upon conjecture which is piled upon multiple layers of assumptions. None of these can be confirmed by experimental means, and nothing can be independently duplicated or verified: this is as close to anti-science as you can get!!!

Solid science turns out useful results and things which work for everyone. Wild guesses are, at most, shallow entertainment for a few.

landlines on May 19, 2009 at 8:43 PM

This fossil proves nothing.

It proves that a creature with these particular morphological characteristics existed about forty six million years ago, which can increse our knowledge about the history of life on Earth.

None of these can be confirmed by experimental means, and nothing can be independently duplicated or verified

Why do you think the features of the fossil can’t indpendantely verified? The findings have been publised in a peer reviewed journal, and Palentologists can either review the specimen itself or request that a cast of the specimen be sent to their University. If something is fishy about this, there are hundreds of scientists would love to call them on it.

Solid science turns out useful results and things which work for everyone.

Pragmatism isn’t the definition of science. Whether or not the Earth revolved around the sun or vice versa was purely a pointless, academic quesiton when it was debated five hundred years ago.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 8:52 PM

PRIMORDIAL Dwarfs are NOT just miniature replicas of average sized humans
ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 7:48 PM

No, they are not. And yet, they are not “another species”. The only full skeletons of “man’s ancestors” just happen to look mostly human but with some slightly different features and yet it’s “not a human! Not a human! It’s a human/ape hybrid!!!”.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 9:03 PM

Yeah, it’s like living in a country where half the people are Geocentrists. And their pressure to detoriate the quality of science education is unrelenting, like we contiue to witness this year with the Texas School Board. I hope their numbers die down by the time my daughter starts going to high school in about a decade.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 8:22 PM

All that believers in Intelligent design want is to have a class say “Oh, andsomepeoplebelieveinintelligentdesign. Now back to our 2-week discussion on macro evolution”.

Meanwhile, surprise surprise, I don’t see you making a stink about macro evolution being taught in history class (yes, it happens).

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 19, 2009 at 9:08 PM

I’ve been hearing about this “missing link” fossil on the radio all day. When I clicked it on tonight to look at it I laughed.

You have got to be kidding me. A monkey millions of years old might have turned into another type of monkey millions of years ago. Wow.

I guess Darwin was right. We came from apes. lol

Elisa on May 19, 2009 at 9:13 PM

You know, I was taught about Darwinism in my 7th grade Catholic school science class.

I never had a problem believing that at one point the hand of God touched one of the monkeys and gave it a mind (different than a brain) and a soul and made the first man. “In the image and likeness of God.”

Then when I was in college I began to read a few anthopology books, because I like this kind of stuff. And started to look at the “science.” Any human or “hominid” fossil or skeleton that is aged at a time that doesn’t fit their theories or timeline is discarded.

I no longer believe humans came from apes. They will never find the real “missing link.” Because it never existed.

Elisa on May 19, 2009 at 9:18 PM

keep dreaming honey…I like em under 300 lbs..

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 5:49 PM

Right. You think I’m fat. But we both know that your problem with me is my skin color.

duhhhhhhhhh you are a stupid piece of trash…try reading in context sometimes…idiot.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 5:56 PM

Those who wear the mark are children of Satan. Is that up for debate now?

was not calling him a ’son of satan’ it was dismissing what he said about me….

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 6:03 PM

By comparing him to Satan…

oh and yeah he is. he got over me…why don’t you?

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 6:05 PM

I posted about you once, just to refute your blatant lie, and it nets six separate posts from you, and I’m the one with an obsession?

Sure.

Esthier on May 19, 2009 at 9:29 PM

I posted about you once, just to refute your blatant lie, and it nets six separate posts from you, and I’m the one with an obsession?

Sure.

Esthier on May 19, 2009 at 9:29 PM

I didn’t lie, you lying piece of trash. and who posted to whom first?? hmmmmm?? why don’t you point out where I lied??

Those who wear the mark are children of Satan. Is that up for debate now?

didn’t the word ‘obaMAHDI’ give it away as a satire??? duhhhhhhhh you’re amazingly stupid…but for someone who twists the scripture like you do…

By comparing him to Satan…

by saying an atheist quoting scripture means about as much as satan quoting scripture….again DUHHHHHHHHHH

Right. You think I’m fat. But we both know that your problem with me is my skin color.

wrong again fat gurl…my problem with you is you call yourself a ‘christian’ yet you twist scripture, and pick and choose what scripture you want to believe…you are, as I have said before, your own little god…

besides being a clueless moron who is obsessed with me…looking up all those old posts…do you have a database of my sayings? do you dream about me at night??

again, thank God for concealed carry…

oh and if you haven’t notice…I don’t like long posts…I tend to make several posts in reply to one…get over yourself…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 9:38 PM

Yeah, it’s like living in a country where half the people are Geocentrists.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 8:22 PM

can you darwiniacs ever evolve any new lines?? and you complain about me repeating myself?? sheesh…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 9:39 PM

right2bright on May 19, 2009 at 6:46 PM

can’t post how I lied? no surprise…looks like you are the liar..

