(After getting very badly owned regarding his "Dinosaurs are just gigantic lizards and scientists make random shit up" post, Brimac bravely forges ahead. Godspeed, little dude!)
Okay, this thread has gotten way of tract. First of all, a few clarifications:
1) Some people have misunderstood(probably my fault)what I meant about science. I do agree that much good has been done through science.
2) The reason why I am weary of the skeletal structures, is because archaelogists have been wrong before. For instance, they thought that the Neatherthal man was a step closer to the missing link, but was it was actually a man with rickets. Also, the parts which were found to place together the Java man skeleton were found quite some distance from each other, and unless grenades were common millions of years ago, that was a scam.
3) The reason why the rotated hips are not proof to me that dinos were not reptiles is that:
1) we cannot be 100% sure that the skeletons are correct
2) I do still believe that Micro-evolution is a fact, species do mutate and evolve within there own species
3) You know how when people get old, they get slouched over as an effect, how can we be sure that if a reptile grows large enough its bones might not become misformed or change position?
4) I do belive that some breeds have become extinct, just because we have not found a reptile to fit the form of each dino, does not mean that it never existed.
5) So much of the earth's oceans and rainforests are yet to be explored, there is no telling what will be found there!
40 comments
re "IFBaptist Girl"...I smell an identity-thieving troll here, pretty much.
Poor Brimac. I do believe he feels left out. Maybe he should discuss dinosaur skeletons with qualified experts.
"Neatherthal man [...] was actually a man with rickets."
So why do the legs bend the wrong way again? Got a single confirmed case of rickets where the sufferer looks neandertal? Where are the other symptoms of rickets on these bones then?
"Also, the parts which were found to place together the Java man skeleton were found quite some distance from each other"
First, this is a mistake, as this claim is made about Lucy (an A. Afarensis), not Java Man (an H. erectus).
Second, it is a lie circulated by creationists. Only creationists claim that Lucy's knee was found at some distance to the body. The skeleton of Lucy doesn't have any knees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lucy_Mexico.jpg ).
Third, it's a stupid remark anyway. Bodies can become disarticulated post-mortem by any number of methods, and their bones spread quite far. Why do you think incomplete skeletons are found in the first place? However, unless they were clearly two fragments of the same bone, no paleontologist would put finds from different locations together as a single specimen.
1. Good!
2. That would be paleontologists, I believe.
While there have been some fakes, Neanderthals are not fakes. Plus, the fakes are eventually uncovered by the scientific community.
3. 1. You can't be 100% sure that you are you and I am I, but we would be wise to go with the conclusion which the best evidence points to.
2. I can't help you with that. You are too stupid or too ignorant to argue with.
3. There are some scientific methods to determine the maturity of the individuals from whom some bone specimens come.
4. Good!
5. There is some telling. There may be many new finds there, but if there was a herd of sauropods they would be awfully hard to keep hidden.
MK, I agree, probably the same one that is using DraKeal's name and the one that has posted all of those grisly rape fantasies, the best is to just ignore him/her and they'll probably go away.
Weather
That's something to think about, Brimac. Not for very long, though.
That's not IFBaptist girl. Just someone too cowardly to use his or her own identity.
Well, at least he's gone from just making stuff up to actually checking some creationist websites. That's good. But these sites are notorious for making claims out of context and relying on their fundamentalist audience not to spot the errors. His next step should be to look carefully at counterclaims and weigh them so he's working with the whole picture.
For example, the "Neanderthals were modern humans with rickets" claim seems to have "evolved" like this:
A 19th century scientist named Rudolph Virchow said a Neanderthal skull he examined may have had rickets. Francis Ivanhoe wrote a paper for Nature in 1970 that extrapolated from this to suggest that all Neanderthals were just modern humans who had rickets or similar diseases. Then in 1990 a guy named Marvin Lubenow drew on Ivanhoe's work and wrote a creationist book called "Bones of Contention". This became the source of the claim on various creationist websites.
Sure, some Neanderthals undoubtedly suffered from rickets, syphilis and other bone-deforming diseases. Humans still do today. But Ivanhoe definitely overstepped his data. In fact, he apparently never examined the skull Virchow used. And rickets produce a bunch of symptoms that are missing in most Neanderthal skeletons, such as calcium loss.
Well well well, what do we have here, another woman with an inferiority complex. Only one way to fix that. IFBaptist Girl, I suggest that we here at FSTDT lift up that pretty skirt and shove a load of hard meat in your tight lil honey hole. Ahhhh the torture how exciting it is. Lets rip her insides to shreds with the power of a freight train, somebody blow the whistle *toot toot* Just another skydaddy lovin christian princess gettin what she deserves. Brutal Repetitive Rape. The men here at FSTDT fantasize of your virgin blood loss on our genitalia. Ahhh the justice and righteousness of it. Spectacular!
David B.
No, he's really talking about Java/Peking man.
The original Peking man bones were found in 2 different places i.e. there were 2 caves with cavemen lining in each one.
The creationists then claimed the evilutionists found a human bone here and an ape bone there, said they were from the same creature and called it the missing link.
Look torture PISS OFF. That is NOT COOL. Nobody here supports rape, or rapists. Please, you do not speak for any of us. Either shut up, play nice, or piss off
Sheesh!
@Mister Spak
Wow, a fundie argument so out-of-date even I'd forgotten it!
Oh well, point 3 still stands. We find many incomplete skeletons, hence something (though probably not handgrenades) has moved some bones quite some distance from the others.
Brimac, you're so wrong it's not funny.
1. That's good, at least.
2. Sorry, it's paleontologists that study fossils. And that 'rickets' story was debunked ages ago.
3. There is no 'micro' or 'macro'-evolution. Lots of 'micros' make a 'macro;' if you make enough small changes, a creature no longer resembles its ancestors. Dinosaurs have more in common with birds than modern lizards, for the most part. And you'll be surprised to know that there have been nearly-complete skeletons of dinos found intact.
4. Good for you; but you're still off with the reptile bit.
5. True enough, but dinosaurs (or their smaller descendants) would be a bit noticeable nonetheless.
---------------------------------------------------
On another note: I think we need to beg Yahweh-admin for comment thread login, or something.
Maybe that'll keep the handle-thieving trolls from pretending to be other posters. Bloody cowards.
I don't know what IFBaptist Girl or her post have to do with Brimac, but I can certainly tell who is more intelligent of the two.
Now on 3:3, skeletal structures, short of wear and tear, don't change fundementally. Rotated hip pelvic designs have key differences with other pelvic formations.
As for the latter half of 2: ancient burial customs, cannibalism, dismemberment (intentional or otherwise), lack of a burial resulting in scavanging, and the geology of the region changing slightly can all explain why the parts were far apart.
Aside from that, this person truly impresses me. Brimac certainly isn't perfect but I've never seen a (possibly ex) Fundie speak with this level of intelligence. Bravo!
PS to IFBaptist Girl: If you took your nose out of your bible we wouldn't have to point out the obvious flaws in what you say. Simple as that.
Oh, and I do notice how it may seem like I agree with what he says, but I don't. There are multiple flaws in what he said, but I've seen far, far worse.
Now as to why I didn't edit, behold: The error screen of doom.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.