Subduction Zone
Regular Member
Well that's true, but there are tons of articles on feathered dinosaurs. It is not a controversial subject at all as it was in the 1980's. I am merely surprised that gradyll did not know of this.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Oh please. If that were the standard of evidence, Creationism wouldn't be a part of the discussion in the first place. There would be no need for a debate.
Oh, I know. Just making a point.Well that's true, but there are tons of articles on feathered dinosaurs. It is not a controversial subject at all as it was in the 1980's. I am merely surprised that gradyll did not know of this.
so, no. Thankyou, I rest my case.Oh please. If that were the standard of evidence, Creationism wouldn't be a part of the discussion in the first place. There would be no need for a debate.
so, no. I rest my case. (as your link is too generic)Please, when you are the ignorant one you really should not accuse others of being ignorant.
And yes. There are plenty of peer reviewed articles on feathered dinosaurs:
feathered dinosaurs - Google Scholar
When typing in the search bar I had only gotten part way through "feathered" when feathered dinosaurs came up as a possible search.
I would also like a peer review of dinosaurs evolving from birds, or vice versa. One specifically with a link between two genra's of organisms.Please, when you are the ignorant one you really should not accuse others of being ignorant.
And yes. There are plenty of peer reviewed articles on feathered dinosaurs:
feathered dinosaurs - Google Scholar
When typing in the search bar I had only gotten part way through "feathered" when feathered dinosaurs came up as a possible search.
I have dozens of creationsitic peer review, every year, more are published.Oh please. If that were the standard of evidence, Creationism wouldn't be a part of the discussion in the first place. There would be no need for a debate.
Oh, I know. Just making a point.
I posted a peer review, and all you guys can post is "go google it yourself." Nice debate here.Well that's true, but there are tons of articles on feathered dinosaurs. It is not a controversial subject at all as it was in the 1980's. I am merely surprised that gradyll did not know of this.
No, you lose once again. You seemed to think that there were no feathered dinosaurs and my link showed that they are incredibly commonplace.so, no. I rest my case. (as your link is too generic)
Nope, there are not any. You have dozens of fake creationist peer review articles. Try to find one in a real scientific journal. A real scientific journal is based upon the scientific method. Sites such as Answers in Genesis actually require their workers to sign a pledge saying that they will not use the scientific method.I have dozens of creationsitic peer review, every year, more are published.
No, you lose once again. You seemed to think that there were no feathered dinosaurs and my link showed that they are incredibly commonplace.
But then you lost when you went back on your word.
Nope, there are not any. You have dozens of fake creationist peer review articles. Try to find one in a real scientific journal. A real scientific journal is based upon the scientific method. Sites such as Answers in Genesis actually require their workers to sign a pledge saying that they will not use the scientific method.
You lose again.
I posted a peer review, and all you guys can post is "go google it yourself." Nice debate here.
hello, I just posted one. wake up, drink some coffee or somethingNope, there are not any. You have dozens of fake creationist peer review articles. Try to find one in a real scientific journal. A real scientific journal is based upon the scientific method. Sites such as Answers in Genesis actually require their workers to sign a pledge saying that they will not use the scientific method.
You lose again.
let me sum up your argument. I proved design in the feather via peer review. you say there are feathered dinasaurs and tell me to google search it myself.
Where? Not on this page. But no worries. I will look at your recent posts and see if you posted any peer reviewed articles.hello, I just posted one. wake up, drink some coffee or something
thats not the definition of peer review. just like quote mine, you like to make stuff up.
Whoa! I missed this bogus claim.I have dozens of creationsitic peer review, every year, more are published.
This is a poorly asked question that shows a lack of understanding of evolution.I would also like a peer review of dinosaurs evolving from birds, or vice versa. One specifically with a link between two genra's of organisms.
Aww, spoilsport.As much fun as this is to watch, I found some feather evolution articles.
This first one is from Scientific American. The article itself is not peer reviewed but rather summarizes peer reviewed literature. The peer reviewed references are at the end.
http://prumlab.yale.edu/sites/default/files/prum_n_brush_2003_origin.pdf
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?