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 9:40 PM

here’s what evolutionnews.org (yeah those evile ID guys) say…

If they weren’t atheists, you’d think the scientists raising the ballyhoo over Ida were hailing the second coming.

Here is yet another icon of evolution. Every time one of these discoveries is made, there’s a huge PR snow job from the Darwin lobby to make it seem like it answers all the questions and objections. I thought Tiktaalik did that. Or maybe Archaeopteryx. It goes at least as far back as Proconsul. Each time the Darwinists seem to forget they already found the missing link — the one fossil to rule them all — and re-find it all over again.

At least CBS News was a bit more skeptical than Sky News when they reported it on Friday.

While the fossil doesn’t relate to the more heated debate over whether chimpanzees and humans share a common identity – the fossil is not the so-called “missing link” — the two factions will likely pounce on this new find with evolutionists claiming the skeleton adds to the limited fossil record.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 9:44 PM

Somewhere there is an unguarded bridge.

ronsfi on May 19, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Real science and the Bible will never contradict. Because they are both truth.

The fact is that none of us knows the truth today. I have no problem believing that man is millions or thousands of years old. Maybe we developed from men who looked a little different from us millions of years ago. Or maybe the earth really is young and it was created with time built into it. I have no problem with either of those theories.

The only thing I know for sure is that the Bible is absolute truth and that God created man. One man and one woman. (like the DNA midocondrial Eve) When He did it or how long it took it up for grabs. The Hebrew word for day does not have to mean a 24 hour day. And “to God a thousand years is as one day.”

It is fascinating to me that when we read about creation in Genesis, it is so similar to what today’s science says. First matter, then light and dark. The sun and moon “to mark time” was created on a later “day.” (another reason it may not be a 24 hour day when talking about evening and morning and day) (Up until then there was only “light” for the vegetation) Then the atmosphere, then the waters separate from the land. Then vegetation before animals. Then animals in the water and sky before they were on the land. Then, lastly, man.

This book was written thousands of years ago. Amazing.

And the whole ark or dome of water in the atmosphere is so fascinating to me. I wonder if one day science will “discover” this. I am a hopelessly curious person. lol

The fact is that science has not proven its current theories of man’s evolution. When something is proven there will be no debate. That is what real science does. It really answers the questions for everyone.

And I do not believe that God has fully revealed to us yet how to interpret Genesis. If the day comes when we know for sure how to interpret it, then it will match science. Man’s own interpretations on specifics in the Bible may or may not be correct. Overall the main message of Genesis is revealed and clear.

I know the Bible is absolute truth from the Holy Spirit. I know that God created order and form out of nothing and chaos. And I know God created man and created him differently than the beasts. “In the image and likeness of God.”

And He created the Sabbath for man. So that we could choose to leave the beasts from day 6 and be with God in day 7.

That’s all I really need to know right now.

Elisa on May 19, 2009 at 9:59 PM

I didn’t lie

Let me spell it out then.

and no I never accused you, or anyone of being a ‘child of satan’

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 3:48 PM

That’s the lie. My proof that it’s a lie (even taking out the two you don’t like):

Get thee behind me Satan…
again you prove yourself to be a liar. your ‘father’ would be proud…
You belong to your father, the devil
yes you are a child of satan.


yep you are of your father, the devil.

So to recap, you lied in saying you’ve never called anyone a child of Satan, and I and justfinethanks have over five examples to prove that.

didn’t the word ‘obaMAHDI’ give it away as a satire???

I’m sorry. I should have known. You’re so well known here for your good humor and jokes.

But then you didn’t say “I never say it except when I’m joking,” so the tone wasn’t really important to me.

by saying an atheist quoting scripture means about as much as satan quoting scripture

Which does nothing to take away from my point, especially not the main one, which is that yes, you have called several posters children of Satan. Even if you throw that one quote away, there are still five others.

looking up all those old posts…do you have a database of my sayings?

Never heard of Google? It’s very user friendly and easy to navigate. Your reputation is out there, for anyone who cares to see.

again, thank God for concealed carry…

Really love the thinly veiled threat by the way.

I don’t like long posts…

Of course except for this one.

I’m off for tonight, but feel free to call me fat, stupid, ugly, white (cause you’ve known white girls like me) or anything else you think befitting someone with my “father”. It’d feel awful to think you have to save up all that hatred, letting it build up until you let it all out in a workplace rampage.

Esthier on May 19, 2009 at 10:02 PM

Elisa on May 19, 2009 at 9:59 PM

evolution is nothing more than atheism dressed up as science…as the atheists very well know…

Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent.”

Provine, William B. [Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University], “, “Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life”, Abstract of Will Provine’s 1998 Darwin Day Keynote Address.

its all about pushing atheism…oh and the theory is racist…and the basis of the eugenics movement which has brought untold death and misery in the last 100+ years

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:03 PM

I didn’t lie

Let me spell it out then.

and no I never accused you, or anyone of being a ‘child of satan’

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 3:48 PM

That’s the lie. My proof that it’s a lie (even taking out the two you don’t like):

Get thee behind me Satan…
again you prove yourself to be a liar. your ‘father’ would be proud…
You belong to your father, the devil
yes you are a child of satan.

yep you are of your father, the devil.

So to recap, you lied in saying you’ve never called anyone a child of Satan, and I and justfinethanks have over five examples to prove that.

didn’t the word ‘obaMAHDI’ give it away as a satire???

I’m sorry. I should have known. You’re so well known here for your good humor and jokes.

But then you didn’t say “I never say it except when I’m joking,” so the tone wasn’t really important to me.

by saying an atheist quoting scripture means about as much as satan quoting scripture

Which does nothing to take away from my point, especially not the main one, which is that yes, you have called several posters children of Satan. Even if you throw that one quote away, there are still five others.

looking up all those old posts…do you have a database of my sayings?

Never heard of Google? It’s very user friendly and easy to navigate. Your reputation is out there, for anyone who cares to see.

again, thank God for concealed carry…

Really love the thinly veiled threat by the way.

I don’t like long posts…

Of course except for this one.

I’m off for tonight, but feel free to call me fat, stupid, ugly, white (cause you’ve known white girls like me) or anything else you think befitting someone with my “father”. It’d feel awful to think you have to save up all that hatred, letting it build up until you let it all out in a workplace rampage.

Esthier on May 19, 2009 at 10:04 PM

I didn’t lie

Let me spell it out then.

and no I never accused you, or anyone of being a ‘child of satan’

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 3:48 PM

That’s the lie. My proof that it’s a lie (even taking out the two you don’t like):

Get thee behind me Satan…
again you prove yourself to be a liar. your ‘father’ would be proud…
You belong to your father, the devil
yes you are a child of satan.

yep you are of your father, the devil.

So to recap, you lied in saying you’ve never called anyone a child of Satan, and I and justfinethanks have over five examples to prove that.

didn’t the word ‘obaMAHDI’ give it away as a satire???

I’m sorry. I should have known. You’re so well known here for your good humor and jokes.

But then you didn’t say “I never say it except when I’m joking,” so the tone wasn’t really important to me.

by saying an atheist quoting scripture means about as much as satan quoting scripture

Which does nothing to take away from my point, especially not the main one, which is that yes, you have called several posters children of Satan. Even if you throw that one quote away, there are still five others.

Esthier on May 19, 2009 at 10:07 PM

looking up all those old posts…do you have a database of my sayings?

Never heard of Google? It’s very user friendly and easy to navigate. Your reputation is out there, for anyone who cares to see.

again, thank God for concealed carry…

Really love the thinly veiled threat by the way.

I don’t like long posts…

Of course except for this one.

I’m off for tonight, but feel free to call me fat, stupid, ugly, white (cause you’ve known white girls like me) or anything else you think befitting someone with my “father”. It’d feel awful to think you have to save up all that hatred, letting it build up until you let it all out in a workplace rampage.

Esthier on May 19, 2009 at 10:07 PM

I thought I heard recently that scientists are now saying that Neanderthals were indeed human. That their old theory that Neanderthals are extinct was wrong.

I have to google this. I swear I heard this. Anyone else read this?

I never believed the old theory. Anyone who thinks Neanderthals are extinct has never met some Mediterranean men. (and that is not an insult. I’m Spanish and my husband is Italian. I think they are good looking.)

Elisa on May 19, 2009 at 10:07 PM

again, thank God for concealed carry…

Really love the thinly veiled threat by the way.

no surprise you’d see it that way!! take it any way you want…but its obvious you’ll never get it..or me!

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:10 PM

and no I never accused you, or anyone of being a ‘child of satan’

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 3:48 PM
That’s the lie. My proof that it’s a lie (even taking out the two you don’t like):

Get thee behind me Satan…

you’re right I was mistaken to write ‘anyone’

I misspoke, I don’t consider it a lie.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:15 PM

, white (cause you’ve known white girls like me)

uh moron I am part white, part native american and part indian…

thats very telling…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:17 PM

right4life on May 19, 2009

You do more to damage the reputation of Evangelical Christians than all the atheists on this site combined.

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM

I misspoke, I don’t consider it a lie.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:15 PM

Of course you don’t.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM

part native american and part indian

part black…sorry..ooh see…another LIE… :rolleyes:

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM

Of course you don’t.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM

I’ll let the Lord judge that one, is that good for you??

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:19 PM

You do more to damage the reputation of Evangelical Christians than all the atheists on this site combined.

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM

and you do the same for catholics…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:20 PM

I’ll let the Lord judge that one, is that good for you??

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:19 PM

Sure, but if I were you, I’d pray forgivenss for a 9th commandment violation, just to be on the safe side.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:22 PM

After he gets thrashed, he has a strange habit of accusing his opponent of being the chld of Satan and always makes the claim that you think that you are “a legend in your own mind.”

It’s actually pretty predictable and tiring.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 3:08 PM

lets see you accuse me of a ‘habit’ of accusing my opponenets of being ‘children of satan’.

but I have never accused you of that…and your hero’s esthier’s few examples…over a year or so…do not consist of a habit..

people in glass houses shouldn’t cast stones…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:23 PM

I’ve never accused loxondota of that…though you see he is my opponent…so much for your false accusation..ie lie…of a ‘habit’…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:25 PM

but I have never accused you of that…and your hero’s esthier’s few examples…over a year or so…do not consist of a habit..

Again, please post where I said you accused me of being achild of Satan. And if you do something over and over again regularly, it’s fair to call it a habit.

Remember, you are the one who said you NEVER accused anyone of being a child of Satan.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:28 PM

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:28 PM

thanks for admitting you lied about me…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Again, please post where I said you accused me of being achild of Satan. And if you do something over and over again regularly, it’s fair to call it a habit.

but you are my opponent..you said I had a ‘habit’ of accusing my opponents of being a child of satan…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:34 PM

Remember, you are the one who said you NEVER accused anyone of being a child of Satan.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:28 PM

and I had the integrity to admit my mistake…you??

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:34 PM

and you do the same for catholics…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:20 PM

In that case, you would be pleased. But you’re not, so I doubt you are correct. I wonder if you could site any similar criticism of me. If so, I certainly will consider it.

On the other hand, how many threads can we find in which you have been very intolerant and disparaging of anyone who does not adhere to your religious views? And how often have you been called out for such behavior. And have you ever considered the negative impact you are having on your cause?

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 10:35 PM

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 10:35 PM

what is your problem?

you’re just so much holier than I am..you should be proud!!

But you’re not, so I doubt you are correct. I wonder if you could site any similar criticism of me. If so, I certainly will consider it.

of course you will…you are such a wonderful, gracious man…you should be pope!

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:38 PM

And how often have you been called out for such behavior. And have you ever considered the negative impact you are having on your cause?

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 10:35 PM

I find that interesting…these thread ALWAYS become about me…this odd obsession about me, usually from the same old people is odd to say the least…but since they cannot argue the issues…they have to change the subject…

usually what happens is I am the target of a personal attack..then I respond…and then several people like you come in and whine about how mean and terrible I am..but you are NEVER upset by anything that anyone says to me…

give me a break…you holier than thou hypocrite…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:42 PM

So, we found a lemur fossil?

RightWinged on May 19, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 10:35 PM

lets see justboringthanks comes in with the following post:

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 3:08 PM

with a typical ad hominen attack on me…because he cannot answer the points I have made on this thread and in prior threads…and I guess he’s upset that I made him look foolish in the past…

so I respond…and the typical ‘its all about me’ comes up…its predictable…people like you and justloser cannot stick to the issues..but have to initiate personal attacks…

and then you come in here with a vile attack on me..and I have said nothing to you…you really must be a very troubled individual to say such a terrible thing.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:49 PM

but you are my opponent..you said I had a ‘habit’ of accusing my opponents of being a child of satan…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:34 PM

Try again. You can have a habit of doing something even if you do it universally. You can have a habit of beating your chlilren even if you don’t touch one or two of them.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Try again. You can have a habit of doing something even if you do it universally. You can have a habit of beating your chlilren even if you don’t touch one or two of them.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:52 PM

you really are a piece of trash.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:53 PM

no surprise you wouldn’t have the honor to admit a mistake…it takes integrity to do that…and its rather obvious you have none…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:54 PM

no surprise you wouldn’t have the honor to admit a mistake…it takes integrity to do that…and its rather obvious you have none…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:54 PM

You don’t have a lot of room to talk about integrity Mr. “I didn’t lie, I just misspoke.” You should be a consultant to Pelosi.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:57 PM

You don’t have a lot of room to talk about integrity Mr. “I didn’t lie, I just misspoke.” You should be a consultant to Pelosi.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 10:57 PM

but I admitted I was mistaken…you have not.

a mistake is not a lie.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:58 PM

just like earlier when I said I was ‘part indian’…I am not…I know to you thats a lie….but then to a liar, everything is a lie…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:59 PM

a mistake is not a lie.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:58 PM

Like I said, I bet Pelosi could benefit from a spin like that. You could be the next David Axelrod.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:01 PM

Like I said, I bet Pelosi could benefit from a spin like that. You could be the next David Axelrod.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:01 PM

you keep showing your lack of character…typical darwiniac.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:01 PM

but I admitted I was mistaken…you have not.

Because I wasn’t mistaken. Do you deny that you have regularly and repeatedly called people children of Satan?

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:02 PM

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:01 PM

you’re a liar…and you don’t have the guts to admit it…but lying for darwin is what trash like you do..your hairygod will be proud of you paduan!!

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:02 PM

Do you deny that you have regularly and repeatedly called people children of Satan?

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:02 PM

yeah sure do.

go back to google..wacko.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:03 PM

have I called you a child of satan?? or loxondota (sp?)

so you lied.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:04 PM

you’re a liar…and you don’t have the guts to admit it…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:01 PM

No, youre a liar who doesn’t have the guts to say anything but ANOTHER LIE: “I was just mistken.”

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:04 PM

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 10:42 PM

this odd obsession about me, usually from the same old people is odd to say the least…

But I’m a recent convert to questioning the value of your posts. And I am looking forward to seeing them improve.

usually what happens is I am the target of a personal attack..then I respond…and then several people like you come in and whine about how mean and terrible I am..but you are NEVER upset by anything that anyone says to me…

I don’t have the time or energy to defend everyone here from every inappropriate remark made. I believe I have defended Evangelicals from abuse here, but cannot put my fingers on such posts at the moment, so perhaps I am mistaken.

I would be more sympathetic to you if you demonstrated greater tolerance and sympathy to people with whom you disagree.

give me a break…you holier than thou hypocrite…

I am not holy, at least in the sense I believe you are using the word. Nor am I better than any other human being in any way that is of any significance.

I confess that I have difficulty seeing my own mistakes and hypocrisy. This is why I take criticism from others into consideration. Criticism from others is often painful, but it is one of the few ways I can learn to improve myself.

How do you learn about your errors?

Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 11:04 PM

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:02 PM

would you feel better if I called you a child of satan??

would it make you proud???

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:04 PM

Game over! We found the fossil of a lemur!

RightWinged on May 19, 2009 at 11:05 PM

have I called you a child of satan?? or loxondota (sp?)

so you lied.

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:04 PM

Did I say you accused me personally of being a child of Satan? Loxodonta?

So you’re still a liar.

You’re hitting the 9th commandment pretty hard this evening.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:06 PM

But I’m a recent convert to questioning the value of your posts. And I am looking forward to seeing them improve.

in that thread where my opponent (forget his name) was all for partial birth abortion..you said nothing…why not? are you for partial birth abortion?

when are you going to have the courage of your convictions…or do you not have any…

I could give a rat’s azz about your opinion of me…

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:06 PM

Did I say you accused me personally of being a child of Satan? Loxodonta?

So you’re still a liar.

You’re hitting the 9th commandment pretty hard this evening.

justfinethanks on May 19, 2009 at 11:06 PM

moron…how clueless are you…you said I have a HABIT of doing that…and I have not done it to you…so you are a LIAR…duhhhhh

right4life on May 19, 2009 at 11:07 PM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7 8